simmo009

Recently had 2 of these brought to the club by their new owners, who are very happy. There were many oohs & aahs from the gathered throng. Ellis & team, bravo, you have delivered in spades with this model, keep up the great work.

I see the prices have crept up again. £230 now for the standard versions, £293 for the smokies. Glad I pre-ordered at the initial launch price.

On the plus side of this, is this the reason they honour pricing i.e. once it's in the system it can't be amended, rather than because they are being nice to us poor customers?

Yes, it looks like from R2105 (possibly R2057) the block gained a threaded hole and some adjacent bumps for the running gear retainer. There is an earlier version on Ebay without these bits, loathe to take a punt without getting all the info beforehand.

Firstly, apologies for resurrecting an older thread. I have R2248, which is on the list of possible affected models. Hitherto, it has run well but the other night, I took it to the club for a run and the main wheels would only turn about 3/4 of a revolution. The motor was impeccable. I stripped it down when I got home, and there was nothing obviously bent or misshapen. I then thought it may be gummed up, but it has been run in the last 12 - 18 months. When I went to lift the wheels, the bearings on the middle sets of wheels (yes all 3) were stuck in the chassis. Does the indicate the onset of Mazak rot? Fyi the front lugs that locate the front of the bodyshell crumbled during removal. Having identified the correct Hornby Service Sheet (254) I note that the chassis block is unnumbered. I presume this is not available as a spare part. Am I correct in my assumption that this chassis block is the same as used on the models covered by Service Sheets 235 & 328? If all of the above is correct, anybody got a healthy chassis block? Would a 3D print be a viable alternative? There is plenty of space in the bodyshell to add weight over the drivers, although admittedly the centre of gravity would be significantly higher. If this is possible, would anybody have a drawing? Lots of questions here, so please be clear with your answers. I have never experienced mazak rot before, this thread so far has been most useful.

Bear in mind these are samples, to show all possible locations. From my discussion with Hornby at Warley, the standard will be Express Goods arrangement. Additional lamps and irons will be provided for customisation, as fiddly as this may prove to be. Maybe we should wait a little longer to see what they finally approve for production, just a thought.

Overall, my experience was generally positive. I went on Sunday, got there around 10.15, parking no problem. The queue for pay on the door was long, but got moving steadily after a while. Yes it was busy. I don't know how many people came only because of Making Tracks and its associated promotion, but numbers through the door is what counts in the end. Were the advanced ticket sales stopped early due to the numbers sold, or was it always going to cut off earlier than the norm (bought the day before previously)? I think it can be said without much argument that the numbers were higher than expected. Harder to see the layouts or have a good ferret on the trade stands early on, but thinned out later and felt a little less intense. In venue refreshments are extortionate, but that applies at most places. I got the things I went for, so that's a big tick in the plus column, and another one for not buying things I didn't plan to buy lol. I hope those who attended out of curiosity got a positive vibe from it all and are encouraged to plunge a little further into our wonderful hobby. Does it need a bigger venue? That's a tricky one as it depends on the headline layouts that can be accommodated. But the promotional side of things seems to have worked very well indeed. It is unfortunate about the Saturday car parking situation, but it is really a coin toss if there is a home game or not. If attendance is similar next year, maybe a larger venue should be sought, but what the options are I have no idea. I feel this is an excellent show, and kicks off the winter season very well. Onto the next show...

Having looked again at the pictures from the show, the lamps appear to be positioned bottom left and bottom centre as you look at it from the front. This is Class 3 & 4 according to my reference, which is more of a good code. This seems more relevant to actual usage than what I understood from the words of Phil. Apologies for inadvertently misleading anyone.

According to Phil, they had immense trouble with lamp irons, so I wouldn't expect any in the detail pack but you never know. Mike Parkin, you just need to snip a wire (or two? ) to stop the lights, and the lamp bodies can remain. The problem is the running plate is 1mm thick. The LED is 0.6mm thick, leaving only 0.4mm for a recess for the lamp base if I am remembering correctly. Removing the LEDs and lamps completely will leave a hole and a recess to fill. Owners choice I suppose. But I concur with The Stationmaster that a freight orientation would have been more appropriate, but more complicated if a lamp were needed on the smokebox door. Well, you can't please everyone all the time.

