class T9 chassis rot

Discuss Hornby Model Railway products and related topics here. This includes (Lima, Rivarossi, Jouef, Electrotren).
GWR_fan
Posts: 4482
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby GWR_fan » Tue Oct 25, 2016 10:35 pm

D605Eagle wrote:Has Hornby made an announcement about these models at all?


I have not seen any official release from Hornby regarding these models. I have five affected models and all were released in either the "Imperial Airways" trainpack or the "1938 Suburban" pack. I certainly have no intention of risking any further greyhound purchases.

User avatar
Ken Shabby
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:20 pm

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby Ken Shabby » Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:52 pm

Still keeping an eye on my T9, It had it's first run today since June and I found It kept stuttering on random areas of my layout.
Fearing the worst I started looking at how to get the body off and noticed that one of the pick up wipers had drooped slightly .
This was causing the front set of wheels on the bogie not to turn properly and also was occasionally touching the track pins.
Once this was sorted I had an hours trouble free running and the loco was no noisier than it was a few months back.
Ken

GWR_fan
Posts: 4482
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby GWR_fan » Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:45 am

A blast from the past. Refer the last comment on the linked page. The mazak rot had established itself back in 2010 on the T9.

viewtopic.php?f=46&t=21507

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 9752
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby Bufferstop » Thu Dec 15, 2016 1:47 pm

It strikes me that Hornby (and they aren't alone) get away with murder in their response to this problem. It's a problem that is well known in the die-casting industry, so they should have a stated policy, for dealing with it. Basically they hide behind the retailers who are responsible in law for the fitness for purpose of the things they sell. Perhaps we should make more fuss about it.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

GWR_fan
Posts: 4482
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby GWR_fan » Sat Dec 17, 2016 8:37 pm

I decided to tempt fate (again!!!) and secured against my better judgement an olive green Southern T9 #120 from a popular store's pre-owned selection. This model, R2690, was from the NRM model collection. I cannot find reference to this particular model succumbing to the dreaded pox but then Hornby kept the disease under wraps for many years. Fingers crossed.

VerdevaleRailway
Posts: 309
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 12:12 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby VerdevaleRailway » Sun Dec 18, 2016 1:11 am

Hi GWR_fan, that is the one that I have. To date I have had no issues with it, purchased new in 2009.

Good luck

Cheers, V.R.
'whose origin was a terminus'

GWR_fan
Posts: 4482
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby GWR_fan » Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:27 am

VerdevaleRailway wrote:Hi GWR_fan, that is the one that I have. To date I have had no issues with it, purchased new in 2009.

Good luck

Cheers, V.R.


Given that my other five T9's all succumbed to the disease, I am not confident. These are all Southern olive green livery.

User avatar
Mountain
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 3:43 pm

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby Mountain » Sun Dec 18, 2016 6:13 pm

Convert them to run on old Triang chassis. They'll last for years... :D
Hope you have good success with this one GWR fan.

User avatar
Bigglesof266
Posts: 686
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 9:59 am
Location: Australia

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby Bigglesof266 » Sat Jun 03, 2017 3:25 am

Hi Tim

Did you end up buying and fitting any Peter's Spares' aftermarket T9 motor mounts and replacement Hornby rear brackets?

I've been out of the loop for a while. About the time this thread was active in October, I was about to undergo a major surgery which triaged my own intended T9 mazak inspection program to low priority indefinite hold.

Since recovered nicely, finally progressed it from the 'to do' list today.

To business. I've just lifted the lid on my T9s x2 moments ago. Both are in SR lined Olive, one from the "Imperial Airways Train Pack", the other from "1938 Southern Suburban Train Pack". Chalk and cheese. One is, well, ...I'll post a pic so you can see for yourself. That's how I found the fragments and remainder of the mount and rear motor bracket inside the loco! o.O OTOH, the other is intact, both parts, and appears structurally sound. I can't be absolutely 100% sure, but reasonably certain the dud was the loco included with the "1938 Suburban Train Pack", as the other was coupled in my display cabinet to the 8 wheel tender. See linked Photobucket image below. As memory serves, both were purchased within a twelve month window of one another time frame.

Hornby must have known about this when they were flogging them off cheap. Even if not, their silence since has been unimpressively deafening.

Image

I'll pick up a couple of replacement brass motor mounts from Peter's Spares this week, along with a rear bracket. Surmising the newer batch Hornby rear bracket parts must be sound if Peter's are selling them -as evidenced by the one fitted to the "Imperial Airways Train Pack" loco. Only need the one mount and bracket set at this juncture, but given the cost of shipping to AU, may as well amortise the postage. Mazak....ugh!

