NewSiding

On 30/11/2023 at 21:40, Marcoblanco said:

anybody know if its possible to refit the smoke version of these with a sound decoder of choice or does this effect the smoke unit making it not work? 

I've been told by Dapol that the smoke unit is not controlled by the decoder.  So the smoke unit is independent of decoder.  So should be ok.

I've seen my Dad's one in ARC livery.  The quality and the paint finish / livery is superb. 

The pulling power and running are excellent too.

33 minutes ago, 37081LochLong said:

I'm only really interested in BR blue and large logo but with possibilities upto and no further than triple grey sector livery... So can someone please explain why I just bought a Colas one and keep eyeing up the Load Haul one?

I know what you mean, they're outstanding aren't they!   I was only going to get one and pre-ordered BR blue 008, and kept saying no, no, no I'm not getting another...... large logo now ordered - couldn't help it!

A little tip in case anyone else has similar issue, mine was derailing on an outer wheelset. I found that it was because two halves of the bogie were not quite clipped together at one end, so the wheelset wasn't being held in firmly enough.  Sorted no problem and it looks and runs superbly (DC).  The powerbank on DC is very good and keeps the lights on for a short while after stopping.

yes that's correct, it was indeed the new 'piano' type.

Good to hear you managed to reduce the noise a bit.

Absolutely, I got a good hit on the search without too much effort.  

I was about to start a new thread in the Gaugemaster section asking if anyone else had noticed the humming and blow me, this thread came up in a search.

On 20/08/2015 at 21:41, Silver Sidelines said:

I had an H&M Duette for many years.  However it had wire wound rheostats which wore through and made the unit inoperable.

 

I then bought a number of Gaugemaster units, first D (simple twins) and later DS (with brake simuator).  I am guessing that these have carbon rheostats and in my opinion are far superior to the earlier H&M design.

 

Noise may be an issue.  My early Gaugemaster controllers - the ones in big square boxes - were very quiet.  My newer controllers - shaped a bit like an upright piano - tend to produce quite a lot of 'mains hum'.  It would be interesting to hear what other people think.

 

Ray

On 21/08/2015 at 09:39, Metr0Land said:

 

Same here.  Recently had to pension off the H&M Duette.  Very pleased with the Gaugemaster DS overall - esp slow speed control, but the hum definitely louder than Duette.

I recently bought a brand new Gaugemaster DS but returned it due to the excessive mains hum.  

Although the control of the locos is excellent, the humming noise from the DS was louder than I'm used to. I would say it was about 3 to 4 times louder than the humming noise from all of my old controllers ( H&M Duette, Minitrol, and very old Gaugemaster that stopped working).
I could hear the humming from the new GM DS 14 feet away (in a quiet room).   My old controllers the humming is only audible from about 3 feet away.
The humming from the DS was louder than the locos when they were running up to about 1/3 speed but of course I'm sat right next to the controller and the loco is further away.
I'm not saying the humming was very loud, but was not as quiet as my old controllers.

I tried to put up with this humming but it was really irritating having the humming in my ears while having trains running.  So I decided to return it for a refund.  I didn't contact retailer or GM as it looks like the humming must be considered within acceptable parameters, but it's too loud for me.

And why are the knobs so small these days?
A larger size knob to get a good grip is better I find.
The GM DCC Prodigy controllers have a nice good sized knob, so why not on the DC controllers?

Back to the drawing board choosing a new controller!

Perhaps I would be better getting a panel mounted GM and separate transformer.
At least I can put the transformer behind a cupboard or something if the humming is too much!
Does anyone have experience of the separate GM transformers? Are they quiet?

I normally use a H&M Duette (on High Resistance, Full Wave settings only) which is very good, but it gets very warm to the touch so may be getting to end of life?
I do have some old Compspeeds but they are feedback only and some motors make a little more noise (but not excessive) on slow speeds and I need new transformers for them anyway.
I also have an old Minitrol which works well, but it's feedback so prefer not to use as like the Compspeeds some motors make a little more noise (but not excessive) on slow speeds.

I'm still deciding whether to purchase one of these or not.  Just recently been given the old Hornby 59 which i've cleaned up and added weight to.  Dapol 59 looks much better than the old Hornby one of course.

Does anyone know what these 2 holes on the Dapol 59 are in picture below that I've circled in red (credit to previous poster for the great photo!) ?

