'Lorna Doone' Review
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Joined
·
7,397 Posts
Gary, have you tried putting a decoder in this yet? If so what have you put in and how hard was it to get it in?
cheers.
With models like this it makes more sense to have the detailed cab. It's a bit redundant on the A3 and A4 when you can't see in. It's better on this one. Diver and fireman figures would really finish this off well.
cheers.
With models like this it makes more sense to have the detailed cab. It's a bit redundant on the A3 and A4 when you can't see in. It's better on this one. Diver and fireman figures would really finish this off well.
Joined
·
1,293 Posts
Really, I don't know why I bother posting stuff for you lot! A couple of weeks ago I added this to the Lorna Doone release notice:
"Just for info, those of you wishing to chip Lorna (that sounds tasteless!) will need a decoder with long leads - the R8215 fits in the smokebox easily but you need the long leads it comes with. Bachmann and GM type decoders will be a challenge to just plug in (although I have managed to fit a Gaugemaster "small" decoder in the firebox!)."
You will need to shave the edge off the PCB to fit one in the firebox though...
![]()
60134
"Just for info, those of you wishing to chip Lorna (that sounds tasteless!) will need a decoder with long leads - the R8215 fits in the smokebox easily but you need the long leads it comes with. Bachmann and GM type decoders will be a challenge to just plug in (although I have managed to fit a Gaugemaster "small" decoder in the firebox!)."
You will need to shave the edge off the PCB to fit one in the firebox though...
60134
Joined
·
7,397 Posts
Thanks for that
Joined
·
213 Posts
QUOTE (ozwarrior @ 30 Mar 2007, 12:19) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>and who knows, maybe the Rocket.
I doubt it!
Hornby haven't got a motor in their range small enough to fit it...
I doubt it!
Hornby haven't got a motor in their range small enough to fit it...
Joined
·
11 Posts
QUOTE (drummond @ 5 Apr 2007, 15:17) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>The photos are great but show the coaches with the older plastic wheels. I suggest that the wheelsets are changed and i think 4 coaches are possible on the flat. A very good article very well presented
The coaches from the Lord of the Isles set do have very free-running plastic wheels. The loco will comfortably handle six on the flat. Note that these short clerestories are very light coaches, about half the weight of a Hornby corridor clerestory with the weight removed. The loco starts to have trouble with 4 corridor clerestories (again with weigts removed).
Adrian
The coaches from the Lord of the Isles set do have very free-running plastic wheels. The loco will comfortably handle six on the flat. Note that these short clerestories are very light coaches, about half the weight of a Hornby corridor clerestory with the weight removed. The loco starts to have trouble with 4 corridor clerestories (again with weigts removed).
Adrian
Joined
·
1,661 Posts
Have just received Royal Sovereign in Flying Dutchman train pack.
![]()
After reading this review it was with some trepidation
![]()
that I tried it out on my magnificent test oval of Hornby track (2nd radius, of course
![]()
) connected via a 1980s basic transformer
![]()
. Prior to buying this, I had bought 3 of the coaches split from the same pack (awaiting a City of Truro? Not at that price... well perhaps).
Hornby must have made some changes - the Royal Sovereign happily pulls all 6 of my GWR lined coaches
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
.
It / she isnt so happy on badly joined track, so I needed to rejoin occasionally as the test / run-in drew on, but pretty impressed. The onlymajor problem came as a result of jerky stopping and starting or acceleration and deceleration from my primitives 1 11 111 1V stops controller when the abrupt halt or acceleration at corners caused the lightweight tender to de-rail (either the coaches pushing it off the track or as a result of the tug-of-war (or love?) between the loco and the coaches). *Needs some care..would this be a problem with a decent DC controller or do I really need DCC?*
I wasn't going to buy any more locos......
![]()
Glad I did.
* andstrikethough added/edited later*
After reading this review it was with some trepidation
Hornby must have made some changes - the Royal Sovereign happily pulls all 6 of my GWR lined coaches
It / she isnt so happy on badly joined track, so I needed to rejoin occasionally as the test / run-in drew on, but pretty impressed. The only
I wasn't going to buy any more locos......
