Oh Hornby! Where did it all go wrong?

[Enterprisingwestern]

31 minutes ago, Colin_McLeod said:

 

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

 

, but the highest form of intelligence.

FIFY.

Don't misquote Oscar Wilde to try and score points.

 

Mike.

[Phil Parker]

53 minutes ago, Neil said:

I know that's the way the market seems to be heading but I'm not sure if it's necessarily true. There will be a good number who want this but there'll also be a number who get this by default as it's a case of stump up for a highly detailed model or don't have one at all. 

 

I'm working on the basis that at least some of the manufacturers have done some market research before putting their money where their mouth it. No new entrant has gone down the right shape, but not much detail route. In fact, I've challenged a few who have said that this would be the future to have a go - talk to a factory and launch a product. All have been unwilling to back their words with deeds.

 

We even have a less than perfect model being described as "not or merchantable quality" on a thread.

 

Personally, I'd be happy with the models you describe. Sticking detail bits on them and personalising is something I enjoy - but I understand that I am a long way (personally) from being in the mass market.

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, AndrueC said:

I too would take reliability over detail. I model in N and so far Dapol has done an okay job in the reliability stakes. I've had to adjust a couple of locos out of the box but once that's done they run and run. The one Farish loco I have is astonishingly good. A Queen Elizabeth that can run round a layout using 2nd radius curves and Setrack turnouts. A 4-6-2 in N is an impressive sight.

 

So my view of N scale at the moment is that they've got things about right. I think Dapol have sacrificed a bit of quality for detail but their newer locos are using a new drive system that should improve the main weakness which was their power pickups. The only downside is that we now have to remember not to try and take the bogies off diesels.

Do you not have some of their older models then?  They certainly lacked finesse in the motor and circuitboards department.

 

Farish certainly have better mechanisms in most cases but impacted by the ongoing split gears issue that let them down and hopefully resolved now with a change to gearing on very recent releases.

 

But on the overall detail, both Farish and Dapol get it about right I feel on the models - enough to look like the prototype without having too many bits to snap or fall off - though Farish 108s are a PITA to get to the body off for chipping.

[AndrueC]

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

Do you not have some of their older models then?  They certainly lacked finesse in the motor and circuitboards department.

All my stock was bought within the last 18 months. Only issues I've had is with the copper pickups being out of position on two models. The QE seems fine at the moment.

[woodenhead]

15 minutes ago, AndrueC said:

All my stock was bought within the last 18 months. Only issues I've had is with the copper pickups being out of position on two models. The QE seems fine at the moment.

The QE is fine, she's got over Covid and is driving again

 

The older Dapol stuff had issues, locos sounding like a bag of spanners, dodgy circuitboards and poor QC.  However, more recent models - a 121 and a 50 seem quite robust.

[AndrueC]

6 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

The QE is fine, she's got over Covid and is driving again

 

The older Dapol stuff had issues, locos sounding like a bag of spanners, dodgy circuitboards and poor QC.  However, more recent models - a 121 and a 50 seem quite robust.

The chassis strips on my 43 appear to be incorrectly spaced. One end they are a bit too close, the other a bit too far apart. The result was that in reverse the trailing bogey pickups would drop between them then on curves and she'd derail when she tried to straighten out. There doesn't seem any way to remove them but I was able to refold them to close the gap.

The other loco was a BR 53 and if too high the strips can disconnect the bogie cogs from the worm drive but if too low the bogie pickups don't make contact. I was able to find a happy medium but I don't know how long that will last. I also don't understand why it's a problem because a Network Rail 53 is fine.

[woodenhead]

1 minute ago, AndrueC said:

The other loco was a BR 53 and if too high the strips can disconnect the bogie cogs from the worm drive but if too low the bogie pickups don't make contact. I was able to find a happy medium but I don't know how long that will last. I also don't understand why it's a problem because a Network Rail 53 is fine.

53?  do you mean 43?

 

I've opened up a class 52 to look at fitting a speaker in the cab area, there are two brass elements sticking up with a loop like it is a solder point that I need to investigate what it represents.

[spamcan61]

3 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

I'm working on the basis that at least some of the manufacturers have done some market research before putting their money where their mouth it. No new entrant has gone down the right shape, but not much detail route. 

