Jump to content
 

Hornby's Best Ever Models


robmcg
 Share

Recommended Posts

On ‎14‎/‎02‎/‎2019 at 09:12, Robin Brasher said:

Have you worked out which is the best Hornby model based on the replies to this topic?

You have to allow for the fact that some models have been available long term, thus have had a lot of exposure, while the newer releases have had much less. Some sort of inverse time weighting is required for an accurate assessment. ;)

 

But more seriously, amongst the newer steam models, I believe a very strong case can be made for the B12/3. It is right up there for appearance with the longer established 'best executed models', and with an almost all metal loco body construction has plenty of weight in the right place for traction. In this latter respect I believe it may be the best RTR 4-6-0 yet produced, tractively outperforms any other of their 4-6-0's I have had the opportunity to test, including Arthurs, B1, B17, Castles, 7P, BR Std 4MT. Of course Hornby could easily go one better on this front with the internally capacious LN. We shall see.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Brit for me still marks the point at which Hornby took full advantage of all the refinement offered by Sanda Kan's experience. Relatively small gains in their steam loco models since. Much of this good stuff was inside out of sight: really solid motor mount, in a heavyweight chassis block for excellent traction, all wired connections to pick-ups eliminating the live chassis block, a drawbar properly positioned in the dragboxes*, providing an option for scale separation of loco and tender, and a plug-in wired link to the tender pick ups. The Brits may have been brief rarities operating into and out of KX, but it is good to have a fine model to operate alongside its seniors from Doncaster.

 

*Sadly this upgrade didn't last, and Hornby reverted to a simpler drawbar screwed to the chassis block undersides on later introductions. Still much superior to the ancient bouncy and bulky drawbar kludge, with wipers to make the electrical connections.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of recent Hornby purchases.  Although to be fair the NYC Hudson was made by Hornby Rivarossi about a hundred years ago... I just bought it at about half the price of the Duchess..

 

Unedited for once.

 

Img_2703a_r1200.jpg.8b4e54593df4403d2e559dfa824d1b91.jpg

 

5442_hudson_nyc_Img_2719abcde_r1200.jpg.54297891f81123470c2bcaa788159722.jpg

And of course looking forward to this...

 

 6201_princess_elizabeth_fowler_tender_2abcd_r1200.jpg.4c29703c39a25a9848204170afe45a16.jpg

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Hroth said:

Duchess of Montrose is a stunner - would it be unnecessarily cruel to photograph the Hornby Dublo DoM alongside?

 

 

 

No. It would however to cruel to point out the cab droop. One of those things which once seen tends to overwhelm one's view of the model.

 

RMweb has a number of specialist fault-finders who point these things out, for better or worse.  

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When the LMS Princess Coronation was built at Crewe those folk over in the USA were building 4-6-4 steam engines to a somewhat more generous loading gauge and axle-load limit than the Duchess, and Rivarossi and others have made models of the New York Central Hudson. The last-built of these, the 1938 J3a class, were recorded producing 5,500 hp at 77mph, which by any standard is pretty good, and double the best of a Duchess.

By US standards they weren't the heaviest or largest, but they did represent a magnificent achievement.

Here is an enhanced pic of a Rivarossi J3a No.5442 at speed in an advertising-style setting. These engines hauled trains of 800-1,000 tons over the NY-Chicago line approx 1,000 miles in 16 hours.

 

5442_hudson_j3a_river_5abcde_r1500.jpg.8ff4b5ed4960fa5ab9982f7224917511.jpg

 

  • Like 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 17/02/2019 at 09:49, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

You have to allow for the fact that some models have been available long term, thus have had a lot of exposure, while the newer releases have had much less. Some sort of inverse time weighting is required for an accurate assessment. ;)

 

But more seriously, amongst the newer steam models, I believe a very strong case can be made for the B12/3. It is right up there for appearance with the longer established 'best executed models', and with an almost all metal loco body construction has plenty of weight in the right place for traction. In this latter respect I believe it may be the best RTR 4-6-0 yet produced, tractively outperforms any other of their 4-6-0's I have had the opportunity to test, including Arthurs, B1, B17, Castles, 7P, BR Std 4MT. Of course Hornby could easily go one better on this front with the internally capacious LN. We shall see.

 

B12/3's are a joy to run and work on - bit's don't disappear into the carpet monster either - though sales wise they suffered from the curse of the black engine.

 

Same with the D16/3's, however their haulage capacity was hampered by the bean counters at Hornby omitting the fly-wheel motor. Having upgraded one with a K1's motor - it transformed the loco, in both smoothness and haulage.

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, toboldlygo said:

 

B12/3's are a joy to run and work on - bit's don't disappear into the carpet monster either - though sales wise they suffered from the curse of the black engine.

 

Same with the D16/3's, however their haulage capacity was hampered by the bean counters at Hornby omitting the fly-wheel motor. Having upgraded one with a K1's motor - it transformed the loco, in both smoothness and haulage.

 

I tend to forget the quality of the B1, B17, O1 and K1, the 'curse of the black engine' is apt,  except of course for the B17.

 

And this, of course, which you cannot give away...

 

61310_B1_Thompson_portrait1_2abcdefg_r1200.jpg.6cf9c352754d006498df446fc3212386.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

I tend to forget the quality of the B1, B17, O1 and K1, the 'curse of the black engine' is apt,  except of course for the B17.

 

And this, of course, which you cannot give away...

