Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Discuss Hornby Model Railway products and related topics here. This includes (Lima, Rivarossi, Jouef, Electrotren).
User avatar
Ken Shabby
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:20 pm

Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby Ken Shabby » Wed Jul 19, 2017 3:29 pm

An unpleasant surprise this afternoon, my 4 year old Railroad R.2880 9F which has not been out of it's box in a year, derailed on every curve .
On examination the diecast chassis block is now bent and a couple of small parts have sheared off.
I've emailed Hornby and I'll let you know how I get on . It's not the end of the world and should be an easy fix, but I think Hornby should be sorting this out before I get onto Peter's spares.

Ken

User avatar
PanzerJohn
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:12 pm

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby PanzerJohn » Wed Jul 19, 2017 8:55 pm

I've got a couple which have gone the same way, first clue is that the centre wheels start to get harder to turn as the derforming casting increases pressure on the axle.

GWR_fan
Posts: 4619
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby GWR_fan » Wed Jul 19, 2017 10:32 pm

At least replacement dummy blocks are available, unlike the other mazak failures that the company has sold us. With more manufacturers now being sourced by Hornby will mazak rot become more common? The 9F block failure is alas not a one off and has now been reported for several years. I cannot recall ever seeing a Margate or Sandra Kan made tender drive block fail.

Bigmet
Posts: 5876
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby Bigmet » Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:02 pm

There is a good low cost DIY fix which makes for a better model too, for those with no requirement that the model be in 'original condition'.
Remove and junk the motor block casting.
Look inside the plastic moulded tender frame, and the moulded locations can be used as guides to locate pinpoint bearings.
Fit bearings and regular pin point axle eight* spoke wagon wheels.
Couple the resulting free rolling lighter tender to the loco and see how much better the available traction is.
If you wish, make a proper coal bunker space to improve the model further, now there isn't a chunk of Mazak in the way.

* Ok, they should be nine spoke, but only you know, no one else will notice, and I won't tell: what's more they have light showing through, much better than the grossly compromised original Hornby wheelsets.

Bye the bye, the most major Mazak failure from Hornby remains that on the first group of releases of the Brush 2 / class 30/31. This was all Sanda Kan production, and before that business was bought by Kader too.

User avatar
Peterm
Posts: 1364
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:26 pm
Location: Bribie Island. Australia

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby Peterm » Fri Jul 21, 2017 5:26 am

Ken Shabby wrote:An unpleasant surprise this afternoon, my 4 year old Railroad R.2880 9F which has not been out of it's box in a year, derailed on every curve .
On examination the diecast chassis block is now bent and a couple of small parts have sheared off.
I've emailed Hornby and I'll let you know how I get on . It's not the end of the world and should be an easy fix, but I think Hornby should be sorting this out before I get onto Peter's spares.

Ken

Good luck with Hornby. I emailed a few weeks back about this same problem, no reply, emailed the complaints dep't and had a reply from a customer service bloke who also had trouble getting in touch with the service and repairs people. I had a reply with apologies from the latter and had to confirm what I wanted, 9F tender chassis which of course is the old tender drive motor housing made of good old mazak. I also want both motor retainers for a T9, a tender underframe for the 9F (which I noticed had been damaged by the expanding mazak) and 9F motor retainers, have a check on yours, mine had started to craze and when I removed the rear one, it crumbled in my fingers. I have a few of their loco's and am now wondering what the future holds for them.

So far, I think my Q1 is all right, but I'll have to confirm when I strip it down. I think it's high time that Hornby as a company started taking more of an interest in QC right from the raw materials and processing, particularly since they need to keep their customers happy in these difficult times.
Pete.

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 10080
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby Bufferstop » Fri Jul 21, 2017 12:35 pm

It's the amount of subcontracting that goes on which makes QC so difficult, a small backstreet foundry isn't going to be too fussed about purity of the mix.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

User avatar
Peterm
Posts: 1364
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:26 pm
Location: Bribie Island. Australia

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby Peterm » Sat Jul 22, 2017 12:26 am

That's the sort of thing I'm getting at. Stricter QC from the start would in the long run probably save Hornby money and more importantly, keep their customers happy and their reputation solid.
Pete.

GWR_fan
Posts: 4619
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby GWR_fan » Sat Jul 22, 2017 1:22 am

Bufferstop wrote:It's the amount of subcontracting that goes on which makes QC so difficult, a small backstreet foundry isn't going to be too fussed about purity of the mix.


Some years ago I was in conversation with a sales representative for a large hobby importing distributorship downunder. At the time a beautiful N scale Life-Like E8 diesel could be purchased for $23.95 retail (there was no internet back then). I asked the representative how the loco could be made and retailed for such a small amount (at the time the price was about one-quarter comparable manufacturers). He replied that he had recently visited the factory making the loco. Was it a large conglomerate corporation with a modern air-conditioned factory? Well, no, the building was a small shed, exposed to the elements with a leaking tin roof and no mod cons. The items they produced were highly detailed and very well made given the primitive circumstances.

We tend to believe that modern facilities are the norm in China, however, many "factories" may be just family businesses subcontracting work for a major contractor. QC under such conditions must be a nightmare for the likes of Hornby. Of cause factories have improved since, but as John has stated, subcontracting will introduce factors beyond the control of the manufacturer. This does though not excuse the manufacturer for tolerating such a lack of oversight.