GWR_fan
Posts: 4482
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby GWR_fan » Sat Jun 03, 2017 5:40 am

Keiron,
I gave up on them. I have two from the Imperial set, three from the 1938 set and the limited run NRM locomotive (#120?) and all had succumbed to the dreaded rot on receipt of them. I decided to just glue the motor in and then packed them away months ago and have no idea what condition they are in now. I assume the remains of the cover have continued to disintegrate. Thoroughly disgusted with them with six expensive locomotives basically condemned to Barry's scrapyard. Purchasing the brass replacements for six locomotives simply adds insult to injury.

This is the reason I have not purchased any other small Hornby locomotives like the 700 class. I simply do not trust Hornby on small models. The defect was basically known right from the start with the olive green Southern livery models in particular all suspect and yet I have not seen one bit of information from Hornby since although the defect is well documented since 2009 particularly over on the other site.

I purchased four sets new from a well known dealer in GWR country and although I reported the defects to him he was not interested (pitfalls of buying overseas). The dealer simply replied that he had tested all locomotives prior dispatch with no defects. All four were purchased at the same time. At the time lined olive green coaches were as scarce as hen's teeth and purchasing train packs was the most economical way to get coaches. The fifth set, a third 1938 pack, I purchased from Hattons secondhand mainly for the coaches only and assumed the loco had disintegrated and was not surprised to find the cover in pieces.

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 9752
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby Bufferstop » Sat Jun 03, 2017 11:26 am

It is absolutely incredible that we should be discussing MAZAK rot three quarters of a century after the cause and solution were discovered by Meccano Ltd assisted by the wartime Ministry of Supply. Particularly as the current purveyors of this rot bought the the physical and intellectual property of Meccano Ltd over 50 years ago. Just shows how the quick buck so easily overules good practise.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

Bigmet
Posts: 5675
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby Bigmet » Sat Jun 03, 2017 11:51 am

Realistically, it has to be accepted that Hornby have no real control over where the castings get made in China. The first and possibly worst incident since the start of Hornby's Chinese production was the 2004(?) first group of releases of the Brush type 2 (classes 30/31) models which have all been 'rotters'. That was while they were with their original 'turnkey' manufacturing vendor, Sanda Kan, a business well established in HO model railway production for both North America and Europe. If it could go wrong there, it can go wrong anywhere is the sad truth.

And actually, the UK isn't clean. WWII production of military items like aircraft instrument bezels and casings can be found all cracking up like crazy, and my Father in Law's navy dirk issued in 1944 is split the full length of the hand grip!

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 9752
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby Bufferstop » Sat Jun 03, 2017 1:21 pm

I suspect that preventing wastage wasn't very high on the agenda during WW2. As long as it held up for the duration of the first mission that was OK. The test facilities needed to control the purity of the mix simply wouldn't have been possible to set up in an effective timescale. It's not so much that it happens that matters, it's the manufacturers attitude when it does. The order of the day seems to be "deaf ears will be worn", and "after all it's only a toy'" which makes some of the effort put into production seem to be wasted. MAZAK isn't particularly heavy, so does it have anything in its favour over an engineering grade plastic for structural components.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

Bigmet
Posts: 5675
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby Bigmet » Sat Jun 03, 2017 1:55 pm

The major advantages of mazak are significantly greater density and thus model weight, and better stiffness and stability, for any given cross-section.

The centre motor twin bogie models are all plastic chassied I think, the model's weight of course supplied by a thudding great mazak(!) cast block. With good design the same could be done on steam models, but the only examples I have are the Hornby (ex Dapol) J94 and the Hornby (ex Airfix tooling via Mainline and then Dapol) N2. Both have the plastic chassis stiffened and weighted with a mazak casting.

The problem is that mazak 'has it all' for small casting production purposes: casts complex shapes cleanly and sharply with relatively low die wear, decent density, strength, stiffness and stability, drills and taps well, modest price. But it does need a production discipline that keeps lead in particular out of the alloy melt pot.

User avatar
D605Eagle
Posts: 2171
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:58 am
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: class T9 chassis rot

Postby D605Eagle » Sat Jun 03, 2017 10:21 pm

Bufferstop wrote:It is absolutely incredible that we should be discussing MAZAK rot three quarters of a century after the cause and solution were discovered by Meccano Ltd assisted by the wartime Ministry of Supply. Particularly as the current purveyors of this rot bought the the physical and intellectual property of Meccano Ltd over 50 years ago. Just shows how the quick buck so easily overules good practise.

Cheap Chinese c**p. they don't care for the sort of quality control you need to ensure Mazak lasts. I have several triang chassis from the early 60s that are as good as the day they were cast. Can you imagine any of the fragile models made in China being any good when they are 55 odd years old? Its not just the Mazak that's poor, I've noticed and increasing number of early Chinese Hornby models suffering from plastic failure too. And we all know about the Bachmann axle muff and keeper plate issues.......


Return to “Hornby - including Lima, Rivarossi, Jouef, Electrotren”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Oxley and 5 guests