I'd say the one partial exception to this is Oxford Rail, more specifically their rolling stock. New tooling 12T vans with a list price of under 20 quid; not featuring the impressive (but invisible when in use or on display) underframe detail of a Bachmann Vanwide, but then that lists at 40 quid. It'll be interesting to see if this continues now they're100% Hornby owned, I certainly hope it does, I'm buying far more Oxford Rail vans than Bachmann.

[PaulaDoesTrains]

5 hours ago, Colin_McLeod said:

 

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

 

I'm sorry you interpreted my post as sarcasm. It was not not meant as such. I did honestly believe that Hornby no longer had any manufacturing production capability.

[AndrueC]

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

53?  do you mean 43?

 

I've opened up a class 52 to look at fitting a speaker in the cab area, there are two brass elements sticking up with a loop like it is a solder point that I need to investigate what it represents.

D'oh! Sorry, that was a typo. They are class 33. I have a Railfreight version that is fine and a BR 'TempleCombe' that has the pickup problem.

 

Their retooled Diesels have dispensed with that pickup system. Instead the bogie is hard wired to the motor and a drive shaft connects each bogie with the motor. Trouble is that if you pull the bogie off it's difficult to reattach it and their instructions are basically 'Don't do that..'

Edited March 1, 2022 by AndrueC

[mdvle]

On 01/03/2022 at 08:09, PaulaDoesTrains said:

 

I'm sorry you interpreted my post as sarcasm. It was not not meant as such. I did honestly believe that Hornby no longer had any manufacturing production capability.

 

For model trains, they don't.  Everything is made in China at this point - though the research and initial design work for new models, and the research/livery stuff for both new models and re-runs are typically done by Hornby in the UK.

 

I don't follow their other divisions/product lines but recall there was talk that they did bring some non-railway stuff back to the UK.

[Colin_McLeod]

On 01/03/2022 at 08:23, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

, but the highest form of intelligence.

FIFY.

Don't misquote Oscar Wilde to try and score points.

 

Mike.

 

1, I was not commenting on anyone's intelligence so no need to use the full quote.

 

2, I did not misquote Oscar Wilde; I gave the commonly quoted shortened version. It's a bit like you calling the man Oscar Wilde when his full name was Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde

 

3, I was not scoring points and am not doing so now.

 

 

 

 

On 01/03/2022 at 13:09, PaulaDoesTrains said:

 

I'm sorry you interpreted my post as sarcasm. It was not not meant as such. I did honestly believe that Hornby no longer had any manufacturing production capability.

 

No problems. Just a difference of view.  I include all Hornby's manufacturing capacity as Hornby, even those aspects that are contracted out to others.

 

 

[cypherman]

On 06/03/2022 at 10:05, Colin_McLeod said:

 

1, I was not commenting on anyone's intelligence so no need to use the full quote.

 

2, I did not misquote Oscar Wilde; I gave the commonly quoted shortened version. It's a bit like you calling the man Oscar Wilde when his full name was Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde

 

3, I was not scoring points and am not doing so now.

 

 

 

 

 

No problems. Just a difference of view.  I include all Hornby's manufacturing capacity as Hornby, even those aspects that are contracted out to others.

 

 

Hi all,

This is an interesting point. Do Hornby actually own the factories in China or do they subcontract out the work to them. If they subcontract the work to them then technically Hornby do not have any manufacturing capacity of their own.

