Hornby Star Class

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

Saw a Knight of St. Patrick at my local model shop in the flesh today. I'd now say the photo on Kernow's website is a good representation - green is darker than previous releases and lining is redder. Very handsome indeed, I was tempted, but sadly not my era!

 

I also think the "Star" was a very good effort indeed by Hornby in spite of its origins within the Design Clever fiasco. I had two, and the main problem I had with them was appalling standard of production-line assembly to the extent that I had to rip the best bits out if two locos to make one decent one plus a pile of spares!

 

If Hornby were to get the manufacturing right side and (my preference) retrofit brass bearings as they did with later batches of thew eight coupled tanks it would be among their finest Western offerings IMHO.

 

Andy.

[Ian Hargrave]

Reassuring news about the shade.Thanks.

 

Edit: the discrepancy between the images on the Rails and Kernow websites is marked.Odd.

Edited April 8, 2017 by Ian Hargrave

[GWR8700]

Good news that they've listened to concerns about the the shade of green on their GWR locos at least.  Just a shame that when making progress in one area they go and repeat an earlier mistake.  I know it's an easy fix but it's just very frustrating given that it's an issue they've sorted out once before.

Edited April 8, 2017 by GWR8700

[M.I.B]

Colour is harder to fix than the bogie issue.

 

I am not offended by the 12 spoke wheels, as it costs £7 to sort with some Hornby Castle spares.    A paintjob would be more of an issue.

 

Some will say for that money it should be 100% perfect. 

 

For what I paid, I am incredibly satisfied.

 

If you are reading this from Hornby - thanks for supplying us with good models at affordable prices, and please ignore the moaners.  They would moan about the box if the engine was 100% accurate.

[Clearwater]

Colour is harder to fix than the bogie issue.

 ,

 

If you are reading this from Hornby - thanks for supplying us with good models at affordable prices, and please ignore the moaners.  They would moan about the box if the engine was 100% accurate.

They'd moan there was nothing to fix and no modelling to be done... I'm fighting hard not to buy this one. I have other Stars so will, probably, resist...

 

David

[coachmann]

Thanks Larry. The key phrase is "complete repaint " .Sadly the Star does not start from a low price point either....

Considering the way prices were heading in the last two years, £129.00 can't be bad. Afterall, people who cannot remove moulded details themselves will be glad of a loco with wire and knob handrails and a decent smokebox dart. And being Hornby, it has electrical pick up's on the tender, is an easy model in which to fit a DCC decoder (and sound), and true running driving wheels that do not leave the loco waggling along the track.

 

Edit: I now see it is £109.50 at one retailers.

Edited April 8, 2017 by coachmann

[Coach bogie]

If you want Castle steam pipes...you could always fit your own. Available as spares from David Geen, and possibly SEF.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[M.I.B]

I bought it because:

 

I couldn't butcher Lode Star.

I wanted an RTR Star  (with no external steam pipes) with an RTR 4000 gallon tender.

 

I tried to get another Princess Alice but couldn't. An Alice and a Harry Potter tender were probably going to be more than I paid for this on pre order anyway. 

 

Even with the price of the correct bogie it's less than the RRP by being pre-ordered.

 

If you are reading this in Margate - thank you, and please can we have some Toplight full brakes,,,,,

[John M Upton]

They're not in Margate anymore...

[Coach bogie]

Consider Hornby's 'Swindon' stardardisation.

 

My first two Stars came with 3,500 gallon tenders. I wanted them with 4,000 gallon tenders, but not the twin filler King tender supplied, so a tender swop with two Tintagel Castles from a friend who wanted small tenders behind his Castles solved that one.Both these stars did not need the elbow pipes, so I removed them, filled the hole, dabbed some matt black paint - job done!

 

I want 4038 Queen Berengaria

which was Westbury's pet but is had the larger sided Collett 3,50 tender Hornby supply with some of the Granges. Obtained a spare top, swopped with the Star (has the same frames), replace the BR emblem with Great Western emblem, luckily the BR lining matched, job done!

 

One of my kit built Stars is worn out (well it is 40 years old). I will not last another 40 years so what do I do.?