 

61310_B1_Thompson_portrait1_2abcdefg_r1200.jpg.6cf9c352754d006498df446fc3212386.jpg

 

Its a Thompson.  If you like Gresley you HAVE to be against Thompson!

 

(To misappropriate Thomas Hardy.)

 

Actually, I suppose you really mean the livery...

  • Like 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hroth said:

 

Its a Thompson.  If you like Gresley you HAVE to be against Thompson!

 

(To misappropriate Thomas Hardy.)

 

Actually, I suppose you really mean the livery...

 

There is another option.  'The middle way'....    or, if strictly as Parliament is now, you resign on principle and , um, disappear....

 

Not a lot has changed since Hardy's day. The trains are a tad faster perhaps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

P1090391.JPG.0081ad9af5151dd68dee560a2fea9c6e.JPG

 

Finally got back into the loft and had a bit of an SR running session.  It occurred to me that the T9 is up there with Hornby's best models.  Certainly runs very smoothly. This is one of the first batch that had a problem with the front bogie pivot lifting the leading drivers, solved by making the hole it passes through rather bigger...

The PMV is actually Triang, repainted with railmatch paint and model master transfers.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 hours ago, railroadbill said:

P1090391.JPG.0081ad9af5151dd68dee560a2fea9c6e.JPG

 

Finally got back into the loft and had a bit of an SR running session.  It occurred to me that the T9 is up there with Hornby's best models.  Certainly runs very smoothly. This is one of the first batch that had a problem with the front bogie pivot lifting the leading drivers, solved by making the hole it passes through rather bigger...

The PMV is actually Triang, repainted with railmatch paint and model master transfers.

 

Then you must be exceptionally fortunate not to have had issues with dodgy running....some of it due to its traction tyres......and corroded motor mounts.It really does look the part but after a couple of unhappy experiences,I’ll pass on this one sadly.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

 

Then you must be exceptionally fortunate not to have had issues with dodgy running....some of it due to its traction tyres......and corroded motor mounts.It really does look the part but after a couple of unhappy experiences,I’ll pass on this one sadly.

H'mm, so far so good. I must admit to not liking traction tyres.  Motor mount seems alright so far, no sign of the dreaded mazak rot.  As you say it does look the part, though.  The most impressive part for me is the loco having pickups on every wheel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 27/02/2019 at 01:11, robmcg said:

Not another Britannia.....     :)

 

70046_Britannia_portrait1_3abcde_r1200.jpg.1a46661b918783af30c0f595fc1e8c4a.jpg

 

Another astonishingly fine model from Hornby, in my opinion.

 

Everyone in Australia and New Zealand who has anything to do with two world wars will have to buy one.

 

Indeed, although the lopsided cabside lining on the 'as factory' (unedited) model is a shame. Good choice for name by Hornby for exactly the reason of the AUS/NZ market! And as I said above, great to see the other tender back again. Lining aside, it looks a veyr well made model. Have Hornby sorted the 'floating' centre driving wheel issue I wonder? Pics on Rails website looks good. Shade of green looks nice as well.

Very atmospheric picture Rob!

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 19/02/2019 at 13:19, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

The Brit for me still marks the point at which Hornby took full advantage of all the refinement offered by Sanda Kan's experience. Relatively small gains in their steam loco models since. Much of this good stuff was inside out of sight: really solid motor mount, in a heavyweight chassis block for excellent traction, all wired connections to pick-ups eliminating the live chassis block, a drawbar properly positioned in the dragboxes*, providing an option for scale separation of loco and tender, and a plug-in wired link to the tender pick ups. The Brits may have been brief rarities operating into and out of KX, but it is good to have a fine model to operate alongside its seniors from Doncaster.

 

*Sadly this upgrade didn't last, and Hornby reverted to a simpler drawbar screwed to the chassis block undersides on later introductions. Still much superior to the ancient bouncy and bulky drawbar kludge, with wipers to make the electrical connections.

Looking at pictures of Anzac, the drawbar still runs through the tender dragbox into the loco chassis. Yes it is screwed on the latest models, but the location doesn't seem to have shifted compared to the earlier releases.

 

Edited by G-BOAF
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one thing, I was considering how the 56xx class always appears to be nose-heavy and my gaze passed over the coupling rods.  Are they supposed to be upside down? :sarcastichand:

 

Then again, its a blue-box product so its to be expected....  :D

 

Ho-hum.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Hroth said:

Just one thing, I was considering how the 56xx class always appears to be nose-heavy and my gaze passed over the coupling rods.  Are they supposed to be upside down? :sarcastichand:

 

Then again, its a blue-box product so its to be expected....  :D

 

Ho-hum.....

It's odd that the GW which produced many well proportioned taper boiler locos should have managed to build something as ugly as the 56xx.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 minutes ago, railroadbill said:

It's odd that the GW which produced many well proportioned taper boiler locos should have managed to build something as ugly as the 56xx.

 

Having lived my early years cheek by jowl,so to speak,with them,I have to agree.They were ungainly but highly effective lumps.Ah well,handsome is as handsome does I suppose.Six on out of Queen Street to Abercynon.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
21 hours ago, Hroth said:

Just one thing, I was considering how the 56xx class always appears to be nose-heavy and my gaze passed over the coupling rods.  Are they supposed to be upside down? :sarcastichand:

 

Then again, its a blue-box product so its to be expected....  :D

 

Ho-hum.....

 

Actually not a Blue-box product - it's Mainline one (so a split chassis) and the axles had split according to my client. The person who he got to replace them, put the wheels on the wrong-side - not me I may add.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...