As to where did Hornby go wrong. Well as we can see here you could write a book about it with everyone's different opinions. My humble opinion is that they have forgotten their original base market. All those kids who in their catalogue pictures were loving playing trains. The ones that grew up and continued the hobby. So the ground base for future model railway builder dropped rapidly. That is not to say that there are no younger modellers. Just not as many. So they set their sites on the older modellers. Those from the 1950-80 time period and said "I know what we will start making much more detailed but increasingly flimsy models for them. And we will charge them a small fortune for these engines to make up for the money we have lost selling as the younger  generation have stopped buying. They have grown up and can now afford the extortionate price we will sell them at". Then after a bit they think perhaps we have missed a trick here. Maybe we can still sell some engines to those less well off and the youngsters. We will call it the Railroad range. We will take some of our older models to drop some extra detail and the things that are fine and flimsy. Make the painting slightly less ornate and sell it cheaper. Let the punters think they are getting a bargain. But still charge them more than they cost or are worth. A point in case is the new release of the old Thomas the Tank Percy as an industrial shunter. RRP is about £50.00 but it, but It is a really poor engine. Badly made and probably only costs £10.00 if that to make. It is fine for some people to say OH YES this new pacific is wonderful and a snip at only £150 - £200. But for everyone that can afford that price there are 100+ who cannot. And they tend to be those youngsters who would love to start serious model rails but are priced out. It may come out in a few years time as a Railroad model, but it will still be £100+. Still too expensive for a lot of pockets. What is needed is a Junior range for the 10 - 15 age groups. Engines similar to the 1970s Hornby engines. That look like real thing but simply made, reliable and cheap to buy. The Triang Hornby Flying Scotsman and Battle of Britain engines  are a good example. In some respect Hornby and Bachmann have become financial elitists in their pricing attitudes. Pricing out the younger generation and those not quite so well off. Then hiking the price of their current products to make up for the loss money by making their target demographic that much smaller.

[Dunsignalling]

I some time ago concluded that it's a moot point whether Hornby abandoned the children's market or the majority of children abandoned train sets. They certainly haven't become unavailable, or unaffordable; just check out the prices of what kids get instead. 

 

It's not that there's no interest, just a lot less of it, and the quantity of toy-level trains that Tri-ang / Hornby used to make would exceed demand several times over today. Hornby (and all the others) are just making the model trains we want now not the ones we wanted fifty and sixty years ago. We mustn't assume kids today want the same stuff we did at their ages, most of them really don't, and quite a lot didn't when we were!

 

Most of we older participants started when interest was taken in the real thing by a much greater proportion of youths, and that was bound to feed through into an interest in models. I reckon a good quarter of my form at school had HD or Tri-ang sets (a couple even had proper layouts) and were at least casual spotters. Much higher, I'd suggest than is the case today.   

 

Another factor was that there was a far narrower range of toys and pastimes available to the young in those days, combined with a much less throw-away culture which led to many of us starting with hand-me-down Hornby clockwork tinplate, irrespective of perhaps wanting something else entirely... Bear in mind too, that if you stripped out inflation the £50 ex-Percy loco would probably come out roughly the same price as Tri-ang "Nellie". 

 

Once you get a reduction in interest levels in one generation, when those in turn become parents, they are unlikely to encourage their offspring in interests they don't have themselves. Levels of spotting seemed to tail off fairly heavily with the end of steam, now a good two generations past and nearer three in some areas. 

 

People get into this hobby for different reasons and at different ages these days. Rather fewer of them, too,  but mainly with rather more spending power per capita. The hobby therefore remains healthy, but is very different to the versions of it that I participated in through the sixties, largely deserted through the seventies and eighties, and bears only a passing resemblance to the one re-entered in the early 1990s...

 

In practical terms, and excluding those who make a living from it, do any of the rest of us really have more than a sentimental interest in the long-term survival of Hornby, or even the hobby in general? If Hornby decided there was no longer a living to be had from "making" model trains, they'd just do something else. Problem? Not mine. 

 

In any event, I'd suggest that the future will not be secured by attempting to re-create a demographic that ceased to exist three decades ago. My efforts will go to ensuring the enjoyment of the hobby for me and my modelling friends for as long as we are able. I won't waste my time fretting about what might happen when we are no longer around or become unable to continue doing it.

 

I assist and encourage younger entrants that I encounter, too, but I'm not a Recruiting Sergeant! 

 

John

Edited March 9, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[robmcg]

8 hours ago, cypherman said:

Hi all,

 

....

