Reading through the recent Bachmann Times there is an article about the process of producing their models. Most of us these days assume that quality control is non existent but according to this article, the products are tested as the process progresses including test tracks and electrical testing.
Haven't seen that article. I'm sure that the vast majority of purchasers have a great product and don't post anything on forums because they are completely satisfied but the very small number who do have problems say so on forums such as this. It is therefore likely that forums show a very distorted picture. I still haven't returned either a Farish or Dapol item. The Farish items seem to be very well made and as solid as anything of that size and with such fine detail can be. It feels to me that Farish products are a little more resilient than Dapol products in terms of not having minor problems during reasonably heavy use. All my Farish items run very smoothly and without any drama even though they get quite a hard life at exhibitions; I just wish the Castle had traction tyres.
Anecdotes I have heard suggest that a fair number of the returned items are not due to manufacturing or design issues.
Chris
I'm happy for you that you've had no problems with Farish or Dapol products. I really wish the same was true for me. Anecdotes supporting one position or the other regarding locomotive reliability are not good enough. I would suggest that the assertion that the number of customers who have had problems is very small can't be substantiated by you or by anyone else.
The truth is out there and is not going to be determined by force of proclamations.
Webbo
If you haven't seen the article, Chris, should you make comment? :hmmm:
Quote from: Bealman on July 04, 2017, 10:41:48 AM
If you haven't seen the article, Chris, should you make comment? :hmmm:
Just saying as an end user that the quality of Farish products I have bought feels good which means there must be good manufacturing process including quality controls.
Quote from: Bealman on July 04, 2017, 10:41:48 AM
If you haven't seen the article, Chris, should you make comment? :hmmm:
Why not?
His comments don't address the article content. Just presents his opinion and supposition regarding quality and failures. Same as everyone else on this site.
5,390+ members; how many active readers; how many have problems with new locos; how many of those can be bothered to write? Damned if I know!
Unless one has access to hard data from the manufacturers then all else is just dust in the wind. Some just like to assume, suppose and pontificate.
For me in the last 7 years :
Faulty Farish = 0/8
Faulty Dapol = 1/9 (one of the cheap returns, burnt out led)
Don't know if I'm lucky, it is normal experience or perhaps more careful than most. ???
I detect an inference that some of the failures and returns may be due to operator error. My experience of ham-fisted users in a variety of activities would support this.
CFJ
Quote from: Webbo on July 04, 2017, 10:34:23 AM
Chris
I'm happy for you that you've had no problems with Farish or Dapol products. I really wish the same was true for me. Anecdotes supporting one position or the other regarding locomotive reliability are not good enough. I would suggest that the assertion that the number of customers who have had problems is very small can't be substantiated by you or by anyone else.
The truth is out there and is not going to be determined by force of proclamations.
Webbo
A pertinent observation is the significant fall off of reworked items by Farish at trade shows. Gone are the days of a counter of reworked returns at a discount.
I asked at last years TINGS and was told the number of returns of new models have fallen significantly and as older less reliable models go out of production their returns are falling as well.
I think a quite few dud models still manage to get though QC!
One thing manufacturers can't control is the way that modellers use their models, I've seen some pretty rough and clumsy handling and dodgy track and am surprised that some of them run at all. (The dodgy track usually belonged to members of our club who asked for help)
I once went to the Bachmann headquarters in Barwell to return a faulty loco in person (they don't usually let you in unannounced or at all but they made an exception because I said I was on my way back to Africa) It was just a warehouse with offices but at that stage they did have someone who tested returned locos.
I chatted to him while I waited for my replacement loco. He said that they got locos full of dog hair, carpet fluff etc. They also got locos with no return address and ones that they could find absolutely no fault with, those they put down to the customers using faulty controllers or some other electrical problem.
By the way, the loco I returned was a rebuilt Merchant Navy which although it ran well, had damaged coupling rods that had been bent into the correct profile with pliers either by the factory or the retailer.
@Elvinley (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=268) may be able to clarify since he has the article, but my understanding of QC in these situations is to take a sample of items, usually at random and test them, rather than test every item individually (a mammoth task, and costly, for batches in the thousands). It's inevitable, therefore, that some faulty items will pass through the system.
What would be interesting to know is the failure rate of the random items that they tested.
I have also read that manufacturers of almost everything use batch testing as a method of quality control. I was told that some manufacturers of washing machines test one in ten while others test each one.
Another factor is good design of the article in the first place, model locos have to look like the prototype and work as miniature models. I do think that some of the Dapol models which look exquisite detail wise are rather fragile and need to be handled carefully.