1 hour ago, LaGrange said:

 

Can you refrain from judging by looking at a hand assembled sample, wait until the production ones arrive

I was looking at the Kernow images. I thought that was a production sample?  If not, then that's good it will be even better when it arrives.

unfortuntately looks like it's not going to be anywhere near the finesse of the Hatton's 66.  The Hatton's 66 oozes quality.  The front air dam on the Dapol 59 looks particularly poor with the gap between the bottom piece.  Even the Bachmann 66 which has the same separate piece doesn't have an obvious gap like that.  Hopefully, this is not final production photo and it can be fitted closer than that.   The side grills on the Dapol 59 look like they could be very good, though it's not possible to tell completely due to resolution of images.  I see Hatton's website is now saying Due November for the ARC livery DCC ready, but all the others still say September.  Perhaps they'll arrive by Christmas!

photo I took in 1991.....

Has there been a mistake at the factory in the final production with the raised piece on the bonnet? 

It is flush on the unpainted sample pictures on Hornby Engine Shed https://uk.Hornby.com/community/blog-and-news/engine-shed/marked-progress

It is a pity for Hornby because there are some positives about the 91.  The motor is very smooth and quiet.  The quality of the paint finish (ignoring the rubs from the packaging) and general build quality is very good.  It's the pantograph and that bogie design that let it down to me. I've been trying to find another of my locos which has a similar terrible bogie design with those plastic clips and tabs that rub against the chassis and I don't seem to have another one like it!  Why did Hornby design it like that. 

On 09/08/2022 at 19:07, Ncarter2 said:

Has anyone been lucky enough to get an Intercity one without the rubbing?

Ive just had a 6th delivered and the rubbing to the red strip and white in the cab is really bad. 

no, unfortunately.  

But it was very minor on mine so it wasn't worth the hassle of returning it and I thought I would probably end up getting a replacement that was worse.  About 1 to 1.5 mm under the cab at the blunt end, on one side.  I managed to gently rub off the small bit of red that was on the white line and was able to touch up the small bit of red line that had rubbed off.  

I did send back 2 For the Fallen ones as it was bad on those and I just got a refund.

When I was checking the wheels out I noticed a residue of something building up on the underside of the chassis.   It's difficult to take a picture of but hopefully can be seen below.   It is in the shape of an arc and is where one of the plastic support pieces on the bogie protudes up and rubs on the underside of the chassis.  The first picture shows the plastic piece - see white arrow.  This seems a strange bogie design to me.    Hopefully the residue is paint from the chassis and not the plastic support piece wearing away?  Is it normal to expect this?

That's not very good from Hornby if it still has clunky running over points.

Interesting that the've changed the bogies.

I've not had derailing so seems my problem is not as bad as others, but for my 91002 I've had some clunky running over some points which is when the wheel drops into the dip (flangeway?) by the frog.

It is worse on Peco points but does happen on Hornby points as well.  
The Hornby points look to have a higher raised flangeway than the Peco points so I think that is why.

Perhaps Hornby have only tested it on Hornby track.

I don't have this problem with Dapol 68 which is the only other modern made bo-bo I have.

I don't have a caliper, but the 68 wheels have a larger diameter (14mm I think) than on the 91 (12mm I think). Also the tread is narrower on the 91 than on other locos I have.  I think the combination of smaller diameter and narrower tread means that the wheel cannot bridge the rail gap between the frog nose and the rail starting again (as mentioned by an earlier poster https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/150520-Hornby-announce-a-re-tooled-class-91-for-2020/page/23/#comment-4820160 ) whereas the larger wheels on the 68 can.
The Hornby 60 doesn't have the problem and has larger wheels, diameter 14mm I think and wider tread . Though being co-co helps there as well I expect.

I've tried changing the back to back but that hasn't helped.

I haven't any spare wheels to try so my fix for now is a thin piece of card (from a Peco track packing) cut into a V shape and placed into the flangeway around the frog. It's only needed on one point on my R3 oval anyway.  

I will probably contact Hornby about this.
  
I've looked for new wheels online, but they only say the diameter and not the tread width which I think will be important to resolve this.
    
I'm using code 100 track. Mixture of Hornby and Peco set track and streamline.

On 27/04/2022 at 12:54, 64F said:

And some more.

That's a shame about the paint smudge.  Is that where the ice cube packaging sticks out to support the body?

I returned my 91111 with the scratch under the front cab side window to my retailer for a refund.

The scratch was where the packaging sticks out.

Then I ordered 91111 direct from Hornby and that had a similar defect.  Some of the finish damaged under the front cab side window.  So I returned that for refund as well.  Hornby and retailer very good about returning it.   So now I've given up.  I've decided I can't live with that fuzzy finish on the 91111 for £200+.
At least the IC one has a nice normal livery finish.

On 27/04/2022 at 12:54, 64F said:

 

thanks.  yes I'm thinking that might be what's best to do - send it back.  The retailer don't have anymore in stock though and Hornby can't help, eg. they don't have replacement bodies, so it would be return and purchase somewhere else.