MItchell kit (in stock) £138, Romfords £50 motor/gears £30, basically over £200 and I would have to waist valuable coach building time (I chose building toplights rather than growing old waiting for rtr), or buy discounted, last years release Star at £94. The old engine was one of my 3,500 gallon ones so really needed a small tender. I have a spare railroad one off a Hall which I swopped for a complete larger Collett 3,500 gallon tender from a Grange, replace the tender hand rails -  job ready to be done!

 

The Hornby Stars may have their faults which are a quick fix but for the money....reality check chaps and chapesses.....what a bargain!

 

But if you have the time and want to spend over £200 creating a better one - be my guest.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[No Decorum]

I suppose ones approach to such things depends on whether one is a railway modeller or not. Clever Design locos are easily sorted plus we are starting from a low price point. I have detailed four Railroad 'Hall' class locos to date and an 8P 'Duke'. They were worth it because they had smooth running flywheel chassis. I thought the 'Star' too was a fine model. From memory, all I did was fit different bogie wheels and give it a complete repaint after lowering the reversor. It performed well with DCC Sound too, which is more than could be said for two 'King' class locos.

 

[Video]

That is a very pleasing video of a very pleasing model. It is good that you found such a good runner. What dismays me about these models is that the motor is very inconsistent. I have an eight-coupled tank which runs very nicely, another which is very poor and a third in between. My P2 has had to be re-motored. In addition, the idea of square mazak axleboxes is alarming. It does not take much running until these acquire arcs to match the axles and a fine polish. To put it another way, they wear rapidly. I have no idea how these will survive extended running but I suspect that they will not last very long.

 

The finish is poor but this is not confined to design clever models. With a little work, Hornby could produce something acceptable to us lesser mortals. I suppose it’s just cheaper to do a re-run without tinkering.

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

That is a very pleasing video of a very pleasing model. It is good that you found such a good runner. What dismays me about these models is that the motor is very inconsistent. I have an eight-coupled tank which runs very nicely, another which is very poor and a third in between. My P2 has had to be re-motored. In addition, the idea of square mazak axleboxes is alarming. It does not take much running until these acquire arcs to match the axles and a fine polish. To put it another way, they wear rapidly. I have no idea how these will survive extended running but I suspect that they will not last very long.

 

The finish is poor but this is not confined to design clever models. With a little work, Hornby could produce something acceptable to us lesser mortals. I suppose it’s just cheaper to do a re-run without tinkering.

 

My point (in post 1601) exactly! I'm not the least bit troubled by the moulded handrail on the side sheet or the wrongly spoked wheesl. Both are easy to fix. What does drive me mad is that Hornby produced such an exquisite body moulding but then made cheap compromises on the chassis. Grrrrrrrr!

 

As with the 2016 Collett Hall, Hornby managed to "Spoil the ship for a Ha'porth of tar". Both have the potential to be outstanding though the Star is much the better of the two IMO.

 

Andy.

[coachmann]

That is a very pleasing video of a very pleasing model. It is good that you found such a good runner. What dismays me about these models is that the motor is very inconsistent. I have an eight-coupled tank which runs very nicely, another which is very poor and a third in between. My P2 has had to be re-motored. In addition, the idea of square mazak axleboxes is alarming. It does not take much running until these acquire arcs to match the axles and a fine polish. To put it another way, they wear rapidly. I have no idea how these will survive extended running but I suspect that they will not last very long.

 

The finish is poor but this is not confined to design clever models. With a little work, Hornby could produce something acceptable to us lesser mortals. I suppose it’s just cheaper to do a re-run without tinkering.

 

My point (in post 1601) exactly! I'm not the least bit troubled by the moulded handrail on the side sheet or the wrongly spoked wheesl. Both are easy to fix. What does drive me mad is that Hornby produced such an exquisite body moulding but then made cheap compromises on the chassis. Grrrrrrrr!

 

As with the 2016 Collett Hall, Hornby managed to "Spoil the ship for a Ha'porth of tar". Both have the potential to be outstanding though the Star is much the better of the two IMO.

 

Andy.

I take on board all your points lads but, without plastic ready-to-run, you would have nothing to complain about because you would have no models at all. What we might call traditional or historical railway modellers always built their locos from whitemetal or brass kits while other people were happy with RTR proprietary toys. Ask yourselves seriously; What would you have if it wasn't all produced for you?