Quote from: Carmont on July 04, 2017, 12:04:32 PM
@Elvinley (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=268) may be able to clarify since he has the article, but my understanding of QC in these situations is to take a sample of items, usually at random and test them, rather than test every item individually (a mammoth task, and costly, for batches in the thousands). It's inevitable, therefore, that some faulty items will pass through the system.
What would be interesting to know is the failure rate of the random items that they tested.
Sampling inspection and testing is a mathematical science based on a given sample size reducing failures to below a defined level of failures.
The sample size is selected depending upon batch size, previous failure levels and what is considered to be an acceptable failure rate.
If previous failure rates are high enough then it may still be necessary to check 100% of products to achieve the chosen acceptable failure rate.
Its also worth noting that if, say, the acceptable rate is 10%, then there is a high probability that 10% of customers will receive faulty product.
These are the customers who, justifiably, complain about poor quality.
It is also worth noting that if the manufacturer does not stick to the sampling rules (based on statistical sampling tables) by reducing samples below the required rate, there's a risk failure rates will be much higher.
:beers:
Samsung do one test on TVs they power them up, look at the picture and measure the current to uA accuracy. If the current is correct and the picture correct they are passed.
They have virtually no failures due to manufacturing in the field.
The way the article reads, it seems everything is tested.
Quote from: Elvinley on July 04, 2017, 03:14:14 PM
The way the article reads, it seems everything is tested.
That would make sense. They probably have relatively small batches/production runs and may not be able to establish enough failure history for a new loco to be able to determine an effective sampling plan. Although they might be able to use the failure history of similar Models.
I must say I've not had any dodgy Farish locos for some time now. I've certainly had a few in the past.
:beers:
The last ten Farish steam locos I have bought (over four years) have all been excellent.
Two were Bachmann returns and one was bought recently second hand. The only problem I have had was self inflicted.
I can remember when there were pages and pages of complaints about any new model, that doesn't happen any more.
Quote from: silly moo on July 04, 2017, 05:11:35 PM
The last ten Farish steam locos I have bought (over four years) have all been excellent.
Two were Bachmann returns and one was bought recently second hand. The only problem I have had was self inflicted.
I can remember when there were pages and pages of complaints about any new model, that doesn't happen any more.
Yes things are improving. However, I tend not use box shifters for my locos anymore and use my favourite model shop who always tests a new loco for me before I buy.
Most recent and decreasingly frequent failure was a Dapol Britannia. Sounded like a broken cardan shaft socket. A common problem with these locos I understand.
Still replacement will be along soon.... Nice looking loco is that Dapol Britannia.
:beers:
All my Farish stock has been bought new in the last three years or so and has been new stock rather than items that have been in store for years. Maybe my lack of problems is due to the improved regime in China over the last three years or so. It certainly would not be fair to comment on current Farish quality control based on locos built more than a few years ago. I do know that a lot of effort has been put in over recent years by Bachmann U.K. to educate the Chinese regarding quality requirements.
I'd consider myself fairly lucky; I had a Farish 57 which was dead out of the Box, and a Dapol HST which fried itself, but that's it, out of 60 models or so.
Both were replaced immediately. Yes, it's a minor inconvenience, but meh, stuff breaks. I had to return a £1000 pair of bicycle pedals last week. At that price obviously you shouldn't have to, but it happens.
IMO there's a lot of hand wringing about reliability, but I can understand people who have far higher failure rates being annoyed. Then again, why are failure rates higher? You do wonder about user error as suggested.
As a retired Management Consultant I always explained to my Clients that poor quality is not acceptable.
It only takes one or few customers who have had a faulty product or service to put many more off the Company for the duration.
Its not about the happy customers but the unhappy ones. They have the biggest voice.
There is no excuse for suppliers getting things wrong. The customer rightly expects what he/she buys to do what it says on the tin.
Time to stop making excuses for poor quality.
Having said all this I believe N gauge stuff is improving.
:beers:
But you get failures in all walks of life. Most models exhibit a classic bathtub failure curve, if anything a lopsided bath, they die quickly, or last a very long time.
Yes, ok maybe Samsung's failure rate is lower, but their batch size and production processes are many many times larger, which itself will drive efficiency. Most n gauge stuff is probably an awkward production size - too small to be genuinely bespoke, yet not big enough to benefit from many of the economies of scale.
All you say is probably correct ngee. I repeat, however, it may be acceptable to the manufacturer that some customers get poor quality but it is NOT acceptable to any customer.