* and
Joined
·
450 Posts
Joined
·
1,661 Posts
The only reservation I have, though, is that it does appear to 'waddle' somewhat - a gentle motion that is visible as the front moves side to side over the bogie, almost as if it is searching for something. I've not noticed this on my N15.
Perhaps on longer straights (I've only used 2 Hornby short straight length) this settles down, perhaps there is something wrong, pehaps it's unavoidable with the configuration - any suggestions would be appreciated....
Perhaps on longer straights (I've only used 2 Hornby short straight length) this settles down, perhaps there is something wrong, pehaps it's unavoidable with the configuration - any suggestions would be appreciated....
Joined
·
450 Posts
modifying the attachment of the leading truck helps eliminate the waddle......ie better side control, etc.
regarding Peterpug's problem with the tender...it is always a good idea to have the heavier vehicles in a train at the front.
It may seem somewhat 'counter-productive', but adding some weight within the tender shell will help tracking when hauling heavier loads....
regarding Peterpug's problem with the tender...it is always a good idea to have the heavier vehicles in a train at the front.
It may seem somewhat 'counter-productive', but adding some weight within the tender shell will help tracking when hauling heavier loads....
Joined
·
1,661 Posts
Kitty - I agree that there are similarities between the way it's set up and a 4-4-0, but I guess the real problem as pointed out by Alastairq is the attachment of the bogie - with it being attached to the chassis behind it has a caster action rather like a supermarket trolly with it's front casters stuck pointing forward instead of backwards. Attaching the forward end of the rod to the centre of the bogie, as they've done, probably alleviates the problem but does not solve it
It would be useful if anybody has any ideas on how to modify the thing.
I think Kiwionrails had something about changing the bogie on his workbench...
Odd, really that H haven't done something about it. They have put a nice details in the cab, which presumably were not there on the original Tri-ang version, almost as if it really were designed to be looked at rather than run, but still no detailing parts which I'm sure would enhance the front (particularly with the coupling removed).
* edited to add (which should have been there in the first place)
Alastair - thanks for advice. I'll probably only use it with 3 of the coaches, so it may not be necessary to deal with the tender.
It would be useful if anybody has any ideas on how to modify the thing.
I think Kiwionrails had something about changing the bogie on his workbench...
Odd, really that H haven't done something about it. They have put a nice details in the cab, which presumably were not there on the original Tri-ang version, almost as if it really were designed to be looked at rather than run, but still no detailing parts which I'm sure would enhance the front (particularly with the coupling removed).
* edited to add (which should have been there in the first place)
Alastair - thanks for advice. I'll probably only use it with 3 of the coaches, so it may not be necessary to deal with the tender.
for bogie attachment, much has been written on the subject over the years [centuries?]....I prefer a central pivot point, perhaps lightly sprung [against the top of the bogie]...directly to the loco chassis.
Hoprnby [and tri-ang] had to consider sharp radius curves....we probably do not!
The hunting is magnified due to the fixed overhang.....the front bogie doesn't really carry the front of the engine...or , I suspect, lead it into curves....[yeah, I know it gets there first, but that's not what I mean].....I would take a look at the back-to-back measurements of the drivers and trailing wheels......setting them as wide as tolerances with B-to-B allow...
After all, the engine is a bit like an 0-4-0 with a long nose?
I have been reading recently [probably in MRJ] about how a chassis for a GWR single was created......from 'scratch'...the builder actually powered the rear wheelset rather than the big drivers......but the builder's problem that he had to overcome was low speed control......made difficult if the very large diameter drivers were driven....he solved it by powering the smaller diameter rear wheelset....lopping off top-end speed, but vastly improving low speed control....effectively turning it into a dock shunter in drag?
Hoprnby [and tri-ang] had to consider sharp radius curves....we probably do not!
The hunting is magnified due to the fixed overhang.....the front bogie doesn't really carry the front of the engine...or , I suspect, lead it into curves....[yeah, I know it gets there first, but that's not what I mean].....I would take a look at the back-to-back measurements of the drivers and trailing wheels......setting them as wide as tolerances with B-to-B allow...
