DAPOL - YOUR THOUGHTS ?

[njee20]

I have found the Dapol diesels to have perfectly adequate to very good pulling power (although I don't own a class 66). My Westerns seem to be every bit as good as my Brush 4 while the Farish Warships can pull more than my Dapol Hymeks which feels about right.

Yes the Dapol 66s are underwhelming, but so's the 68 - mine slip to a stand with 8 pairs of Megafret wagons on the flat. I've not tested the 67 or 50 to its limit as I haven't wanted to haul longer trains. I'm running comparatively long trains (16-18 bogie wagons, 32ish two axle wagons), so I'm accepting of this, it is just an area that Farish locos tend to be better.

[Train Waiting]

Hello Chums

I don't have enough experience of Dapol locomotives to comment on them... so I won't.

But I can comment on the firm's range of passenger rolling stock and I think it is excellent.  Dapol carriages spend many happy hours running round my little layout and are an absolute boon.  I'd be struggling to bring my 1923-1938 scene to life without them.



These three Dapol 'Collett' carriages make a super passenger train.  By the way; the locomotive is a 'Dukedog' 4-4-0 from Union Mills.

Thank you Dapol, from a happy customer.

Best wishes.

John

[Dr Al]

I had two Dapol 9Fs (one since sold) from the original production run. For sure they are quite pretty, but chassis and mechanicals are (and were even at the time of launch IMHO) cheap and nasty, certainly not warranting the "platinum" branding. Slow running is not especially good and haulage very un 9F like so the remaining loco stays in it's box and is never run.

I understand that while the basic design never changed, later production runs were an improvement, and for sure the weathered one looked (to me anyway) quite well done.

The later batches had large improvements:

- completely retooled finer profile wheels throughout,
- retooled sprung front bogie
- retooled to accommodate the 5 pole skew wound motor

Essentially, the first batch and later batch models are barely comparable.

In terms of haulage, I've seen a couple of issues that might help folks:

- some of the recent production seem to have slightly bowed chassis - this can result in the loco see-sawing on its central driver. You can deepen the slot for this wheel a touch to allow all the wheels to run on track. I suspect that given the chassis is plastic either the tooling is wearing or some moulded imperfectly in some way. This see-saw can also give wobbly running.

- One of my models had a notably lower pulling power than others - oddly I found this was fixed when I checked over the loco pickups and found that on one side two were flat against the chassis. After fixing this the pulling power increased immediately - I can only presume that the pickups on one side were pushing the wheels hard to one side, reducing their contact with the track.

Ones to look for if that helps. I've found mine are fine with 30-35 wagons, which is enough for me.

Cheers,
Alan

[Les1952]

This haulage problem with the Dapol 9F is well documented.

It's a lovely looking spaceship, but I have no experience with it.

I do, however own two Minitrix 9Fs, which don't have such problems 

I have 6, yes SIX 9Fs currently available for service.  They are quite happy with the longest and heaviest trains running on Croft Spa (34 stiff fish vans or 35 weighted four-wheel vans) or on Hawthorn Dene - the van train shortened to 32 to fit the loop or 25 21-ton hoppers filled with real coal).   For reasons of being the wrong prototype for these trains they don't normally pull them- the brown vans and fish being a Dapol A3 or A4 (occasionally a Farish A2) and the coal either a Union Mills J27 or a tender-first Dapol B1.   ALL of my 9Fs will creep along up to a stop signal with a loaded train and will gradually pull that train away without slipping. No issues slow running.

I am less of a fan of the later 9Fs as there has been some weight taken out which hasn't improved them.  Two of mine are VERY early ones- my 92050 is the one photographed in the NGS Journal when they first came out- and both of these are in regular service on a semi-fitted train of 20-odd wagons at shows, the length being the train that fits the road in the fiddle yard also occupied by the 8-car class 101/111 train rather than a reflection of their haulage capacities.

Looking at the Farish alternatives- not one of my five WDs will look at the heavy trains - indeed no two of the five will pull the hoppers double-headed.  The weakest WD struggles with eight empty bogie sulphate wagons (which have all been re-wheeled and are all free running) and the strongest just about manages 12 of the hoppers.  My Farish B1 went onto eBay as it couldn't pull its diagrammed trains.  Any of my (presently 9) B1s will pull the hoppers.

In general I find (from the experience of a hard-worked exhibition fleet of nearly 140 locos)  there is little to choose between Farish and Dapol diesels- and each successive release from BOTH has raised the standards.  Farish tender-drives are variable- my best of these are the J39s but even here two out of 5 are laid up with split gears.  The loco-powered steamers are much better, but why is the 2MT stronger by a country mile than the WD? 