Is not that lamp arrangement also valid for other train types I.e. newspapers, on duty breakdown etc?

I had the good fortune to speak to Phil, the designer for this locomotive at GETS. The EP looks great, though none of the diecast pieces are in place yet. Lots of fine detail to please the eye. Spring / summer next year is realistic for delivery according to him. He is the same chap we saw involved in the P2 design, and is also the man who did the 2MT. A thoroughly nice chap, and very forthcoming with information. Unfortunately, the lights will be supplied in a fixed configuration, they tried all they could to allow variation, but the issues were insurmountable given scale, tolerances etc. I believe they will be supplied in Express configuration. He also told me the full saga for the 2MT manufacturing delays (long story) but that particular manufacturer is so good that they didn't want to move away from them. The 2MT is hopefully the benchmark for top end Hornby products going forward.

I think mine is fabulous. Credit to Hornby, they seem to have done many things right with this model. The only gripe I have is the poor communication through the process which created much frustration for many. If they can improve that aspect, I think it will improve their image and reputation no end.

Mine was delivered today, luckily my neighbour was able to take it in for me. I will have to wait until I get home tomorrow to see it though.

Hornby tell me mine was despatched yesterday, but the DPD tracking link says they have not got it yet. I imagine it is somewhere in the space between worlds and will emerge at some future point. Probably when I'm not in.😆

Hornby have processed my order and it is being prepared for despatching. Just a few more days.....hopefully.

We are implementing this on our new club layout, approx 40' x 20', multi-scale. With the temporarily laid track without ballast the trains were near silent. We will be ballasting only after intensive operational testing, but so far we are highly impressed. Sticking it down with PvA to clarify.

The first batch will be released some this month, some next. These are the initial ones announced in Jan 2020. The second batch, which have the higher RRP, will be in December.

I did indeed speak to Hornby today. The first ones (some of the first batch models) will be available at the end of this month, the rest of that batch in October, and the batch 2 in December according to the nice lady in Customer Service. 2 - 3 weeks potentially folks. 🤞

Sorry to give a negative vibe, but this is the 4th different date from 4 different retailers. I am ignoring any further speculation until I get an email / stock alert from Margate direct. Do Hornby actually know anything concerning the whereabouts of these models?

When do we think Hornby will change the website to Winter 2023? 😆

The drawbar doesn't look very robust, with the amount of time these have taken, they would have been able to incorporate one like the P2.

Bit of luck, found it on the club layout. Thanks

Having recently secured at auction R2565 (70013 Oliver Cromwell) I have finally got it out of the box to check all is ok. Smooth as you like, absolutely beautiful, a steal at the price. The only thing is, one of the front buffers complete with housing is non existent, nor is it loose in the box. Alas, the Hornby Service Sheet does not show this item, so I cannot start a search. Do any of you splendid folks have an idea for the X reference for this item? Or could possibly suggest a viable alternative. Not averse to changing the remaining one if that's what it takes. As you can see, it is a clean break, so it should be easy to rectify. Thanks in advance.

Wheatley, that was my first thought. I have some of those so will give them a try. But I think the hole in the bogie is too far back to improvise some sort of post. I may need to trim back the bogie to allow the hook free movement. If it's too much kerfuffle, these two will be for pulling stock behind only, I have 4 others that have front couplings. Thanks for your input DCB, I will see what the results of the above are and then probably start thinking of alternative solutions if that proves unsatisfactory.

Hello all. I have a couple of Class 5's, specifically R2555 and R2360. The front bogie does not seem to have any accommodation for a coupling. There is no NEM pocket, and no tension locks seem to fit properly either. They appear to be the same bogie on both locomotives. There is a clear hole, possibly for a quite large self tapping screw. Does anyone have any bright ideas, or better, actual examples, of how to fit a coupling to these bogies? I have asked Hornby, didn't even get an acknowledgement, let alone a reply.