Just remember that customers do not exist to satisfy suppliers' requirements... Its the other way round.
I really don't get it why this is so difficult to understand.
:beers:
Because I'm a customer. And I accept it. It's less than ideal, but I don't really care. I've never really been inconvenienced by things not working, but have benefited from it previously.
I'm not sure why that's difficult to understand and why you're telling me how I should feel?
Obviously if people want to get all stampy and shouty that's their prerogative.
I'd say it should be the other way round - failures are not acceptable to a manufacturer, but may be to a customer.
If your happy to be shipped dodgy product then that's your choice... Nothing further to be said.
If someone sold you a brand new car with faults, I'm not sure you would have the same attitude.
:beers:
I'd want recompense in line with my inconvenience, plenty of examples of new cars breaking down, it's a poor example. A friend waited 6 months for a car that turned up the wrong colour, I know another whose new car had no oil, the obvious happened very quickly. You can't expect 100% perfection. I'm realistic.
"happy to be shipped dodgy product" it's a huge leap from what I said, but I don't judge companies by their product quality so much as how they act when things go wrong.
If a company consistently delivers poor quality products I'll voe with my feet and buy elsewhere, but that's not my personal experience of either Farish or Dapol. I've had a far higher failure rate with Apple products. How many people are up in arms about Apple's reliability?
Well njee I think we'll have to agree to disagree.
Not worth falling out over mate.
Enjoy your evening.
:) :beers:
Likewise Bob, I shall return to playing on my iPhone which has been repaired once, whilst watching my replacement Sky box and keeping an eye on my son sleeping in his second, now non-faulty cot ;-)
Cheers
Nick
Quote from: njee20 on July 04, 2017, 08:55:13 PM
Likewise Bob, I shall return to playing on my iPhone which has been repaired once, whilst watching my replacement Sky box and keeping an eye on my son sleeping in his second, now non-faulty cot ;-)
Cheers
Nick
Nice one...
:) :laughabovepost:
For me the failure of a product, any product isn't a problem unless poor customer service makes it a problem. If I order a product online and instantly receive a 'confirmation' email, then 2 weeks later receive a 'dispatched' email, followed by the product being delivered in perfect working order another 3 weeks after that, then I've got a problem.
If I order a product and it's delivered the next day but doesn't work, there's no problem until customer services don't respond with a timely efficient solution.
I've had two failed locos ever. Both were Farish split gears outside of warranty. One, a Poole Farish Class 20, I just wrote off - used it as a learning exercise in model train dis/assembly. The second, a Bachmann Farish Class 57, I repaired - emboldened by new skills acquired through the Class 20, I sourced new gears and replaced the faulty one. So neither failure was a problem for me.
Quote from: njee20 on July 04, 2017, 07:13:52 PMI had to return a £1000 pair of bicycle pedals last week.
Missing the attached bicycle, were they? :D
Quote from: NinOz on July 05, 2017, 05:47:17 AM
Quote from: njee20 on July 04, 2017, 07:13:52 PMI had to return a £1000 pair of bicycle pedals last week.
Missing the attached bicycle, were they? :D
;D if I get a new bike out of it I'll be really happy they stopped working!
:bump:
£1000 for a set of bike pedals! :o :goggleeyes:
I must be living on a different planet to you njee.
But if they make you happy, then that's what life is all about.
:beers:
This is as good a place to put this without starting a new thread........
This afternoon I had a "running in" session for a number of my locos that have seen either limited running or not been run by me since purchase.
One of the locos is a Bachmann Baldwin H16-44 that I must have bought here in the UK, rather than the US, as it has a CE sticker on it with their UK address. I thought this was one I had test run before (which, as it turned out, I obviously hadn't) but when I put it on the track and applied power, it did absolutely nothing - not even an illuminated headlight.
Checked everything visible - power contacts, then removed bogies, all gearing free moving etc, so decided to remove the body.
Instructions consulted and body lifted off with a bit of "persuasion". Checked circuit board diagram and found it actually bore no resemblance to the one fitted on the loco but then looked for anything untoward and discovered that one of the two copper "dummy plugs" for DC operation (in a totally different location to the diagram..) had been fitted upside down.
Duly turned said plug the correct way up and everything then worked perfectly !
So that loco has obviously never been checked to see if it worked before leaving the factory, let alone any form of quality control inspection.........
At least the other 26 locos I tested today worked perfectly!
Glad everything is running for you now. A good play