 

Progress has given modellers and collectors alike the opportunity to have plastic ready-to-run fine scale models at a fraction of the cost of kit-building. In fact, building the kit was easier for most people than painting them afterwards. With RTR, we get the lot to a standard most professionals would be hard put to match, yet it has been obvious to me since I joined RMweb that some RTR buyers have lost their reason and all sight of reality.

Edited April 9, 2017 by coachmann

[No Decorum]

I take on board all your points lads but, without plastic ready-to-run, you would have nothing to complain about because you would have no models at all. What we might call traditional or historical railway modellers always built their locos from whitemetal or brass kits while other people were happy with RTR proprietary toys. Ask yourselves seriously; What would you have if it wasn't all produced for you?

 

Progress has given modellers and collectors alike the opportunity to have plastic ready-to-run fine scale models at a fraction of the cost of kit-building. In fact, building the kit was easier for most people than painting them afterwards. With RTR, we get the lot to a standard most professionals would be hard put to match, yet it has been obvious to me since I joined RMweb that some RTR buyers have lost their reason and all sight of reality.

I can’t quarrel with any of that. The trouble about criticising is coming across as a moaner. Actually, as a paid-up moaner (although I am quite happy to dribble about models I like) what is happening is that I see a locomotive which is good but could be better in some respects. I focus on (moan about) the shortcomings.

 

Undoubtedly, we have never had it so good. Apart from shortcomings which creep in, modern models are superb.

 

I cast my mind back many years to a time when I wanted a King Arthur and Hornby produced one. Even for those days, it was so poor that couldn’t bring myself to buy one. When the new generation model appeared, it left me breathless.

 

The question is, if we did not criticise what we see as shortcomings and, in all fairness, if Hornby had not been challenged by better models coming to market, would we have the gems we have today? We have moaned about motors and we have moaned about square axleboxes. Hornby does not now tool up any more of these. All credit to Hornby for listening.

 

I have built a couple of models and sprayed them black. It took ages and the results (to put it kindly) could have been better. I have had some locomotives professionally built. Some good, some not so good but always hugely expensive. This Star is a reasonable model and much better than anything I could build and much, much cheaper than anything I could have had built for me. If a Star is what’s wanted, there is nothing to compete with it. However, it could be better. It is only my own approach to things but I have a Star and I won’t get another but I have three Hornby King Arthurs. I say again, it is only my approach but get a model right and it levers my wallet open more than once.

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

I take on board all your points lads but, without plastic ready-to-run, you would have nothing to complain about because you would have no models at all. What we might call traditional or historical railway modellers always built their locos from whitemetal or brass kits while other people were happy with RTR proprietary toys. Ask yourselves seriously; What would you have if it wasn't all produced for you?

 

Hi Coach,

 

I agree that I couldn't produce anything remotely as good as the outstanding RTR products we routinely see today. I started collecting model trains in the early 80s. The stuff we have today was unimaginable then. I hope I wasn't coming across as a general moaner as that was not my goal. I was making a specific point about the use of brass axle bearings and to a lesser extent about moulded body detail.

 

It seems to me that the Hornby 'Star' and 'Hall' have different markets and therefore warrant different specifications. Because of the success of the Harry Potter films the Hall will be sold into a far broader market. Many will be bought for children and run on train sets. For that model the omission of fragile separately fitted components such the brake ejector, steam pipes and handrails makes sense. Equally the absence of brass bearings will make little difference in perceived value to the customer but will reduce cost. That market will be price sensitive as many customers will be families/children with limited means to spend on the hobby.

 

The Star however is surely a different kettle of fish? The Stars were outstanding machines in their day, a fact made apparent to me by reading some of O.S. Nock's accounts of their performances pre World War II. The fact is however that they now languish in (undeserved) obscurity. It is therefore a niche model likely to sell to a smaller market of more knowledgeable collectors many of whom have the means to pay a little more for premium features like brass axle bearings and separately fitted detail. The point I was making was that it is a shame that such an exquisite model should be compromised by cost cutting because I think it was un-necessary for the clientele likely to buy it.

 

Andy.

