Quote
My answer is that Kato gives the most reliable product on average - and by a long margin

Couldn't agree more ! Just wish we could convince them to start on 1/148 scale UK stuff...

Quote from: austinbob on June 15, 2014, 10:34:05 AM
It would be really nice to get a balanced view of how good/bad manufacturers are.

But since most of us have a relatively small sample size, I doubt very many objective overviews are going to be obtained.

Suppose you assumed that Dapol make 2500 of a particular model, a reasonable sample size might be 250, 10% of them. I'd be very surprised if any of us have bought and/or extensively used 250 models of one particular kind, say Dapol Class 66s. A 5% sample would be 125 models of just one particular kind, and even a 1% sample would still be 25 models, and very, very few people are likely to have that many models of a single design of a locomotive (though you might have better luck with wagons or coaches).

So saying you have 3 Dapol 66s, 2 Dapol 22s and a Dapol 'Western' might sound like a lot, but in terms of statistical sampling its trivial. Or, as scientists would put it, "unreliable". It would be hard to tell whether your observations form a pattern or are just random noise in the data. You couldn't tell whether you were unlucky and got 3 faulty 66s in a row, or Dapol 66s of that particular design (say, early split chassis, non-DCC) was actually a poor model.

Retailers might be able to give you a more generalised overview in the sense of whether more Dapol models get returned compared to Farish ones, but determining pros and cons of a particular model will probably be beyond even a retailer's purview.

Forums do provide some sort of statistical tool in the sense that you might have 50 members here all of whom own a Dapol 66, and if polled, they might might provide you with some sort of measurement of quality and reliability. But going purely by messages or reviews could be misleading because posted comments (complaints and plaudits) are going to be more noticeable in a forum than silence from people who own the model but don't post about it because they don't have a strong opinion either way.

With all this said, I'll proffer an opinion about British N-gauge. Steam engines with valve gear and pony trucks tend to be dicey (e.g., fragile during transit/use, prone to derailing or poor running) for both manufacturers; short wheelbase 0-6-0s are better; and the more recent the diesel, the better it seems to be. Recent Bo-Bos and Co-Cos from both manufacturers do seem to be as well made on the inside as the outside. The complexity of lighting and DCC sockets has surely added a bigger risk factor compared to the older designs though -- the old Farish 'Western' might not look top-notch any more but consistently (if not invariably) runs reliably and smoothly well.

If I was looking for a diesel for example, picking between a Farish 'Deltic' and a Dapol 'Western' comes down to taste, not reliability. They're both excellent. On the other hand, the virtues of the simple but rugged Union Mills models shouldn't be overlooked if you're in the market for a steam locomotive and you're worried about derailing, quartering, bits falling off, etc.

Cheers, NeMo

Quote from: Pengi on June 15, 2014, 12:38:10 PM

Quote from: austinbob on June 14, 2014, 09:19:16 PM

Quote from: newportnobby on June 14, 2014, 09:08:19 PM
I'd be interested to know why the data on Dapol is required and what you intend to do with any data collected. If the interest is purely Dapol, why even bring Farish into the equation?
Given that, on average, some folks get good 'uns and some get bad 'uns, I'm really not sure you're going to get any solid/presentable information
If I have concerns about Dapol, it is more to do with their customer interface/PR than anything else

I'm just trying to work out which supplier gives the most reliable product on average. I've had bad and good experiences of both

Bob Austin

My answer is that Kato gives the most reliable product on average - and by a long margin

If only Kato had a good range of British outline steam and early diesel..........

Bob Austin

Quote from: Pengi on June 15, 2014, 12:38:10 PM
My answer is that Kato gives the most reliable product on average - and by a long margin

I'm sorry, Pengi, but as your option is not within the parameters of the poll your answer is deemed invalid and disqualified 

But on a more serious note, as Kato do very little to interest UK modelling (as far as I can see from a quick look at their site, barring using the mechanisms to replace Dapol / GraFar mechanisms maybe) they are sadly a minority interest in an already-minority hobby   

I know some people will want to jump up & down on my comment, but I am coming from the direction of UK stock, remember ...  For those where the offerings do meet their desires I do appreciate that they will be very happy 

Quote from: Pengi on June 15, 2014, 12:38:10 PM
My answer is that Kato gives the most reliable product on average - and by a long margin

Point of grammar, shouldn't it be a wider margin ?

Yes - I was being a bit  by a wide margin by mentionning Kato 

Thank you !

Signed

Jimmy Buckfast
Professor of English
Gorbals University.

Quote from: Agrippa on June 15, 2014, 02:55:37 PM

Quote from: Pengi on June 15, 2014, 12:38:10 PM
My answer is that Kato gives the most reliable product on average - and by a long margin

Point of grammar, shouldn't it be a wider margin ?

Not if you rotate it by 90 degrees.

Love it DCCDave, absolutely love it! 

Quote from: NeMo on June 15, 2014, 01:07:48 PM

Quote from: austinbob on June 15, 2014, 10:34:05 AM
It would be really nice to get a balanced view of how good/bad manufacturers are.

With all this said, I'll proffer an opinion about British N-gauge. Steam engines with valve gear and pony trucks tend to be dicey (e.g., fragile during transit/use, prone to derailing or poor running) for both manufacturers; short wheelbase 0-6-0s are better; and the more recent the diesel, the better it seems to be. Recent Bo-Bos and Co-Cos from both manufacturers do seem to be as well made on the inside as the outside. The complexity of lighting and DCC sockets has surely added a bigger risk factor compared to the older designs though -- the old Farish 'Western' might not look top-notch any more but consistently (if not invariably) runs reliably and smoothly well.

If I was looking for a diesel for example, picking between a Farish 'Deltic' and a Dapol 'Western' comes down to taste, not reliability. They're both excellent. On the other hand, the virtues of the simple but rugged Union Mills models shouldn't be overlooked if you're in the market for a steam locomotive and you're worried about derailing, quartering, bits falling off, etc.

Cheers, NeMo

Hi NeMo

In my experience steam engines with valve-gear and pony-trucks are no more dicey than diesels if properly designed and manufactured. I have sufficient number of Farish steam locos to (I think) base what I say on a reasonable sample size and cross-section of models. My experience of the new coreless motor locos in particular is especially positive. I have run one of my Ivatt 2-6-0s extensively (to the point of being positively brutal) but it continues to run smoothly and reliably.

Admittedly my experience with some earlier Dapol steam locos, especially things like the M7, Ivatt Tank and 9F is less good especially in terms of track holding, but also slow running. I think this is only reinforcing my point that the design must be good and the quality of mechanism and motor up to scratch.

I do think it is a slightly skewed view that Union Mills provide a solution to good running and derailing. I do not decry their products and have a good number. However they are not perfect. In my experience back-to backs are variable and they can be very prone to derailing, especially when running tender-first.  It must also be said that the pickup footprint (especially as regards the tender side of current collection) is very short, they can and do stall on points.

On the subject of diesel I cannot disagree, mine (from both manufacturers) run very well, but again, they are not without issues, my earlier GBRF Dapol 66 "Cromer Lifeboat" has a notoriously stiff mechanism, and although not many, I have had a few split gears too.

Regards

Roy

Like most responders I think this is a near impossible survey in that nothing is quite either/or.   Generally (and I have far too much stock being an ex-collector) I would say that Farish/Bachmann mostly run well out of the box whereas Dapol often need extensive running in and even then are often indifferent performers  some good and a few bad.  A regular minor problem With Dapol is that they are noisy, have poor soldering which leeds very to failures  and have odd/imperfect current collection methods which inevitably makes poor runners. 
If you look back over their cl.66s for instance, there have been several differnt current collection methods, all with a variety of problems (most of which are resolvable by an average modeller - and I think we should all try to be modellers - but in reality should not be present on a new model requiring repair by the purchaser).   I have also experienced these problems from Bach/Far, but on a far lesser scale.   If Dapol could get their quality control up to par, they would be the best around.   As it is, any new purchase is apotential adventure in repairs.  In their favour, they do seem to be innovating and improving with every new release,   Non-powered rolling stock - no problems, it is very nice.
Sorry Dapol, you need to get things working right before you issue products.

I am somewhere in the middle as far as the pair of them go and would rather give them marks out of ten, Farish 8/10 and Dapol 6/10.

They could both do better as far as QC goes. Dapol should actually employ someone at Chirk to physically test each loco before it's sent out, I know that some faults develop after a few hours running but that would weed out some of the dead on arrivals.

Having said all that we'd all be moaning our socks off, if either one of them stopped producing N gauge.

Quote from: silly moo on June 16, 2014, 03:02:58 PM
They could both do better as far as QC goes. Dapol should actually employ someone at Chirk to physically test each loco before it's sent out, I know that some faults develop after a few hours running but that would weed out some of the dead on arrivals.

Currently no major manufacturer does this as the cost associated with manual checking is prohibitve. A typical run from Dapol is 1200 locos. To test each one for an hour in each direction is 100 days of running. How many test tracks and testers would they need to employ and how much would it cost?

Also it would not actually save them any money. As it stands, they provide a warranty so any locos that burn out just get repaired or replaced. Granted it might improve their return rate and hence their reputation but at what cost?

The only manufactuer I know of test their wares are Union Mills but they are a concern on a different scale.

I wouldn't suggest a hour of testing but even a few minutes would rule out some of the really bad ones. I realise it won't happen though, I suppose buying from a retailer who is prepared to test locos before despatch is the next best thing. And then you could argue that there are collectors who never take locos out of their boxes.

Quote from: silly moo on June 16, 2014, 03:22:14 PM
And then you could argue that there are collectors who never take locos out of their boxes.

Then they can have the duffers and we'll have any good 'uns they've got