Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
DT
Joined
·
4,794 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I'm rather disappointed this morning. After running the loco half way around my layout, it derailed. It had buckled and came off the track due to the glue join on the boiler failing.



This loco has so many delicate bits that come off or brake when handling it that now I have a few more broken bits as a result of my attempts to repair the boiler. The boiler required quite a bit of pressure maintained on the join to glue it back. I now have bust smoke deflectors, cab doors, pipes and some other small pieces.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,918 Posts
QUOTE I'm rather disappointed this morning. After running the loco half way around my layout, it derailed. It had buckled and came off the track due to the glue join on the boiler failing.

I don't know how I can put this any other way but it's the plastic bodies that most turn me off to this brand of trains. Die-cast cost more but I just feel that this would never happen on one of my models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
QUOTE (Dennis David @ 6 Dec 2005, 18:09)I don't know how I can put this any other way but it's the plastic bodies that most turn me off to this brand of trains. Die-cast cost more but I just feel that this would never happen on one of my models.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have a question for you Dennis, or anybody else. I'm simply asking this out of pure naivety on my behalf.

Regarding injection moulded plastic bodies v diecast metal bodies. I was always under the impression that modern injection moulding processes could deliver a body of extremely high detail and surface finish, as opposed to metallic diecasting.

I fully understand that metal bodies are far more durable, but how detailed are they? As I said I am being naive as I don't own or ever seen OO/HO diecast
products.

I owned some Graham Farish diecast bodied class 08 and 20's, and was appalled by the lack of detail and surface finish. (I know that could be just down to manufacturer in general) The plastic bodied products were far superior.

Just interested in the visual differences thats all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,918 Posts
To be honest I have never been impressed with Graham Farish. That being said I think that either process can give you excellant detail. The Kiss models that I have posted have die-cast bodies. I'm just biased towards a die-cast body attached to the driving gear. I feel that when you have a plastic body attached to relativly heavy running gear you open yourself to these kind of issues. Especially when the plastic is a little on the light side whcih I had noticed on some recent Hornby Models.

Would that stop me from buying Hornby, no not at all when it came to British prototype but if I could choose between a Big Boy by Hornby or one by Minitrix or Marklin I would pay the extra cost.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,650 Posts
Thats a bit unfortunate Doug. I do have a very strong suspicion that your package took a bit of a jolt somewhere along the shipping route. Its that time of year when the Post Office employ a lot of amateur part time postmen and I do get more trouble this time of the year than at any other with damaged contents. To be honest it should be returned to Hornby as they would surely want to investigate.

Diecast locomotives are historically at least twice the price of plastic and the masses that Hornby supply to in the UK simply won't pay that sort of money. And its all very well making the comparisons with Marklin but they are in deep trouble with declining sales. The average model needs to sell 20,000 units over its life to recover the tooling costs. In this day and age you are not going to sell 20,000 diecast bodied UK outline locomotives.

The typical white metal kit might sell 1000 units tops if you are lucky and the tooling costs for these are much lower.

Do the US HO manufacturers do metal bodied stuff? Answer no!

I suspect that those who would pay the extra cost are in a very small minority.

Happy modelling
Gary
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,650 Posts
Good review Doug and right to let the pictures do the talking and to focus on the DCC chip installation.


Just some further thoughts on Dennis's point about diecast models.

We live in a world where mail order is making up an ever increasing proportion of sales.

I dread shipping diecast products because its like shipping a small lead weight. When these packages are dropped they land with an almighty thud and if I do get shipping issues it is inevitably something with a high metal content that takes damage (Hornby Dublo, Wills Finecast, etc). Now I do my best with this with the experiance that I have but when parcels get dented as a result of loose packaging diecast products still get damaged.

I now insist on an insured delivery for all diecast locomotive products and put fragile stickers around the outside of the box.

Strange how I don't need to do this for the majority of plastic locomotives!


I do genuinely feel that Doug's model had some bad luck during shipment and it was dropped and landed on its back in some way which weakened the joint. Although the point made by Doug about the DCC chip position is a useful one.

And if nothing else it does indicate that Hornby go to great lengths to make sure the shape of a locomotive is right and that accurate representations of a wide range of examples can be produced. And if this means producing a boiler in several sections then they will take the trouble to do this.

Happy modelling
Gary
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,650 Posts
That may be but I do recall LisaP4 saying that a brass Flying Scotsman had been produced in the past at a cost of some $2000!

And Japanese brass locomotives go for £300-£400 in the UK.

You pays your money and you take your choice to be honest. Metal will always be a lot more than plastic.

Doug has been unlucky but for £75 to £80 the Hornby Flying Scotsman is good value for money with very fine detail although as stated in the review she does require careful handling. Think of the loco as a fine lady and you won't go far wrong!