 

 

My humble opinion is that they have forgotten their original base market. All those kids who in their catalogue pictures were loving playing trains. The ones that grew up and continued the hobby. So the ground base for future model railway builder dropped rapidly. That is not to say that there are no younger modellers. Just not as many. So they set their sites on the older modellers. Those from the 1950-80 time period and said "I know what we will start making much more detailed but increasingly flimsy models for them. And we will charge them a small fortune for these engines to make up for the money we have lost selling as the younger  generation have stopped buying. They have grown up and can now afford the extortionate price we will sell them at". Then after a bit they think perhaps we have missed a trick here. Maybe we can still sell some engines to those less well off and the youngsters. We will call it the Railroad range. We will take some of our older models to drop some extra detail and the things that are fine and flimsy. Make the painting slightly less ornate and sell it cheaper. Let the punters think they are getting a bargain. But still charge them more than they cost or are worth.........

 

Point made but I respectfully disagree that the standard Hornby range is over-priced.

 

It certainly hasn't been over-priced, Hornby have until recently, for several years I think,  run at a loss.  Chinese labour costs and transport and distribution costs are very much on the increase.

 

Models of the standard of the recent A2s and any number of others couldn't even be assembled by UK workers for less than the total retail, let alone design, tooling, marketing.

 

The whole world is far different for kids now than it was in 1949-70, and while toy trains are still very popular for younger children I don't see an obvious niche for Hornby other than what they do now , in my opinion very well.

 

The highly detailed models they and others make with Chinese production and assembly is astonishingly good for such short-run production.It makes sense to me to produce lower priced less-detailed models for the kids of 10-14 who are inclined to build a model railway. Or those who may want to detail things themselves.

 

The thread title assumes Hornby have gone wrong. But have they?  They are still here and better than any other producer at times. 

 

 

[kevinlms]

2 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

Point made but I respectfully disagree that the standard Hornby range is over-priced.

 

It certainly hasn't been over-priced, Hornby have until recently, for several years I think,  run at a loss.  Chinese labour costs and transport and distribution costs are very much on the increase.

 

Models of the standard of the recent A2s and any number of others couldn't even be assembled by UK workers for less than the total retail, let alone design, tooling, marketing.

 

The whole world is far different for kids now than it was in 1949-70, and while toy trains are still very popular for younger children I don't see an obvious niche for Hornby other than what they do now , in my opinion very well.

 

The highly detailed models they and others make with Chinese production and assembly is astonishingly good for such short-run production.It makes sense to me to produce lower priced less-detailed models for the kids of 10-14 who are inclined to build a model railway. Or those who may want to detail things themselves.

 

The thread title assumes Hornby have gone wrong. But have they?  They are still here and better than any other producer at times. 

 

 

As far as production runs of models are concerned, remember Airfix in the late 1970s/80s where they made far too many models. Items like 4F's, Royal Scots, GWR 0-4-2Ts and Mk 2D coaches, were available for next to nothing from discounters for years.

Airfix seemed to think that if you made the models available to every shop, this would create a market. It didn't, because even then, there were not hordes of kids wanting a train set.

[33C]

It would be interesting if Hornby re-introduced the Triang BIG BIG train sets or the Lima O Gauge sets. Great for kids to run in and outdoors and a budget start for O modellers. BUT, what would they cost today! The 4F set was very basic, especially in battery configuration, but had 3, 16 ton mineral wagons! Great to put cars and dolls in, and later for dad to respray into a realistic livery! The Hymek was a good model and the 4F was great for conversions. My Big, Big set was, I think, about £6 then (1971) and my 4F set was £8 (1982). Prices today for modern versions?

[Steamport Southport]

49 minutes ago, kevinlms said:

As far as production runs of models are concerned, remember Airfix in the late 1970s/80s where they made far too many models. Items like 4F's, Royal Scots, GWR 0-4-2Ts and Mk 2D coaches, were available for next to nothing from discounters for years.

Airfix seemed to think that if you made the models available to every shop, this would create a market. It didn't, because even then, there were not hordes of kids wanting a train set.

 

Were they heavily discounted or was the alternatives* vastly too expensive? I remember the Airfix 14XX was half the price of a Hornby 0-6-0T but far better in almost every way. The Wrenn R1 was about four times the price!

 

Most of the Airfix stuff in places like Hattons was there because they managed to buy up most of the stock acquired when they went bankrupt in 1981 from one of the warehouses. Zodiac also had tons of it ISTR. That was a real pile it high and sell it cheap retailer. 

