All seem to run fine out of the box, but have had a couple of Dapol that have had to be returned after a bit of running..

But never a problem, they are always replaced

Quote from: Nigel Molesworth on March 22, 2015, 09:03:28 AM

Quote from: martyn on March 22, 2015, 03:09:27 AM
Union Mills locos run very well when converted to dcc. I have a B12/3, D16/3 and three J39s (and hopefully soon a K3), and though the conversion needs a bit of work, the results are very good. I have used decoders which, after a bit of metal work on the inside of the tender, are mounted on top of the motor, and hence do not fill up the cab space.
Martyn

Thanks for this - if you don't mind me also specifically asking,

Comparing with a modern Farish Diesel - when DCC fitted how do you find UM locos on pointwork, sharp curves, track joins (9" - 12") etc, when DCC and what decoders did you use?

On Hawthorn Dene I have five Union Mills locos running, all chipped, though differently.  They have now all run at three exhibitions.

In the fiddle yard I have dead frogs- largely as the Peco Code 80 insulfrog has a good clearance between the running rail and the back of the point blade, which means far fewer short circuits from wheel backs.   Union Mills pick up one side from the loco and the other side from the tender.  At low speeds at the wrong end of the day they are more likely to stick on the frogs than diesels.   By the end of the day dust etc has settled onto the rails and onto wheels. 

Other than that they are reliable and strong performers. I tend to keep one J27 spare to change over if one of the other four locos starts stuttering so I can clean wheels.  Otherwise I use a Farish Class 24 as a spare. 

Performance wise, apart from an odd failure, I find steamers reliable.  Failures over the three shows have been for a number of reasons, the most common being a decoder losing the plot.  Cheap Bachmann decoders are the worst for this, but I've also had a Zimo sound decoder needing its sound re-blowing after a show.   I've had valve gear fall apart on a Farish WD and a Dapol A3, and one (Note- only ONE in three shows) traction tyre failure.  Most other problems have been due to accumulated dirt.

Hope this all helps.
Les

BTW with one UK and one German outline layout going out to shows I can confirm that under exhibition conditions in my experience the Continentals are NO better for reliability!

There have been some interesting replies to this question. I have limited experience with British outline, but what I have seen would suggest that diesels would have to have the edge over steamers of similar size.

Diesels have several intrinsic advantages over steamers for runability (a word?). Their boxy shape allows for a chassis that can be a great big piece of metal that results in better traction. Modern diesels have cup bearings in the axles that are superior to the wiper systems that appear in steam locos. The motor in a diesel is always in the body so they don't have to make do with makeshift arrangements such as Cardan drives from the tender or tender traction.

Most of my equipment is North American diesels, but I have a couple of old NA steamers, a brand new Kato 4-8-4, and an old-timer Atlas 4-4-0. All of the diesels have good traction and run smoothly. The old NA steamers with more primitive motors don't run as well but with the motors in the loco bodies and lots of weight still have reasonable traction. Due to its tiny size the 4-4-0 has a motor in the tender driving a Cardan drive to the loco. It suffers from the difficulties experienced by my several British steam locos i.e. lower traction and electrical pick-up fiddlyness. The Kato 4-8-4 is an example of how a steam locomotive should be designed and manufactured in N scale. My single British outline diesel is a recent Farish class 55 and it has the desirable running characteristics of my NA diesels, strong and smooth. 

I love model steam locos probably more than diesels, but I don't think they are yet on a par with diesels for robustness, pulling power, or smoothness.   

I've never had the need to have a haulage competition between  my locos, but Union Mills locos are VERY good haulers for their size. I have to admit that the detailing is pretty basic, as has been discussed before, but for sheer traction, they are difficult to beat.
Martyn

Quote from: martyn on March 24, 2015, 11:51:46 AM
I have to admit that the detailing is pretty basic, as has been discussed before,

Bear in mind there are plenty of possibilities for detailing and additions, and many of us have done this to our UMs to improve them further. The good thing is that generally their major dimensions are correct and proportioned ok, so it's more often the smaller detail that needs added.

Cheers,
Alan

Just had a delivery from Hattons this morning, and included in it was their latest "Best Sellers Brochure".  Noticed in it 2 Class 9Fs at £87 each (thats just £72.50 without the VAT) and always liked the look of the 9Fs.

