OO gauge GWR Mogul and Prairie

[No Decorum]

2 minutes ago, Butler Henderson said:

If he simply takes it out of the box and runs it any loco probably will be, run it for a fair amount of time first.

He demonstrated its running out of the box and again after running in. It was smooth at higher speed but jerky at very low speed.

 

As an afterthought, the Bachmann Moguls seem to compare very well, considering their age.

[NCB]

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

People who buy RTR products to use and run on layouts may, IMHO, by subdivided into two categories.  A Category, according to my friend's daughter when she was 4 and so cute she sh*t kittens, is where the cat went when the family went on holiday, into a Cattegory, and I for one have no argument with that assertion.  But as it applies to railway modellers, it seems to be the natural order of things that some demand their exact prototype in the exact condition and livery that they want it and will wait until it is available, and others will buy something close and immediately alter it, sticking new numberplates on, repainting it, adding or subtracting details, weathering, putting in real coal and such to build the best model they can of their required prototytpe with no regard to the 'integrity' of the original model.

 

Think there's at least one more category. People who are more interested in the overall look and performance of a model rather than details and detailed variations (a Castle is a Castle is a Castle ...).

 

Nigel

[Pteremy]

33 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

 

 

As an afterthought, the Bachmann Moguls seem to compare very well, considering their age.

As the owner of several I sincerely hope not!

 

For all the possible issues about the accuracy of the bodywork and livery the one thing we should be guaranteed with any new version of a model that is 1 or 2 decades old is an improvement in 'performance'. 

[Legend]

1 hour ago, Butler Henderson said:

If he simply takes it out of the box and runs it any loco probably will be, run it for a fair amount of time first.

The instructions say it doesn’t need running in . However Sam does run it in . . He did show that it was hesitant at a crawl but fine and smooth at other speeds 

[melmerby]

I've still got a Mainline 43XX whose chassis turned to Mazak dust and now sports a Comet chassis & gearbox, Markit wheels and a Mashima 1620 complete with a Bachmann tender chassis with conducting wheelset

Nice smooth runner but not particularly fast or pwerful.

 

The still original Manor bought at the same time has just decided that it's driving wheel axles have had enough after 40+ years.

[tomparryharry]

I can't take the video review seriously. Sam does indeed appear to be an erstwhile chap, and good for him. However, he does not appear to have any criteria to apply for or against the model. 

 

If the reviewer had a set test to apply, then we would know immediately if a model is Rolls-Royce, or a bag of nails. The failure of test application does Sam a disservice, as  he is then reliant upon subjective scrutiny, which is completely liable to counter or ridicule. 

 

What we do know, is that the packaging appears good, and the model also appears good.  The price is competitive (also good).  Perhaps if Sam brushed off the dust on his tender connection (in the video review ) then perhaps it might run a bit better.  I'm not about to knock Sam, as I strongly believe that a lot of train models will get used on carpet-based layouts, but the lack of structure to a test is a bit hit-or-miss.  I do hope he keeps doing his reviews; I also watch what he gets up to...

 

Cheers,

Ian. 

[tomparryharry]

4 minutes ago, melmerby said:

 

The still original Manor bought at the same time has just decided that it's driving wheel axles have had enough after 40+ years.

Hello Keith, I'm chuckling..  40+ years is longer than the accountants book value for the original ( full-size )  locomotive...

[melmerby]

10 minutes ago, tomparryharry said:

Hello Keith, I'm chuckling..  40+ years is longer than the accountants book value for the original ( full-size )  locomotive...

Yes. we don't often realise that locos had a design life a lot shorter than many actually survived for.

Now preserved 5322 had a working life of 47 years (1917-1964)

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, No Decorum said:

He demonstrated its running out of the box and again after running in. It was smooth at higher speed but jerky at very low speed.

 

As an afterthought, the Bachmann Moguls seem to compare very well, considering their age.

Some do, probably ones that have led easy lives.

 

However, many more clearly suffer the usual muff-axle collywobbles that come to most locos so equipped with heavy and/or prolonged use.

 

John

 

 

[Miss Prism]

What is the gear ratio?

 

[NCB]

Thought Sam's review was fair enough. Gave an idea of what the reactions of most purchasers are likely to be. Main takes were overall very good indeed, bar significant concerns about the power unit.

 

When I can get around to unpacking mine, which arrived yesterday, I'll see if he's right.

 

Nigel

[Butler Henderson]

Presumably once they tool up the Manor they can use the Collett cab on the Mogul, along with the respective details, to produce the 93xx's / 7322-7341.