 

But the main problem was General Mills wanting out of the toy market. Most of the model railway stuff went to either Hattons or Dapol. I still remember the piles of boxes of Mainline locomotives in Hattons, piled up to the ceiling.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palitoy

 

 

 

*Hornby, Triang and Wrenn were also still available, much of it left over from ten or twenty years previously but I believe the retailers didn't want to discount it because middle aged blokes with money kept buying it. Look at prices of all that Wrenn stuff now. Unless it's very rare you are paying less now than you did in 1980.

 

 

 

I'm afraid that I'm in the section that reckons some are looking back at old Hornby with rose tinted glasses thinking they were good enough for the later generations. Most of it was old rubbish that nobody wanted anymore. I certainly didn't.

 

We were the Star Wars generation. We wanted detailed models that looked like things in the films or in books.

 

Play value meant little to us as we could just play on our brand new computer games that were starting to come out. Why did we need to play with toy trains and use imagination when we could plug something into the TV and shoot aliens?

 

 

 

Jason

[Steamport Southport]

42 minutes ago, 33C said:

It would be interesting if Hornby re-introduced the Triang BIG BIG train sets or the Lima O Gauge sets. Great for kids to run in and outdoors and a budget start for O modellers. BUT, what would they cost today! The 4F set was very basic, especially in battery configuration, but had 3, 16 ton mineral wagons! Great to put cars and dolls in, and later for dad to respray into a realistic livery! The Hymek was a good model and the 4F was great for conversions. My Big, Big set was, I think, about £6 then (1971) and my 4F set was £8 (1982). Prices today for modern versions?

 

Didn't the Big Big Trains end up in Russia? Good luck getting those back!  

 

ISTR they were sold to somebody called NOVO.

 

http://www.binnsroad.co.uk/railways/novo/index.html

 

 

 

Jason

[kevinlms]

14 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Were they heavily discounted or was the alternatives* vastly too expensive? I remember the Airfix 14XX was half the price of a Hornby 0-6-0T but far better in almost every way. The Wrenn R1 was about four times the price!

 

Most of the Airfix stuff in places like Hattons was there because they managed to buy up most of the stock acquired when they went bankrupt in 1981 from one of the warehouses. Zodiac also had tons of it ISTR. That was a real pile it high and sell it cheap retailer. 

 

But the main problem was General Mills wanting out of the toy market. Most of the model railway stuff went to either Hattons or Dapol. I still remember the piles of boxes of Mainline locomotives in Hattons, piled up to the ceiling.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palitoy

 

 

 

*Hornby, Triang and Wrenn were also still available, much of it left over from ten or twenty years previously but I believe the retailers didn't want to discount it because middle aged blokes with money kept buying it. Look at prices of all that Wrenn stuff now. Unless it's very rare you are paying less now than you did in 1980.

 

 

 

I'm afraid that I'm in the section that reckons some are looking back at old Hornby with rose tinted glasses thinking they were good enough for the later generations. Most of it was old rubbish that nobody wanted anymore. I certainly didn't.

 

We were the Star Wars generation. We wanted detailed models that looked like things in the films or in books.

 

Play value meant little to us as we could just play on our brand new computer games that were starting to come out. Why did we need to play with toy trains and use imagination when we could plug something into the TV and shoot aliens?

 

 

 

Jason

My head hurts reading that Palitoy link! Not saying it's wrong, just shows what goes wrong with the corporate world.

 

Personally, I've never been interested in the computer games you mention, but I'm a minority!

 

As far as choosing what models I buy, it's a case of which prototypes I like, not just what is cheap at the discounters. As an LMS man, it is of no interest whether any GWR locos are a bargain or not.

 

But I guess the toy market didn't work like that and brand loyalty was the key.

[SM42]

It's all an arms race really 

 

No matter what product from cars to toy trains, introducing the next thing to make your product stand out is the key to selling more units. 

Others catch up out of necessity and so on. 

 

The result is products with features that only 10% use and the rest put up with the other stuff they don't need or choose the least worst option.

 

Cars and TVs are by far the worst examples 

 

Back in the 80s the burgeoning market in nodel detailing parts showed the way. 