Manufacturers calculate a percentage risk factor in production. The cost of complete quality control is a major cost to production. The manufacturer will spread the "risk" over the production run, assuming that only a small proportion will be returned for warranty. This way "managed" QC costs are reduced.

As an example of complete quality control, I worked in international aviation my whole working life. Every process and every stage of production required an inspector's stamp on traceable paperwork for the entire production process. The final product also needed to be tested and a final authoristation given by an approved person. The costs are astronomical. As an example, a simple item such as a toilet seat which may retail for around $25.00, when fitted to an aircraft may cost upwards of $800.00. Essentially there is little between them in composition, however, given the regulations and stringent production requirements and the certification of the item that it complies with all regulations is what drives up the cost. QC is an expensive cost on a company.

Bigmet
Posts: 5876
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby Bigmet » Sat Jul 22, 2017 9:08 am

But it is important not to mix the secure and traceable QC required for safety critical applications, which inevitably carries quite a price tag; and the perfectly adequate QA for consumer product which is a lot cheaper. (I have found employ in both fields, and once had the extreme joy of detecting metallurgical flaws in aerospace grade aluminium alloy on consumer product QA, ahead of detection by either of the aerospace users then taking the same feedstock. On the consumer side we were working JIT and had the feedstock extruded and machined and the problem detected, while the large aerospace castings were still in goods receiving of their customers.)

In my experience the small sub-contract shop in the far East (saw a lot of this in Japan in the 1970s) was very expert indeed and entirely trustworthy. The penalty for anything else was so severe - no more business ever - that they had to be! China is different culturally and may not be quite as snappy as that in this respect, but nevertheless these small businesses do have to perform or die. It is inside larger organisations that the control so easily goes soggy.

Sanda Kan was the biggest of all the Chinese model railway makers, and I note that Hornby's worst Mazak problem - the Brush 2 - happened while Hornby were solely with Sanda Kan as the Chinese manufacturing contractor, and I believe still while owned by its original founder. An old article in one of the US mags claimed that Sanda Kan did all the fabrication in house, with Mazak casting of components specifically identified as one they kept under their own direct control.

User avatar
RAFHAAA96
Posts: 426
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:39 pm
Location: Cyprus

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby RAFHAAA96 » Sat Jul 22, 2017 9:53 am

Seems to me there is a cottage industry opportunity for someone with the right kit and skill sets to turn out replacement parts for all these rotters, whether aluminium or brass machinings or some sort of cast metal or resin alternative or even some new thermo plastic formed material not yet considered for model railway use.

Rob
Last edited by RAFHAAA96 on Tue Jul 25, 2017 1:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.
RAF Halton Brat - 96th Entry
http://www.halton96th.co.uk

User avatar
D605Eagle
Posts: 2329
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:58 am
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby D605Eagle » Sun Jul 23, 2017 2:48 am

Bigmet wrote:Sanda Kan was the biggest of all the Chinese model railway makers, and I note that Hornby's worst Mazak problem - the Brush 2 - happened while Hornby were solely with Sanda Kan as the Chinese manufacturing contractor, and I believe still while owned by its original founder. An old article in one of the US mags claimed that Sanda Kan did all the fabrication in house, with Mazak casting of components specifically identified as one they kept under their own direct control.

Funny as it was only the Brush Type 2 that suffered and no other stock they were making for Hornby at the time, which was quite considerable. To me it suggests that Sanda outsourced that particular casting to somebody else who could do castings but wasn't too bothered with what they used to cast it with!

User avatar
Peterm
Posts: 1364
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:26 pm
Location: Bribie Island. Australia

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby Peterm » Tue Jul 25, 2017 10:40 pm

I've put two links here to (1) back up Bigmets solution and (2) to let people know of some of the other problems with this mazak.

9F
http://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/in ... =46074&hl=

Others
http://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/in ... =46266&hl=
Pete.

GWR_fan
Posts: 4619
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby GWR_fan » Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:22 am

Reading on another site a member reported a Hornby standard class 4 rear motor mount disintegrated. Another to keep an eye on. Other than the Brush class 2 has Hornby ever admitted an issue with its mazak castings? The list of troublesome locomotives is astounding. Apparently, Bachmann are still able to supply N class footplates that were initially reported many, many years ago.

User avatar
Peterm
Posts: 1364
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:26 pm
Location: Bribie Island. Australia

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby Peterm » Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:48 am

This is off topic a bit, but but my Hornby Q1, quite old but not had a great deal of use has a new set of drivers on the way from Peters Spares because the plating on the tyres has worn through and it's now not picking up as it should do.
Pete.

User avatar
GeraldH
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 6:10 pm
Contact:

Re: Railroad 9F tender chassis fatigue

Postby GeraldH » Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:27 am

Peterm wrote:I've put two links here to (1) back up Bigmets solution and (2) to let people know of some of the other problems with this mazak.

9F
http://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/in ... =46074&hl=

Others
http://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/in ... =46266&hl=


There's also a bad batch of Hornby Toby's, I've had two disintegrate :( .
Gerald H - alternative modeller :)

My layout: viewtopic.php?t=28854


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests