Dapol VS Farish A3

[MistyEyedWanderer]

Looking at some of the history, Dapol locomotives appear to explode somewhat, but I have Bachmann American N Scale examples that also have failed.

It seems I don't have to look too far for salvageable donor projects.   

Not having access to either brand A3, or any current models other than squinting at photographs of used examples, what is considered better?

[Woodenhead]

The Farish A3 (and A4) are both Graham Farish designs, they are older models that at most got a better motor from Bachmann.

The detail level is as per older Graham Farish, it's a cast body with little added detail and are not DCC Ready.

I'd go for the Dapol models, much more modern, lots available, DCC Ready, modern mechanisms and a lot more accurate.

[Newportnobby]

I'd go for the Dapol models, much more modern, lots available, DCC Ready, modern mechanisms and a lot more accurate.

True, but with the cardan shaft drive system which I'm no great fan of.

[Roy L S]

My twopenneth here is that the Farish model is woefully inaccurate in a significant number of areas including driving wheel diameter and spacing, and boiler diameter, the cab is not glazed, there is no separate detail such as handrails, it has no NEM coupler pockets, is not DCC ready and wheel spokes are solid not see through. On the plus side it is pretty solid mechanically.

The Dapol model is very much more accurate with lots of separate detail, more correctly sized wheels and spacing, spokes see through, DCC ready, NEM coupler pockets - it looks lovely. Mechanically it can have weaknesses, the tender mounted motor driving loco wheels through a cardan shaft can be noisy and a source of frustration to some, the valve gear is made of very soft metal and easily damaged, the power transfer wires from loco to tender are of poor design and break easily - it does not run at all well without them in place. DCC circuit boards can be a bit flaky, motors are sometimes prone to failure.

In terms of choice it depends what is important to you, I have two Dapol A3s and they have generally been OK, in terms of looks and overall atmosphere of the real loco they win by a country mile, they are made to a more modern spec and are still being made, they are exceptionally strong pullers. There are though weaknesses in design and they are quite delicate. The Farish A3 is a very old design and is best described as an approximation of the real loco, but it is very robust with a generally reliable chassis and it is possible to DCC it using a digi-hat.

Perhaps controversially, we're I just wanting an LNER Pacific I would choose neither, I would buy  Bachmann Farish A1 or A2.

Roy

[Bealman]

Good post. You've summed it up nicely. That cardan shaft and wires that are easily broken are a problem.

But the crude dicast Farish bodies grate on me too.

So I'm not really offering any advice here. My guts say Dapol.

[mojo]

It depends what you require it to do.
If you want to enjoy the appearance then Dapol and display in a case.
If you want to see it pull a train of coaches or vans and view from 2' or 3' away whilst running through a scenic layout then Farish/Bachmann.

[Roy L S]

It depends what you require it to do.
If you want to enjoy the appearance then Dapol and display in a case.
If you want to see it pull a train of coaches or vans and view from 2' or 3' away whilst running through a scenic layout then Farish/Bachmann.

I don't think it is quite that cut and dried, the Dapol locos are very delicate with points of particular weakness, but if carefully looked after can and do run well.

Without question (having had both) the Dapol one would out-pull the Farish model any day of the week.

[Bazza]

It depends what you require it to do.
If you want to enjoy the appearance then Dapol and display in a case.
If you want to see it pull a train of coaches or vans and view from 2' or 3' away whilst running through a scenic layout then Farish/Bachmann.

Not so sure about that.

The Farish model is a Poole legacy model and very compromised. Regardless of distance viewed it still has those compromises.

[ntpntpntp]

I'd have an old Minitrix   Simple to maintain, well built and good haulage.  The skirt under the boiler is not pretty but otherwise I think it looks the part from normal viewing distances.

I'm not a fan of the flimsy rods and linkages on Dapol steamers (I have a Brit and a 9F). The cardan shaft drive and electrical connections could have been done better and more neatly (other brands I have manage to implement shaft drive perfectly well)

(Sorry I model European N now so out of touch) Do Farish not do an A3 with a similar mech as their "Tornado"?  That was the first Farish loco I'd bought since giving up on British N in the 80s, that I thought was finally getting a bit nearer to the European brands for quality of looks and running.

[Portpatrick]

The only Dapol tender loco I have is a Britannia.  Even with very careful handling the prop shaft is prone to coming adrift.  A fellow modeller who has Dapol A3 and A4 says they are !!***!!** to put back.  My Brit can be tricky.  So I avoid Dapol tender engines.  My B1 is Farish.

So I will hang on to my Farish A3 (Poole era) and A4.  Both these run and pull well.  8 or 9 (heavy)  Dapol Gresley coaches no trouble on the club layout's inner curves of c 10.5 and 12 inches.  My Farish A1 and A2 slip with 7, and cope with 6.  Alan generally uses the outer 2 tracks and his Dapol pacifics manage 7 or 8 Farish Mk 1 coaches (lighter than the Dapol Gresleys). I don't pretend they are up to modern standards, they are not,  but they still look good and they are robust. 