The more detail out of the box became the arms race and so it goes on with digital features too.

How many sound users use more than the engine and horn? 

The novelty of station announcements soon wears off and 19 of the 21 functions never get used but do get paid for.

 

As ever, we buy what we are given which drives more things we might not want but have to accept if we want a particular item. This skews the market towards more features as it is what is selling.

 

If we were only offered 1980s level models, what would we buy?

 

The die is cast, there is no going back from more complexity with the inherent risk of failures increasing with that complexity built in to a price the market will stand. 

 

The market still produces different levels of the same product with more or less features, but as time goes on the minimum level raises.

 

The aim is units sold. 

Very few companies work otherwise. 

 

The only one I can think of is Miele who design in a 25 year life and aim  to sell a product to more people rather than sell more product to fewer

 

 

Andy

 

[Dunsignalling]

Thing is, I've never had a gripe with Hornby design other than the odd case of needless complication. Neither have assembly errors been other than a very occasional issue for me. 

 

All the Hornby problems I've encountered; split gears (nylon) and crumbling chassis or bogies (mazak) have been down to component failure, most probably caused by the use of inferior materials. 

 

Of course, when the manufacture of your products takes place half-way round the planet, preventing the cutting of corners in the factory isn't easy. Having a proportion of products suffer such defects may simply be one of the prices we pay for outsourcing.   

 

That said, it's Hornby's reputation on the line, not the Chinese factory's, and they really should be more assiduous in ensuring the dodgy stuff can be repaired. These failures are not related to the amount of use the models get and, IMHO, the rectification of manufacturing defects should not be time-limited.   

 

John

[Michael Hodgson]

5 hours ago, SM42 said:

Back in the 80s the burgeoning market in nodel detailing parts showed the way. 

The more detail out of the box became the arms race and so it goes on with digital features too.

How many sound users use more than the engine and horn? 

The novelty of station announcements soon wears off and 19 of the 21 functions never get used but do get paid for.

 

The number of functions on DCC decoders strikes me as OTT - we don't really have much use for MARS lights, ditch lights etc if we model British outline.  But it doesn't really cost any more to make chips with all these extra functions we're never going to use as there's a global market and they are provided for the benefit of yanks who do have a use for them.

[SM42]

1 minute ago, Michael Hodgson said:

The number of functions on DCC decoders strikes me as OTT - we don't really have much use for MARS lights, ditch lights etc if we model British outline.  But it doesn't really cost any more to make chips with all these extra functions we're never going to use as there's a global market and they are provided for the benefit of yanks who do have a use for them.

 

It may not cost more to make but the extra functions can sure add to the retail price.

 

The problem is that to improve somewhere to keep up with the competition and maintain a retail price that is competitive, something else has to give. 

Nylon instead of brass gears being a good example

 

They'll do the job to end of warranty. After that who cares? 

You can always sell a spare or a often a replacement.

 

The money in selling cars is not in the car. It's in the parts, servicing and repairs

 

Andy

[newbryford]

36 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

The number of functions on DCC decoders strikes me as OTT - we don't really have much use for MARS lights, ditch lights etc if we model British outline.  But it doesn't really cost any more to make chips with all these extra functions we're never going to use as there's a global market and they are provided for the benefit of yanks who do have a use for them.

 

 

There is often a confusion between functions available as keys (F0-F28) and functions available as outputs. Until reasonably recently in the history of DCC - we only had up to four to play with. (It wasn't that long ago, I was "piggybacking" two decoders into a UK loco to wire up all the LEDs on a Class 37)

 

Saying that the US needs more functions is not necessarily true.

 

Mars lights and ditch lights are all software based functions - so once written into code - there is no extra cost.

Yes, they do take up physical outputs but let's have a look at a UK loco as a distraction.

 

I'll use a the ubiquitous Class 66 as an example if you really wanted to push the output count for a truly all-singing/dancing/bells/whistles and make the tea model for the UK market. And anything after a 66 will need a similar output count.

 

Tail lights.

Marker lights

Day headlight

Night headlight

Cab interior.

Cab dashboard lights (just as the Accurascale D*lt*c is doing)

 

Repeat for the other end.

And also include the engine room light.

 

I make that 13!