On Pacifics, I have plenty of all four major varieties of LNER.  The best I have are the Dapol A3 and the Farish A2, though the latter has had to have extra tyred wheelsets sourced- it is a weakling straight out of the box, not helped by one of mine having NO traction tyres as supplied. The Dapol A4 is also fine but its slightly different front bogie makes it a little more tricky to set up than the A3 and it loses its settings much more easily.  Farish's A1 is less good than the A2- it seems to be closer to the "locking up" weight than the A2 so needs to be scrupulously kept clean of dust around the valve gear.  The A4 and A3 are much stronger than an A1 or A2 with only one traction tyre but there is little difference when the Farish has two sets of tyres.

It is worth remembering that BOTH manufacturers are continually upping their game and that the new releases of the last year or two show up the previous generations of BOTH manufacturers.  The SECR C is a little gem, but so is the Class 60 and the Class 50.  They are the product of their upgrade.

Also worth thinking is it is now about TWICE as many years since Dapol introduced their 9F as the number of years between Dapol STARTING in N and releasing the 9F.

Les

The weakness of the Farish WD is a milling problem with their tyred wheels affecting a good percentage of locos that they took a long time to admit to - the result being WDs with correctly milled wheels would pull long trains while the worst would hardly pull themselves.  Traction tyres are no good whatsoever when the y don't touch the track.....

[Graham]

I have a number of Dapol 66's, 67's & 68's, and as others have said the pulling power is not a match for the Farish examples, but in my opinion I prefer the look of the Dapol units, and for me I run them on short trains rather than the 20 HTA's etc and never on the Revolution wagons.

To date other than one HST which has lost its headlights and I haven't got round to replacing the leds I have had a very good run from them.

[Dr Al]

To date other than one HST which has lost its headlights and I haven't got round to replacing the leds I have had a very good run from them.

Most likely to be the dual diode surface mount package on the PCB - especially if it's the red lights out (though I've seen various strangenesses with lights all coming back to this same problem). This can be changed (the diode, not the PCB) for pennies. Worth checking first before replacing anything more expensive or challenging.

Cheers,
Alan

[Graham]

thanks @Dr Al, it is only the headlights, the tail light is still working, so I was just looking to replace the headlight leds to see if that worked.

[Dr Al]

Worth doing a bit of switching around (e.g. swap body to another chassis or a dummy) to see if the LEDs actually do work and it's the PCB contents that are the problem.

The LEDs can be blown, but most often its the PCB components or as a result of the PCB components.

Cheers,
Alan

[Graham]

thanks will see how I go, I have some spares.

[njee20]

I've bought 3 HSTs with failed lights, and each time it's been the actual LED. Never had one fail on any of mine, so not sure what people are doing to make them fail.

[jpendle]

The lights on all but one of my 86's have failed. But that's down to the use of flimsy wiring to a connector on the main PCB. Removing the loco body to add a decoder broke the first one, and even being very careful on subsequent loco's it's still a problem.

The wires typically come loose at the lighting PCB, and once you get all the black paint? off, that's because instead of going to the expense of a single pin header for each wire there is just a solder pad, and not a very big one at that.

Dapol have addressed this on their redesigned Next18 CL66's though, using wipers to transfer the lighting signals from the main PCB to the loco body.

Regards,

John P

[Roy L S]

This haulage problem with the Dapol 9F is well documented.

It's a lovely looking spaceship, but I have no experience with it.

I do, however own two Minitrix 9Fs, which don't have such problems 

I have 6, yes SIX 9Fs currently available for service.  They are quite happy with the longest and heaviest trains running on Croft Spa (34 stiff fish vans or 35 weighted four-wheel vans) or on Hawthorn Dene - the van train shortened to 32 to fit the loop or 25 21-ton hoppers filled with real coal).   For reasons of being the wrong prototype for these trains they don't normally pull them- the brown vans and fish being a Dapol A3 or A4 (occasionally a Farish A2) and the coal either a Union Mills J27 or a tender-first Dapol B1.   ALL of my 9Fs will creep along up to a stop signal with a loaded train and will gradually pull that train away without slipping. No issues slow running.

I am less of a fan of the later 9Fs as there has been some weight taken out which hasn't improved them.  Two of mine are VERY early ones- my 92050 is the one photographed in the NGS Journal when they first came out- and both of these are in regular service on a semi-fitted train of 20-odd wagons at shows, the length being the train that fits the road in the fiddle yard also occupied by the 8-car class 101/111 train rather than a reflection of their haulage capacities.

Looking at the Farish alternatives- not one of my five WDs will look at the heavy trains - indeed no two of the five will pull the hoppers double-headed.  The weakest WD struggles with eight empty bogie sulphate wagons (which have all been re-wheeled and are all free running) and the strongest just about manages 12 of the hoppers.  My Farish B1 went onto eBay as it couldn't pull its diagrammed trains.  Any of my (presently 9) B1s will pull the hoppers.

In general I find (from the experience of a hard-worked exhibition fleet of nearly 140 locos)  there is little to choose between Farish and Dapol diesels- and each successive release from BOTH has raised the standards.  Farish tender-drives are variable- my best of these are the J39s but even here two out of 5 are laid up with split gears.  The loco-powered steamers are much better, but why is the 2MT stronger by a country mile than the WD? 

On Pacifics, I have plenty of all four major varieties of LNER.  The best I have are the Dapol A3 and the Farish A2, though the latter has had to have extra tyred wheelsets sourced- it is a weakling straight out of the box, not helped by one of mine having NO traction tyres as supplied. The Dapol A4 is also fine but its slightly different front bogie makes it a little more tricky to set up than the A3 and it loses its settings much more easily.  Farish's A1 is less good than the A2- it seems to be closer to the "locking up" weight than the A2 so needs to be scrupulously kept clean of dust around the valve gear.  The A4 and A3 are much stronger than an A1 or A2 with only one traction tyre but there is little difference when the Farish has two sets of tyres.

It is worth remembering that BOTH manufacturers are continually upping their game and that the new releases of the last year or two show up the previous generations of BOTH manufacturers.  The SECR C is a little gem, but so is the Class 60 and the Class 50.  They are the product of their upgrade.

Also worth thinking is it is now about TWICE as many years since Dapol introduced their 9F as the number of years between Dapol STARTING in N and releasing the 9F.

Les

The weakness of the Farish WD is a milling problem with their tyred wheels affecting a good percentage of locos that they took a long time to admit to - the result being WDs with correctly milled wheels would pull long trains while the worst would hardly pull themselves.  Traction tyres are no good whatsoever when the y don't touch the track.....

I think your assessment is in the main very fair and balanced Les.

That said, you have seen one of my WDs walk off with just shy of 40 16 Tonners on Rugby Central, and my sound fitted one is equally capable.

On the subject of B1s and j39 tender drives (Farish) I have never had a split gear, in fact I don't think I have had split gears on any of my Farish tender-driven, just a couple of diesels, less of an issue amongst more recent ones it seems.

My experience of the Dapol v Farish B1 is quite different though. My Farish are capable of pulling a very decent train and have proved very dependable. The two Dapol ones I have owned were not only a much poorer rendition of a B1 (Poorly proportioned and more akin to a "generic" LNER 4-6-0 in some ways) but the first got so hot it melted the tender sides and the second shed a loco-tender wire, the screw housing in the tender rotated rendering the screw impossible to remove. I sold it cheap (with full disclosure of the problem of course).

The Farish Ivatt is a little stunner, even now if I was told I could keep just one loco, I think it would be my sound fitted 46440..

Best Wishes

Roy

[Snowwolflair]

The more split gears I have replace the more I am convinced that the type of oil used plays a big part. 

I now use Teflon lubricant with no ill effects to the plastic, but I strip gear trains and towers and clean the old oil off with IPA first.

WD-40 and 3 in 1 oil are definite culprits as they contain a cleaning agent, but lite pure gun oil seems to be fine.  I have also used Castrol grease to great effect.

[Dr Al]

Never had one fail on any of mine, so not sure what people are doing to make them fail.

Likewise, and I am equally intrigued to find the actual cause.

My suspicion is that it's momentary shorts, wheels touching backs of poorly adjusted point blades etc, shorts caused by derailments, etc - the BAT54C diode package isn't rated that highly (700mA IIRC?) so a short or spike may well degrade and ultimately cook it. LEDs pretty much can only cook if overcurrent, which means over-voltage given they do have protection resistors. Not sure how that happens on DC unless it's from old controllers?

At some point I do need to sit down and work through the circuit properly, to see if the weak components could be replaced with something more robust, or reworked to be completely removed.

Cheers,
Alan

[Snowwolflair]

Never had one fail on any of mine, so not sure what people are doing to make them fail.

Likewise, and I am equally intrigued to find the actual cause.

My suspicion is that it's momentary shorts, wheels touching backs of poorly adjusted point blades etc, shorts caused by derailments, etc - the BAT54C diode package isn't rated that highly (700mA IIRC?) so a short or spike may well degrade and ultimately cook it. LEDs pretty much can only cook if overcurrent, which means over-voltage given they do have protection resistors. Not sure how that happens on DC unless it's from old controllers?

At some point I do need to sit down and work through the circuit properly, to see if the weak components could be replaced with something more robust, or reworked to be completely removed.

Cheers,
Alan

A lot of the cheap diodes LED and signal sourced in China are poor clones and way off the advertised specs.  You can bet the factory is buying cheap and it does not take much of a voltage spike to fry the Anode