16 hours ago, Steadfast said:

 

Yes that decoration will be physically printed onto the model rather than traditional style Tampo printing, hence the texture. 

 

Jo

Does anyone have an idea what the finish is called and how I could touch it up?
Mine has a small scratch in the finish under the cab window. 
The paint underneath is ok, it's just the surface finish so that scratch is glossy instead of matt.

It's only really noticeable when tilting the body towards a light.

I think it may have got rubbed in the ice cube packaging.

interesting attempt at cut and shut on APT

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/325122101636

Initial impression is very good. It feels very well made.  The side grill on the chassis is metal and even the pantograph is an improvement over the APT-P.

The livery looks quite good and nicely done but it's finished with, what I would say, is an unusual sort of textured translucent varnish which makes it a little fuzzy, especially the printed name plates.  On one side of mine the printed name plate is more fuzzy than the other side.    It makes it difficult to photograph because of this finish as the light reflects differently depending on the angle.  It's more noticeable when tilting it up towards the light as in my second image.  The finish doesn't look sharp like the Hornby images but it's still nice (apart from the printed name plates which are very fuzzy).  Not run it yet.

1 hour ago, zoomer1979 said:

I didn't know there was cab lights until I saw a DCC Sound fitted example and the cab light function and sound was used. It's not very bright, so could easily be missed if you are not expecting it.

Neil.

ok thanks.  that's possible I'll have a closer look when I'm back in the locality.

The cab lights are not working on my 5 car APT.  DCC sound fitted.
I haven't had time to investigate further and unfortunately won't be able to for some time. 
I don't know if the cab lights worked or not before DCC fitting.

6 hours ago, wappinghigh said:

Has Hornby guaranteed these new to be released Mk4's and Mk4 DVTs will be free of the light bleed problems that plague the IC Swallow Mk3 DVT's, the LNER Azuma and the new IC Swallow Mk3 R4000X series of coaches (with aftermarket LED fittings)?

 

Anybody know inside Hornby to give me a heads up?

 

I am reluctant to order any of these given Hornby's QC on the above other models until I know for sure...> partic in the light shaded liveries like LNER...

 

thanks!

 

 

Hi

In the comments in the Hornby June Engine Shed, it was mentioned that 'Mk3 DVT has problems with light bleed, moulding mark on roof, poor fitting of cab doors and incorrect colour of windscreen surround'.

Hornby replied - 'I am aware of the Mk3 DVT issues and can assure you that steps have been taken to correct this on future runs of the Mk3 DVT and the new Mk4 DVT.'

So sounds promising, but I guess the proof is in the pudding.

54 minutes ago, letterspider said:

 

Take a look at the pantographs on the Accurascale Class 92 or the Bachmann 90 - a good quality and precise pantograph can be done in metal but my guess is it would add £10 - 20 to the motor car.

Mind you after upwards of £400 you are not going to quibble over £10-20 provided you smile every time you look at your model?

 

 

yes would definitely be happy to spend extra £20 for a metal pantograph.  The NDM power car is quite a bit cheaper at £133 than other Hornby locos ( ok, it doesn't have windows, buffers or lights).  So I think Hornby should have put a better pantograph on as there was scope to increase the price a little I think.

4 hours ago, Wolf27 said:

I can’t remember why I did the mod now but I see your point. 

thanks both.

I had another look.  I found that the lower arm wasn't raising at all.  I had to carefully manoeuver a piece on the lower arm around a piece on the base.  Have put a photo up showing with red circle. The upper arm falls down easily.  I've also included in the picture the pantograph from a budget model for comparison.  I can't decide if the pantograph on the premium model is better quality or not.  Perhaps it is very slightly. 

yes the pantographs are very cheap looking.  I've seen it on the NDM I have.  The pantograph is like something from a £10 toy, dreadful value for money.  I'm still trying to work out how to raise it without breaking it.  I've unclipped it as per the instructions, but it starts to bend in the wrong place when I try and lift it.  Perhaps I'll have another go tomorrow.  For my 5 car pack I have also now found out from my retailer (who have been informed by Hornby) that for DCC sound, it requires 2 sound decoders, 1 in each DT, otherwise it won't work.  Surely it should be designed to have one sound decoder in the NDM to be prototypical.

On 13/01/2022 at 09:47, APT-P said:

Hornby 5-car APT-P Packs are starting to arrive !

That join line / gap between the yellow and grey seems quite big.  I would have thought with the latest manufacturing technology the tolerances should be much better than that.  Would be interested to see if it is like that on others.

However, the rest looks very good, inlcuding the colours and livery.
The join line across the top of the nose is good.