How well does this model run though? - are they prone to derail or not on setrack and tight curves etc., anybody got one who can tell me as I am very tempted at the price they are on offer. The models advertised are 92052 & 92088 - both black.

Quote from: Tdm on March 24, 2015, 01:00:42 PM
How well does this model run though? - are they prone to derail or not on setrack and tight curves etc., anybody got one who can tell me as I am very tempted at the price they are on offer. The models advertised are 92052 & 92088 - both black.

Recent ones are very good - they have the super creep motor (the early ones had a much stickier Tomix motor that ran well but was sticky at slow speeds meaning crawl was hard to attain). The front bogie on the newest 9Fs has lateral springing to get over the initial derailment problems the first batches had, and mine at any rate have been completely reliable in this respect (the first batch one by comparison that I had with no bogie springing was also completely reliable - completely reliable at derailing every time!)

The only issue I've found is they are perhaps a little bit lighter on their feet than the prototype and if you have gradients this might be a concern. I've had mine towing 35 wagons on the level though, no trouble.

It's an established model now and has had all the initial issues ironed out and improvements (like the motor) applied. If you can get for £72.50 then I'd say that's pretty good value these days.

The only outstanding issue (IMHO) is that the valve gear can be particularly fragile, in particular the central eccentric rod crank pin - this is prone to breakage causing the valve gear to come adrift. This seems common (I think the part is cast, or in a weak material), so careful handling is definitely prudent, as spares aren't obviously available for these (and if they were it wouldn't be the easiest repair either).

HTH,
Alan

Mention was made earlier by Les1952 about cheap Bachmann decoders being more prone to "losing the plot". So with my "not so EZcommand"  I'm stuffed as regards reprogramming a chip aren't I?

So if I were to buy a Farish loco as DCC ready should I get a Bachmann decoder or not? Until I read the above I would have intuitively thought "same manufacturer, might as well use thir decoders" but perhaps not in light of the above?

My Warship came "DCC fitted" so I guess it would have a Bachmann decoder? I've not had any issue with it whatsover in the two months I've owned it. Or is Les1952's comment only in relation to Union Mills locos? Would a Bachmann decoder fit into a Union Mills tender?

Sorry for the zillion questions everyone; just tell me to shut up if I'm being dense about all this.

Quote from: Dr Al on March 24, 2015, 01:12:17 PM

Recent ones are very good - they have the super creep motor (the early ones had a much stickier Tomix motor that ran well but was sticky at slow speeds meaning crawl was hard to attain). The front bogie on the newest 9Fs has lateral springing to get over the initial derailment problems the first batches had, and mine at any rate have been completely reliable in this respect (the first batch one by comparison that I had with no bogie springing was also completely reliable - completely reliable at derailing every time!)

The only issue I've found is they are perhaps a little bit lighter on their feet than the prototype and if you have gradients this might be a concern. I've had mine towing 35 wagons on the level though, no trouble.

Yes, it may be that traction (or lack of it) is not a major issue for layouts built on the level. On horizontal track, the loco pull only needs to counter the rolling resistance of the train, but going up gradients the weight of the train needs to be overcome as well. I had a recent model Farish class 5 (tender drive) that was barely capable of pulling 6 Farish Stanier coaches up a 1.6% grade (slithering and slipping all the way) even after an additional lead weight was inserted under the coal in the tender. Traction in all model locos comes from weight over the driving wheels and my now ex-class 5 just didn't have enough of either for my layout even though I'm sure that the motor itself was powerful enough. Regrettable as I really liked the loco in all other ways.

Well I've bitten the bullet and bought two Union Mills locos. A 4-4-0 2P and an 0-6-0 3F in B.R. black (ostensibly for the S&D part of my layout when it gets built). They've been to returned to me following being converted to DCC and they run fine.

Quote from: Nigel Molesworth on March 27, 2015, 09:36:09 PM
Well I've bitten the bullet and bought two Union Mills locos. A 4-4-0 2P and an 0-6-0 3F in B.R. black (ostensibly for the S&D part of my layout when it gets built). They've been to returned to me following being converted to DCC and they run fine.

Very good choices! I have a couple of 2Ps in S&D blue and am awaiting an unlettered 3F, also in blue. The pulling power of a UM loco is absolutely amazing. They can't be bettered.