New Hornby diesel speculation...

Jerry wrote:-

"Have produced for many years" = present tense = still in production.

What you should have written was "did produce for many years" = past tense = no longer in production.

(kim)

In message , ":::Jerry::::" writes

I didn't say that. But then the old Lima model didn't, either.

Mark Thornton wrote:-

That would restrict a Hornby 08/09 to contemporary layouts whereas Bachman is revising their 08 to represent an earlier period. That isn't so much going "head to head" as going for completley different markets.

(kim)

Have produced - past tense, DO produce - present tense....

In the context to what you said it's clear that I was talking in the past tense.

They have produced XYZ, but do not at the moment. They do produce XYZ, but they have not done so for many years.

You said that they produced a 09, the Lima 09 *did* have the extra compressor housing at least.

Err !!....

In message , ":::Jerry::::" writes

That's not what I meant.

In message , kim writes

Actually "have produced" is not present tense, but perfect tense, i.e. production has stopped.

Why would it restrict it? Did they not do shunting when the 08 first came out in the 50's?

John Ruddy wrote:-

They didn't have modern autocouplers in the UK in the 1950's. Those of us who prefer scale link manual couplers would be left out completely.

(kim)

Jerry wrote:-

Hornby "have produced" a Class 47 for many years. Does that mean they've stopped making it? According to you it does.

(kim)

In message , ":::Jerry::::" writes

Well, actually, I copied out of their last three catalogues, so effectively I said that they said that they produced a 09. Maybe they ought to do it properly.

A 50 with four working fans? I must see this!!!

Cheers, John.

Do you have miniature people operating your 'manual' couplers or the giant hand in the sky, 'cause they certainly didn't have giant hands operating the prototype in the '50s either. So while it would leave out those who wish to use an incompatible style of coupler, it doesn't restrict those who take a different compromise in modelling the 50's.

Mark Thornton

I emailed this same speculation to Pat last night! The existing Hornby model has been an embarrassment (in scale terms) for decades! But it does confer Hornby 'grandfather rights' in a way.

There's still a market unsatisfied by the Bachmann model, as they've left some batches uncovered by their tooling variations. In particular, the one I want, which included the batch which populated the Kings Cross district. These had pressed/dished bonnet doors, and were numbered around D3690. I think Hornby's toolmakers could easily surpass Bachmann's in the finesse stakes on this one.

Cheers, Francis K.

John Lancaster wrote:-

Yes, very funny. Don't give up your day job :o)

A Western with "chip basket" style roof grilles and four revolving fans would be pretty spectacular on any layout.

(kim)

Mark Thornton wrote:-

A lot of models never leave the display case so the fitting of operating couplers is entirely superfluous. My old Triang A1A-A1A sits on a sideboard for decorative purposes and its appearance is marred only by the presence of hideous tension-lock couplings which are almot impossible to remove without a hack saw. That is one reason why I welcomed the fitting of screw link couplings to the Class 50 and am looking forward to the all new A1A-A1A from Hornby. It would be bizarre if having developed scale link couplings as a new feature, Hornby then reverted to fitting non-scale automatic couplers again.

(kim)

And you complain about my grammar....

Francis K. wrote:-

If the details were any finer it would be impossible to pick the model up without breaking something! The slow running qualities are also about as good as it's possible to get so I don't see as there's any room for improvement. That's why I quibble with the words "even better". A new Hornby 08 may well be "different" and even "more desirable" to some people but I very much doubt it can be any "better".

(kim)