Happy modelling
Gary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
521 Posts
There seem to be a circular argument going on here.

We have a plastic body, made in more than one piece, that breaks - easily.
This is immediately blamed on ham-fisted post office workers in a bid to deflect any possible criticism that might be attached to either the basic design or the workmanship of this obviously very delicate plastic model. Is there any evidence that it was dropped in transit? Was the packaging adequate? Was the packaging damaged? Was there any sign of damage to the loco when it was unpacked? At this point we do not know and should not leap to unjustified conclusions.
QUOTE I now insist on an insured delivery for all diecast locomotive products and put fragile stickers around the outside of the box.
Strange how I don't need to do this for the majority of plastic locomotives!
Strange indeed, as it completely contradicts what appears to have happened to the plastic review model! Surely no one could possibly think that plastic is tougher than metal? To which one really must add that diecast locos maintain their value largely on the basis that they have maintained their bodily integrity.

It seems pretty obvious that a two-piece boiler is absolutely asking for trouble at the inherently weak joint and that that particular mishap simply could not have happened if the boiler had been manufactured as a single piece. It would have been even less likely to happen if it had been made of metal in a single piece.

The implication that Marklin's difficulties are a result of their bodies being diecast metal, as opposed to plastic, is amusingly simplistic! Their difficulties are considerably more complex than that.

Other than the unfortunate split boiler incident, the Scotsman appears to be a very fine model indeed and one that I would be delighted to own myself. But it highlights yet again the manufacturer's difficulty in providing fine detail and attachements while still maintaining an adequate degree of kid-proofness. (or even Doug-proofness!)


In my opinion, that two piece boiler is a basic design decision that results in a very obvious vulnerability and I would agree that it could be most helpful to Hornby that they be made aware of what happened so that future models might avoid suffering the same fate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
Having just read all the above items, & have suddenly realized why, on my model "Windsor Lad" i have two shades of green along the boiler, the front section behind the smoke box between bands 1 & 2 is a darker shade of green than the rest of the locomotive, but saying this, it does not detract from the over all beauty of this loco, I have also installed a DCC chip into it, without to much trouble, is there a difference between "Windsor Lad" & "Flying Scotsman" that makes this install more difficult? Finally i must add that this loco is now the pride of my fleet, its smooth running, quite, and a delight to watch trundling around my layout. Nice one Hornby.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,918 Posts
I didn't mean to imply that one shouldn't buy plastic bodied locomotives. That would deny you from purchasing many fine models. It's just something to think about when comparing prices. I was actually getting very close to buying one of Hornby's live steam models but was somewhat put off by the plastic body which I though was a little on the thin side. Of course if it had a die-cast body it might well have cost more but is that really true? I always thought that plastic fabrication up to a certain level was very expensive and for short runs brass was actually cheaper. That's always been the traditional answer for why brass in the past. Whether this is still true maybe it's not anymore.

As far as Marklin goes, yes things could be better but how is their sales compared to Hornby? Are all divisions of Hornby pulling their weight or are certain divisions suffering?

I do know one thing this would be a lot darker place if either Marklin or Hornby would go under. Though some of those Marklin collectors may not mind too much.
 

·
DT
Joined
·
4,794 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
The live steam body is actually quite a bit thicker than the standard body. I think it's made of a heat resistant plastic. It gets really hot even with the internal fibre protection - you have to use the special gloves to handle it.

The detail on the live steam model is not bad indeed. I'll take some shots in the next day or two as I'm selling one of my Live Steam locos to fund some other project.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
I have been reviewing this thread with great interest because the next addition to my fleet is going to be Hornby's A1 Great Northern. I hope the seam problem with the Flying Scottsman reviewed here is just a "fluke".
 

·
DT
Joined
·
4,794 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Hornby offered to fix my loco. So it is now on it's way to them. I left the decoder chip in the box with the train. Lets see if they can send it back to me with that fitted somewhere in the boiler space.
 

·
DT
Joined
·
4,794 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
After Hornby offered to "fix" my loco, they requested that I send it to them. So I sent it in to them. I included a DCC chip in the box for good measure and asked them nicely in a not if they would plug it in when the fixed the cracked boiler.

I received the package back today, so I was keen to see what they had done.

How dismayed I was when I opened the package. They had included a repairs invoice for £0 and they had done zero work.

The body was untouched, the loose steam deflector was just left off, the steam pipes and the connecting pipeds that I had glued on were loose in the box. The 'Flying Scotsman' name plate for the front of the boiler is missing completely and my DCC chip is still in the box, not installed.

What was the point of me spending cash sending it there if they do absolutely nothing, and actually return it to me in a worse state than I sent it...
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top