[Roy L S]

The only Dapol tender loco I have is a Britannia.  Even with very careful handling the prop shaft is prone to coming adrift.  A fellow modeller who has Dapol A3 and A4 says they are !!***!!** to put back.  My Brit can be tricky.  So I avoid Dapol tender engines.  My B1 is Farish.

So I will hang on to my Farish A3 (Poole era) and A4.  Both these run and pull well.  8 or 9 (heavy)  Dapol Gresley coaches no trouble on the club layout's inner curves of c 10.5 and 12 inches.  My Farish A1 and A2 slip with 7, and cope with 6.  Alan generally uses the outer 2 tracks and his Dapol pacifics manage 7 or 8 Farish Mk 1 coaches (lighter than the Dapol Gresleys). I don't pretend they are up to modern standards, they are not,  but they still look good and they are robust. 

The haulage of the Bachmann Farish A1 and A2 is transformed by adding a second tyred axle at the rear of the tender (so that the rearmost pair both have tyres) in that guise it will pull prodigious loads.

The Dapol A3 and A4 with traction tyres and a significant tungsten weight in the boiler will in my experience easily out-haul the old Farish variants.

It depends what you want, the one thing the old Poole era models have in their favour is a rugged simplicity, even if in terms of accuracy and finesse they are pretty dire.

Roy

[MistyEyedWanderer]

This has proven a little controversial!  I had a Minitrix Scotsman way back but never got to have any Farish tender engines to compare them to.  They all looked a bit coarse to me, especially the flanges. And the way tank engines stalled on turnouts at shunting speeds put me off. I actually had a hobby store owner tell me to run them faster!

I think I'll hunt for Dapol shells to fit 2FS chassis     

[ntpntpntp]

.. the way [Farish] tank engines stalled on turnouts at shunting speeds put me off.

If you do a lot of slow shunting then live frog points are a must. Vastly better for continuity (and look better too).  I run some very short little locos (half the length of a Farish 0-6-0T) with no stalling at all on my Electrofrog turnouts.  Farish used to make "Super Liveway" points with live frogs back in the 70s (I think before Peco introduced theirs).

This little narrow gauge shunting tractor is the shortest I have, and it is DCC fitted too   Here it's sitting on a cast live frog fitted to a Peco Setrack curved point, and as you can see if it were still the original plastic frog the model would be totally isolated from power.

[MistyEyedWanderer]

.. the way [Farish] tank engines stalled on turnouts at shunting speeds put me off.

If you do a lot of slow shunting then live frog points are a must. Vastly better for continuity (and look better too).  I run some very short little locos (half the length of a Farish 0-6-0T) with no stalling at all on my Electrofrog turnouts.  Farish used to make "Super Liveway" points with live frogs back in the 70s (I think before Peco introduced theirs).

This little narrow gauge shunting tractor is the shortest I have, and it is DCC fitted too   Here it's sitting on a cast live frog fitted to a Peco Setrack curved point, and as you can see if it were still the original plastic frog the model would be totally isolated from power.

Cast frogs huh? Where might they be from?  I have had new Peco turnouts that did not lay flat.
The old Farish I had would not sit level on crossings and rocked slightly on the center wheels, even after sending off for repairs.  I doubt anything was fixed, it's just the way they were built.  It's part of what led me to desire building my own models rather than relying on the whims of depressed factory workers.  I think that's how it still is with Bachmann, though they look nice models,  is anyone happy assembling them? 

[MistyEyedWanderer]

.. the way [Farish] tank engines stalled on turnouts at shunting speeds put me off.

If you do a lot of slow shunting then live frog points are a must. Vastly better for continuity (and look better too).  I run some very short little locos (half the length of a Farish 0-6-0T) with no stalling at all on my Electrofrog turnouts.  Farish used to make "Super Liveway" points with live frogs back in the 70s (I think before Peco introduced theirs).

This little narrow gauge shunting tractor is the shortest I have, and it is DCC fitted too   Here it's sitting on a cast live frog fitted to a Peco Setrack curved point, and as you can see if it were still the original plastic frog the model would be totally isolated from power.

Cast frogs huh? Where might they be from?  I have had new Peco turnouts that did not lay flat.
The old Farish I had would not sit level on crossings and rocked slightly on the center wheels, even after sending off for repairs.  I doubt anything was fixed, it's just the way they were built.  It's part of what led me to desire building my own models rather than relying on the whims of depressed factory workers.  I think that's how it still is with Bachmann, though they look nice models,  is anyone happy assembling them? 

My post appears to have been eaten by the internet.  Where did you get those cast frogs?