Hornby K1 2-6-0

[Bigmet]

We don't seem to have a thread specific to this fine model. A s/h specimen reached me Saturday, sent by an old friend for attention and decoder fitting, and is now 'all done'. This must be the fifth one I have tinkered with, and all have been very good: the model looks and measures right, and performs well with excellent traction. The moulded coal is easy to remove, and the complete bunker space is modelled so you can 'coal it' any way you choose, always a neat feature in my opinion.

The one improvement Hornby could have usefully incorporated is to fit a Bachmann style screw locked slide adjustment to the loco to tender drawbar; so I had to make a new shorter drawbar and file a little off the intermediate buffer mouldings on the tender drag box. Now the fall plate and cab doors close the gaps as they should, and the loco will still sail around a 24" radius curve which is smaller than anything on its owner's layout; where layout curves permit closing up engine and tender to scale separation just ices the cake in appearance of any tender loco.

Once test running was complete, I gave it a traction test yesterday afternoon, and it is good for more than 60 wagons or 15 coaches, more than adequate for the type, which had a 5P6F rating. A very complete model of a medium mixed traffic type in short.


(Although not applicable in this case, Hornby knew it was practically perfect in every way, so on the first production run had the attachment of the tender side frame mouldings performed near cement free, so that they often fall off, just to give us something to grumble about. A little ABS effective solvent cement swiftly and invisibly fixes this should it arise (butanone, plastic magic. etc..). )

[Peterm]

I might have to have a look at doing that mod to my K1 now that you mention it.

[Bigmet]

It's a little curious that Hornby don't copy* Bachmann's way superior loco to tender drawbar arrangement, seen on all their newly tooled tender loco introductions these last ten years or thereabouts.

For those that haven't seen it, the drawbar is hinged on the loco, and engages a pin on a screw locked slide on the tender underside. So the owner can adjust to exactly the minimum spacing possible on their own layout's curves, for best appearance of the loco and tender combination. Simple and effective. Until Hornby imitates, it's carry on making a shorter drawbar to suit the layout. It's very worthwhile, not least because it further enhances the typically fine appearance of Hornby's product.


* It's not as if Hornby haven't taken up other superior features from Bachmann's designs; the best of these the neat curved pick up wipers that appeared on Bachmann's Blue Riband steam models from the 1990s. Hornby finally replaced their Margate inherited 'long and floppy' style wipers on newly tooled steam loco mechanisms when they parted from Sanda Kan in the 2010s. The superior efficiency of these pick ups mean that tender pick ups (still by overlong and floppy wipers!) are not really required, but Hornby have still to discover that...)

[Buelligan]

Bigmet, have you had a play with a Bachmann K1 to compare them? If so, what are your thoughts on which is the best runner, Bachmann or Hornby?

I went to the Hornby visitor centre today and picked up a K1 freight pack, then on the way home, realised I already have a Bachmann K1! It's brand new and sealed, so not sure whether to try and sell it and keep my Bachmann example, or open it up and sell the Bachmann, or possibly just keep both, but not sure there's much point in that.

*edit* memory lapse, I'll admit I've no idea of the difference, but I've just realised the Hornby is a K1, and I think the Bachmann is a K3...

[Bigmet]

Inevitably as a BR(ER) ex-GN mainline modeller I have both, the K3 a mainstay of the mixed traffic fleet until withdrawal at dieselisation, the K1 a relatively rare visitor from elsewhere on BR(ER).

The K3 is quite dated now, coming up 20 years from introduction. It's too light to have sufficient traction for the loads these locos could handle, but the mechanism stands up to having extra weight added and with a Lenz or Zimo decoder it runs smoothly and quietly. Yet to have a failure of any sort. One had a motor bearing start screaming after more than 10 years very regular use, a tiny drop of oil fixed that, the only problem is that the pony truck flanges will wear through the paint on the underside of the footplate eventually and cause an intermittent short, this can be fixed easily.

As a model it looks like the real thing, can use having some detail added and the loco to tender gap closing up as close to scale as layout curves permit and a fall plate added. The major 'scale' defect is the undersize driving wheel diameter, Bachmann tried to pack in as much weight as possible and made this compromise to have as much metal as possible in the footplate casting.

The K1 is a significantly more recent introduction and it shows, per my post above. (The relationship to the K3 is very obvious once you have them side by side, the development path being Gresley K4, smaller boiler and driving wheel diameter type for the West Highland, Thompson K1/1, rebuild of a K4 to 2 cylinder form, Peppercorn K1, new build developed from the K1/1. More information: https://www.lner.info/locos/K/k.php )

[Buelligan]

I have noticed a lack of traction with the K3, due to builders error, there is an incline up 1 side of the layout, and decline down the other side, and the K3 slips a bit up the incline with more than 4 coaches.

I've opened the K1 and had a look at it, and it looks very nice. Got it for what I thought was a good price, £99 for the freight pack, loco with 3 trucks. I'll give it a test on my next days off and see how it performs. For anyone else who makes the same mistake as me, here's some side by side photos: