Hattons announce 14xx / 48xx / 58xx

[PMP]

I don't have a Hattons 14xx, but I do have one of their P tanks, and it is superb in every respect, and 

that must be down to good design, and a good manufacturer.

I've had dodgy loco's and they go straight back to where they came from.

The Hattons P is a completely different mechanical design, and having seen one as you say excellent. Apart from Being a Hattons brand model theres not a great deal of similarity. There is clearly a design/manufacturing issue with the 14xx chassis, if mine is uncoupled from the motor the chassis runs free with no binding, (same with the DJM J94) the problem occurs when the motor and worm is added to the equation.

 

I've also found a better running J94 than the six I've had pass through the mancave, and Keiths (Melmerby) videos show that there are Hattons 14xx's out there that are clearly very good.

[melmerby]

I'm really surprised no one has re-done the Saint Class yet, as both Hornby and Bachmann have each covered the classes derived from it. Perhaps the New Build/rebuild might trigger some inspiration. 

 

Paul. 

Hornby even have the more or less correct chassis/boiler/cab set-up with the Star

Just change the cylinders/smokebox. The Star is in essence a 4-cyl Saint. Same boiler, same pitch, same cab, same wheels etc.

 

Keith

[9402 Fredrick]

Hornby even have the more or less correct chassis/boiler/cab set-up with the Star

Just change the cylinders/smokebox. The Star is in essence a 4-cyl Saint. Same boiler, same pitch, same cab, same wheels etc.

 

Keith

The valve gear would need changing aswell.

[Paul_sterling]

The valve gear would need changing aswell.

 

In the great scheme of things a relatively minor change compared to new tooling though.

 

Over to you Hornby.............

[Allegheny1600]

That's actually what most would class as a good runner! See PMP's blog for what a really bad one is like.

Good grief - really!?

If that's a 'good' one, I'd be really annoyed with a 'bad' one.

Not to worry, I've decided to go the whitemetal kit route instead. I really doubt I can get such a nice finish or detailing on the body but I know I can sort the chassis out.

YMMV.

[Paul_sterling]

Id be interested to see if, given the recent introduction of the Rapdio Stirling Single Wheeler, if anyone revisits building a 14/48/58xx chassis with all axle drive?

 

Could even use a system where the rear driver and the trailed axle are geared together, but the front driver is powered by the rods............?

 

Paul. 

[coachmann]

I am reluctant to invest 100+ smackers on a sound decoder for the 14XX at the moment, but it is by no means alone. My DJM 14XX, Heljan GWR 47XX and Oxford Mk.II Dean Goods have been fine on DC but distinctly dodgy on DCC + Sound, and it is obvious from comments on this forum that I am not alone. It seems new entrants to 4mm RTR are breaking away from Hornby's well-proven chassis design. 

Edited July 20, 2018 by coachmann

[Allegheny1600]

Id be interested to see if, given the recent introduction of the Rapdio Stirling Single Wheeler, if anyone revisits building a 14/48/58xx chassis with all axle drive?

 

Could even use a system where the rear driver and the trailed axle are geared together, but the front driver is powered by the rods............?

 

Paul. 

No need!

As I offered to Rapido when they were designing their lovely Stirling Single, all a manufacturer needs to do is examine a Lenz BR66 2-6-4T or a Brawa BR65 2-8-4T - these models have the main driving wheels AND the trailing bogie wheels gear driven, copy that system with appropriate changes to allow for different wheel diameters, apply the same engineering principles and specifications and voila.

I've sold my Lenz model but still have the Brawa and that is a very smooth runner.

If any manufacturers are reading this, I would be happy to loan it to them - just to help out in the quest for a decent British mechanism.

[adb968008]

No need!

As I offered to Rapido when they were designing their lovely Stirling Single, all a manufacturer needs to do is examine a Lenz BR66 2-6-4T or a Brawa BR65 2-8-4T - these models have the main driving wheels AND the trailing bogie wheels gear driven, copy that system with appropriate changes to allow for different wheel diameters, apply the same engineering principles and specifications and voila.

I've sold my Lenz model but still have the Brawa and that is a very smooth runner.

If any manufacturers are reading this, I would be happy to loan it to them - just to help out in the quest for a decent British mechanism.

You have to be careful copying other vendors mechanisms, often designs have patents attached.

I love the square axle stubs on Bachmann locos for perfect quartering in an instant, but doubtless there’s a reason no one else uses it.

Same to for Heljan modular “removable power pack” approach to the motor on the 47xx..it’s a great idea but suspect there are design rights attached to it, if not a patent application to the design.

 

Here’s a good one for example..

 

It’s a Kader patent for counting vehicles passing over a section of track, from the days model railways were more about fun and less serious about precision... (1965).

 

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&ND=6&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19690717&CC=GB&NR=1108191A&KC=A

Edited July 20, 2018 by adb968008

[melmerby]

The valve gear would need changing aswell.

That comes under cylinders AFAIC. As any new cylinders would include the appropriate slides, rockers etc.

 

Keith

[John Isherwood]

Good grief - really!?

If that's a 'good' one, I'd be really annoyed with a 'bad' one.

Not to worry, I've decided to go the whitemetal kit route instead. I really doubt I can get such a nice finish or detailing on the body but I know I can sort the chassis out.

YMMV.

 

Then why not build an etched chassis kit for the body that you clearly find acceptable?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[NHY 581]

Then why not build an etched chassis kit for the body that you clearly find acceptable?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Agreed,John but why should we have to. The body on the 14xx is second to none, arguably one of the finest RTR models issued. It is therefore reasonable to expect a chassis to match. Instead we have an over complicated set of cogs and wheels for which it is a real lottery as to whether or not you get a good one.

So having spent £100 on the loco you then spend x amount of time sending them back until you get a good one, accept defeat if you don't and ask for a refund or you spend another £100 on a suitable chassis.

 

It's simply not right and it is for this reason I have not purchased these. I cannot be bothered to go through all the potential drama and hassle for this particular model.

 

Rob.

Edited July 21, 2018 by NHY 581

[John Isherwood]

Agreed,John but why should we have to. The body on the 14xx is second to none, arguably one of the finest RTR models issued. It is therefore reasonable to expect a chassis to match. Instead we have an over complicated set of cogs and wheels for which it is a real lottery as to whether or not you get a good one.

So having spent £100 on the loco you then spend x amount of time sending them back until you get a good one, accept defeat if you don't and ask for a refund or you spend another £100 on a suitable chassis.

 

It's simply not right and it is for this reason I have not purchased these. I cannot be bothered to go through all the potential drama and hassle for this particular model.

 

Rob.

 

That is, of course, your decision.

 

But when it comes down to actually sourcing an acceptable 14XX, I would submit that a cast whitemetal kit is not a good starting point - especially if we are referring to the K's kit which must have been amongst the first of its breed, back in the 1950s / 60s.

 

What is unacceptable as regards running quality must surely have an equivalent in what is unacceptable in fidelity to prototype  appearance?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Allegheny1600]

Speaking for myself only, I picked up a built and painted kit (yes, a K's) for around the £45 mark!

Unlike most of you guys, I am a beginner in modelling the GWR but I am used to superb running from my H0 stock and would rather have a great runner, even with mildly inaccurate details than a superbly accurate body, correct to every detail as of 21st July 1933 but that runs like a bag of nails.

Sorry if this is an anathema to some of you but we are all different.

Cheers,

John.

[Allegheny1600]

Then why not build an etched chassis kit for the body that you clearly find acceptable?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

If I end up modelling the GWR in a big way (possible), then I may well go this route but for now, see my previous ppost.

Cheers,

John.

[NHY 581]

That is, of course, your decision.

 

But when it comes down to actually sourcing an acceptable 14XX, I would submit that a cast whitemetal kit is not a good starting point - especially if we are referring to the K's kit which must have been amongst the first of its breed, back in the 1950s / 60s.

 

What is unacceptable as regards running quality must surely have an equivalent in what is unacceptable in fidelity to prototype  appearance?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Hi John.

 

I have no intention of trying to make a silk purse out of the sows ear that is the K's kit and have not alluded to such.

 

If I really were to buy one, I would source a Hornby 14x and upgrade it accordingly. The reason that I fancied the Hattons/DJM 14xx was the way it looked..I do not model the GWR/Western region but have always had a soft spot for the 14xx. It really does look very nice but pretty pointless if the thing won't run though.

 

I will just do without, in the same way I wouldn't buy a Kernow/DJM 1361. Looks lovely but splashers!!?.

 

I have a Kernow/DJM O2. Looks lovely but has sloppy conrods which really irritate me. I also have a Kernow/DJM Gatestock set. Not the one I ordered as I returned the original order which had dimples instead of raised rivets. The other errors I can live with.

 

 

In short, I would not now purchase any more locos which have the same designer as above. He is either not up to designing a chassis which will work or the factories which produce his models are incapable of working to the tolerences required.

 

 

Like others I don't have the money to waste on models that won't work correctly. So I won't.

 

Rob.

[melmerby]

Speaking for myself only, I picked up a built and painted kit (yes, a K's) for around the £45 mark!

Cheers,

John.

In what way is the K's kit a good runner?

It had a crap motor and the rest of it wasn't up to much.

However it was all that was available at the time.

Yes I have one, it never ran properly, the chassis was distorted and the motor used to overheat!

It's now in the "what shall I do with this?" box!

 

Keith

[tomparryharry]

Well, I've got a couple of K's 14xx....

 

Mind you, still in their boxes,.....

 

Ian.

[johnarcher]

That is, of course, your decision.

 

But when it comes down to actually sourcing an acceptable 14XX, I would submit that a cast whitemetal kit is not a good starting point - especially if we are referring to the K's kit which must have been amongst the first of its breed, back in the 1950s / 60s.

 

What is unacceptable as regards running quality must surely have an equivalent in what is unacceptable in fidelity to prototype  appearance?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

The last sentence is no doubt true, though I'd suggest that in building a kit one can improve the appearance more easily than improving the running of a (apparently) dubious RTR chassis design.

With the Perseverance kit gone maybe the best-looking 14XX would be this body on a High Level chassis - though it's a bit expensive to buy the complete RTR model and bin the chassis, whatever its faults.

Edited July 22, 2018 by johnarcher

[The Fatadder]

The last sentence is no doubt true, though I'd suggest that in building a kit one can improve the appearance more easily than improving the running of a (apparently) dubious RTR chassis design.

With the Perseverance kit gone maybe the best-looking 14XX would be this body on a High Level chassis - though it's a bit expensive to buy the complete RTR model and bin the chassis, whatever its faults.

Definitely the best option would be the DJM body on a High Level chassis, all be it expensive.  However they do turn up at sensible prices on ebay from time to time, I think I paid 55-60 or so for mine.  At that rate you can get a High Level chassis and the DJM body for little more than the new price (and i am sure someone will pay £15 -20 for the spare chassis.

 

I must get the chassis / smoke box / roof of my Hornby / High Level combination painted, I will be very interested to see the look of the end model vs the DJM version.

[woodenhead]

I am pleased to announce a new arrival at Woodenhead castle - a GWR livery 14xx.

 

I did the age old thing of prevaricating too much to get a new one from Hattons especially with some of the negative comments, then when all the pristine GW livery ones had gone I settled for I didn't need one anyway but secretly I did.

 

Anyway with the thread ignored I went ahead and bought one off Ebay this week then re-read this thread and thought oh-no what have I done, till this morning when a pristine GWR 14xx arrived and it works a treat

 

Happy days

Edited July 26, 2018 by woodenhead

[Ian Hargrave]

I am pleased to announce a new arrival at Woodenhead castle - a GWR livery 14xx.

 

I did the age old thing of prevaricating too much to get a new one from Hattons especially with some of the negative comments, then when all the pristine GW livery ones had gone I settled for I didn't need one anyway but secretly I did.

 

Anyway with the thread ignored I went ahead and bought one off Ebay this week then re-read this thread and thought oh-no what have I done, till this morning when a pristine GWR 14xx arrived and it works a treat

 

Happy days

You shouldn't be so surprised.You are not alone.There are indeed a small but significant number on this forum who have "outed" ourselves and declared in its favour.....especially when you read of the agonies seemingly suffered by those who attempt a working relationship with Hornby 's latest offerings.Nobody says it's without fault.Except it's the best we have by a country mile in rtr.

[woodenhead]

You shouldn't be so surprised.You are not alone.There are indeed a small but significant number on this forum who have "outed" ourselves and declared in its favour.....especially when you read of the agonies seemingly suffered by those who attempt a working relationship with Hornby 's latest offerings.Nobody says it's without fault.Except it's the best we have by a country mile in rtr.

I had to remove it's DCC chip and I was worrying about going into the body when I remembered - this is a DJM model, the smokebox door comes off and you just slide out the plug - easy.

 

It's currently simmering in the bay platform on with a couple of mint B-set coaches I picked up the same week that need converting to Kadees - it might be a 14xx but I don't feel an immediate need to tie it to an Autocoach.

[tomparryharry]

You shouldn't be so surprised.You are not alone.There are indeed a small but significant number on this forum who have "outed" ourselves and declared in its favour.....especially when you read of the agonies seemingly suffered by those who attempt a working relationship with Hornby 's latest offerings.Nobody says it's without fault.Except it's the best we have by a country mile in rtr.

 

You are not alone.... I confess that I too, have a 48xx. My principal decision centres around the choice. When It was released, I had some 3-4 GW-centred models to choose from. Topfeed? that's just 1 or 2 of the options. My mistake was not getting 4825, and renumbering one as 4821. Still, I can always buy 4871. I Bought one on principle is that I advocated such choice, and I'll put my money where my mouth is. As a happy note, my 48xx runs straight out of the box, after running in.

 

It's a limited job locomotive, doing a limited job. Don't expect to put 8 coaches on an express ....."Oh look, it's not very good haulage....". One or two coaches, or an extra van is about your limit.

 

You'll hear me banging on about topfeed. I'm sorry. It arrived in the early thirties, and was indeed an advance in boiler management. However, nothing defines an era more forcibly than this. It limits the last 10 years of the Western, and puts your locomotive choice fairly & squarely into that bracket. Little wonder, therefore, that I'll always mumble about the Baccy pannier, and Hornby shoving the blessed thing onto your pride & joy....Whether you like it or not.

 

So, apologies. Enough ranting for me. The Shapeways website shows some rather nice matchboarded trailers, and I did say I wanted one..... Or is that two...?

 

Happy modelling,

 

Ian.

[south_tyne]

 

I wouldn't be at all surprised if another manufacturer decides that the time's just right for a definitive 14xx.

I cannot see another manufacturer going near it for a long time now. Unless I suppose Hornby simply upgraded the chassis of the ex-Dapol example.

 

There is of course the O gauge version to come from Dapol due over the coming months... I think that will be THE definitive version! (maybe too large for this discussion though! )