After all, the engine is a bit like an 0-4-0 with a long nose?
I have been reading recently [probably in MRJ] about how a chassis for a GWR single was created......from 'scratch'...the builder actually powered the rear wheelset rather than the big drivers......but the builder's problem that he had to overcome was low speed control......made difficult if the very large diameter drivers were driven....he solved it by powering the smaller diameter rear wheelset....lopping off top-end speed, but vastly improving low speed control....effectively turning it into a dock shunter in drag?
Joined
·
1,661 Posts
QUOTE Alastairq....After all, the engine is a bit like an 0-4-0 with a long nose?.................
that just about describes it! The bogie is probably doing absolutely nothing - well at least doing nothing useful - just checked the '0-4-0' bit (for measurement, not running) on a radius 1 curve and there is so much play - no wonder it's squirming about. The accompanying leaflet says radius 2 minimum - presumably to stop the tender flying away?
Having never done 'back to back' measurements / adjustments, I'm not too keen on fiddling with the beast. The only loco I've opened up in my current train-playing incarnation is the Cally pug, and getting that back together caused so much swearing that I swore I'd never take one of the things apart ever again. Still, no valve gear to dismantle....
that just about describes it! The bogie is probably doing absolutely nothing - well at least doing nothing useful - just checked the '0-4-0' bit (for measurement, not running) on a radius 1 curve and there is so much play - no wonder it's squirming about. The accompanying leaflet says radius 2 minimum - presumably to stop the tender flying away?
Having never done 'back to back' measurements / adjustments, I'm not too keen on fiddling with the beast. The only loco I've opened up in my current train-playing incarnation is the Cally pug, and getting that back together caused so much swearing that I swore I'd never take one of the things apart ever again. Still, no valve gear to dismantle....
Joined
·
1,661 Posts
Back to back measurement on my tatty old calipers (perhaps I'd better visit AldiLidl etc) is less than 14mm (looks closer to about 13.66 - 13.75)
I think that's way out, isn't it? Should I just contact Hornby / the supplier and ask them to fix it (but who pays postage?)
I think that's way out, isn't it? Should I just contact Hornby / the supplier and ask them to fix it (but who pays postage?)
QUOTE and another question - should the driving wheels be 'quartered'? In this instance they aren't - the weights are opposite each-other.
--------------------
ah yes...but you can only tell if you dangle the loco upside down...??
I defy you to actually see both sides at once.......unless, of course, you watch yur trains hurtling around , with the aid of a mirror?
--------------------
ah yes...but you can only tell if you dangle the loco upside down...??
I defy you to actually see both sides at once.......unless, of course, you watch yur trains hurtling around , with the aid of a mirror?
Joined
·
1,661 Posts
QUOTE I defy you to actually see both sides at once.......unless, of course, you watch yur trains hurtling around , with the aid of a mirror?
..... with head on one side at table-level (*edited to add* and one eye closed) to see if they look real? No, they were on the floor.
However, the Royal Sovereign (pulls forelock) has stopped with the 'weights' on both wheels at the bottom (actually, at BDC is the end of the weights - a coincidence or the problem or an indication of the problem?), which shows on both sides clear of the chassis, and they a pretty-much dead opposite. If I were a better photographer (and had a better camera, the world were flat and so on) I'd photograph it.
But, there isn't any valve gear hanging off the wheels, no crank axle etc. would these rather feeble extra bits of plastic really make a difference?
..... with head on one side at table-level (*edited to add* and one eye closed) to see if they look real? No, they were on the floor.
However, the Royal Sovereign (pulls forelock) has stopped with the 'weights' on both wheels at the bottom (actually, at BDC is the end of the weights - a coincidence or the problem or an indication of the problem?), which shows on both sides clear of the chassis, and they a pretty-much dead opposite. If I were a better photographer (and had a better camera, the world were flat and so on) I'd photograph it.
But, there isn't any valve gear hanging off the wheels, no crank axle etc. would these rather feeble extra bits of plastic really make a difference?
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Join the discussion