[Hilux5972]

I agree on many points with you Andy. However, the Star was produced around the time that many people were complaining on a regular basis about the rising cost of models, and Hornby tried to do something about that, with the Design Clever ethos. This worked fantastically for some, like the Duke because it was the first RTR model and the Hall because Bachmanns great model already existed, but the likes of the Star and the Heavy Tanks did not do so well, due to modellers wanting highly detailed models of these, but which Hornby felt would have complained about a full price model.

 

It didn't take them long to realise Design Clever was a mistake and consign it to history. Hopefully the models will eventually get reworked into the highly detailed models we have come to expect form Hornby.

[No Decorum]

I’m glad you both mentioned the Hall. I have an ancient Hall and an ancient Modified Hall. I also have a retooled Bachmann one, which I could well have done without. Things are moving quite quickly nowadays and it isn’t only that the new Bachmann offering is a bit off under the smokebox – it seems to have been made to the standards prevalent when the recalled model appeared, with touches of detail missing and no provision for sound, for example. I already have a couple of nice Halls not up to modern standards; I don’t want more.

On the other hand, my daughter-in-law is a Harry Potter fan. I bought her a red Hornby Hall. It isn’t even a display model (because of three small children) and is tucked away. Just having it does the job. She is absolutely delighted to have it and I am delighted that Hornby made it possible for me to provide it.

I am now rather smug, with hints of the hero about me.

 

As for design clever, it was a perfectly reasonable attempt to respond to complaints about rising prices, for which Hornby got no credit at all. Like many good ideas, it just didn’t work and (coupled to supply problems) brought Hornby to its knees. Perhaps Coachmann is right – we shouldn’t moan too much.

[coachmann]

I no longer own a 'Star', but I am sure it came with wire handrails on the tender and was not from the Clever Design stable. The ejector pipe might be moulded on the boiler (I cannot remember), but if it was, it was preferable to a flimsy plastic pipe that also holds the boiler handrail. I never had the driving wheels out so I dont know if the axle bearings were brass or rectangular slots. But what I do know is its selling price is appropriately placed between the full-cream Castle and the Railroad Hall. 

 

NoDecorum is right when he says the Bachmann Hall is really from a past era. The rectangular bit carrying the decoder plug is an obvious afterthought. This is where Hornby scores plus they usually fit electrical pickups in the ender. The bit of extra modelling incurred such as replacing moulded details is actually quite therapeutic.

 

I have found this shot of my Star after making it into Princess Margaret by lowering the reversor and reach rod and making the vertical pod that fits on the front of the cab. 10-spoke bogie wheels are Hornby. It was weathered down quite a lot in an attempt to make the green acceptable. A few months later I gave the loco a full repaint.

 

Just remembered : At least the brake shoes are in line with the wheels on the tender and it has electrical pick ups.

 

Edited April 10, 2017 by coachmann

[No Decorum]

Assuming Hornby has produced 2,000 of these, could you have them all repainted by Friday?

[Ian Hargrave]

Assuming Hornby has produced 2,000 of these, could you have them all repainted by Friday?

Personally,I think Hornby should employ Larry as chief livery consultant on a full time contract. And I am being serious...

 

And I agree with the views on the Bachmann Hall .The Hornby version is a largely unappreciated gem.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Ian Hargrave

[coachmann]

Assuming Hornby has produced 2,000 of these, could you have them all repainted by Friday?

Now that would be a Good Friday..... 

[Clearwater]

Personally,I think Hornby should employ Larry as chief livery consultant on a full time contract. And I am being serious...

 

And I agree with the views on the Bachmann Hall .The Hornby version is a largely unappreciated gem.

Can they afford his rates???

[Ian Hargrave]

Can they afford his rates???

Can they afford not to ? Just looked at 4013 on the Hattons website and regrettably the GWR livery shows as the same anaemic sage.

 

Oh well...

[toboldlygo]

Now that would be a Good Friday..... 

 

You'll be too busy enjoying a Hot Cross Bun or two (or something more alcoholic) won't you Larry

 

I'll be busy actually working :/

[gwrrob]

Can they afford not to ? Just looked at 4013 on the Hattons website and regrettably the GWR livery shows as the same anaemic sage.

 

Oh well...

 

Hopefull I'll get a chance to do a review of sort tomorrow as mine arrived today whilst out.SWMBO signed for it., gulp.