Edited November 16, 2020 by Butler Henderson

[jonnyuk]

watched the review last night, pleasantly surprised, looks stunning and abit of a bargain, I'm concerned with running though.

to be fair to sam he does perform the same tests for every loco, i think it is structured

1: examines the box to ensure good packaging

2: exams the product to ensure nothing has fallen off

3: reviews the instructions

4: gives some history

5: on the white background 

 a: checks livery

 b: build quality
 c: detail

6: then slow running with no run in

7: runs it in

8: back to slow running

9: then a proper run with a train

10: watches performance on the same section of track and compares to others

 

he always uses the same bit of track, same controller

 

 

[The Johnster]

4 hours ago, Butler Henderson said:

Presumably once they tool up the Manor they cab use the Collett cab on the Mogul, along with the respective details, to produce the 93xx's / 7322-7341.

This is the sort of thing that is tempting to think with GW locos, as they all look the same and are made from standardised parts, but only to a point.  A Manor cab is different to the cab on a 93xx/73xx firstly because the firebox is bigger on the Manor and hence the shape of the cab front sheet is diifferent, secondly, because the Manor has a different boiler to the 43xx the 'sit' of the boiler in the frames is different (the Manor boiler pitch is higer), so the firebox top is higher on the Manor as well.  And I believe  the cab windows and cut-out are a different size on the Manor as opposed to the 93xx/73xx. 

 

A tooling for a 93xx/73xx body will not be able to share many if any components from the Manor, and certainly not the cab...  This is not the way that modern production works anyway; production runs are regarded as individual 'projects' within the producing company, which subcontracts out to China and orders the exact number of components for that particular project, so an order for x number of Manors, as a part of the Manor project. will result in exacly x number of components, pairs of components, sets of components etc.  A possible 93xx/73xx would be a separate project, and components for that will be manufactured separately to the correct numbers, possibly in different subcontracting factories.

[rembrow]

My BR late green version runs extremely well at all speeds, I was able to get a smooth crawl. Dapol don't recommend a running in period for the motor, only a backward and forward test to ensure all is in order. As far as ratio is concerned all I can say is that it runs faster than the Hornby prairie at all speed settings. One benefit of Dapol's dcc ready system is that the loco will run without the tender, the tender provides additional pick up. The front wheels have a vertical spring, that moves with the side to side movement of the bogie, to keep the bogie on the track. It is fairly lightly sprung.

The front buffers seem to be a push fit into the diecast buffer beam, they seem to have self locating prongs, to grip once pushed into the beam, so probably the reason why some have become loose in transit.

The moulding of the depth detail inside the safety valve bonnet is the best I've seen.

The paint finish and lining are excellent, with a satin finish, which is unusual for Dapol as their models tend to be more on the matt side. Overall an excellent model and bodes well for the Prairie and Manor.

Edited November 16, 2020 by rembrow
Spelling

[Les1952]

On 14/11/2020 at 13:44, SteamingWales said:

Mine has arrived and looks like I got a Friday afternoon model

 

One buffer rolling round the packaging and the other one basically hanging off. Doesn't look like they have been glued!!!

 

 

The smokebox dart is also missing. First looked as though it had broken off but there is no stub within the door and you can fit a 0.7mm drill bit in. Whilst looking at the tender it spat out the whole dart

 

 

Not a good start to my Dapol loco experience 

 

Hopefully it run, then I'll give it some TLC it deserves as apart from the bits falling off this looks to be a great model and echoing what others have said it's up there with Bachmann

 

 

Encouraging to know they are still throwing shipping containers around even during the pandemic.....

 

 

 

[Cor-onGRT4]

Just succeeded early this morning to order the very last one 6336 from Hattons to orderit was going fast

 

Edited November 16, 2020 by Cor-onGRT4

[rembrow]

A couple of further things I noticed. The piston covers are full profile at the rear, not shortened or flattened. The bogie is rated by Dapol for second radius. What they have done is to put a cam on the front bogie, which only comes into play as the wheel gets close to the piston cover, and moves the wheelset forward by a couple of mm.

[tomparryharry]

9 hours ago, The Johnster said:

 

A tooling for a 93xx/73xx body will not be able to share many if any components from the Manor, and certainly not the cab...  This is not the way that modern production works anyway; production runs are regarded as individual 'projects' within the producing company, which subcontracts out to China and orders the exact number of components for that particular project, so an order for x number of Manors, as a part of the Manor project. will result in exacly x number of components, pairs of components, sets of components etc.  A possible 93xx/73xx would be a separate project, and components for that will be manufactured separately to the correct numbers, possibly in different subcontracting factories.

 

I'm not entirely sure that's true, young Johnster. I 'think' I'm right when I say that some Dapol work is done in-house. Specifically, the spare parts list with the new model. There may be other Dapol products that are UK made., but they don't need to disclose which part was made where, and by whom. 

 

I wouldn't mind betting that if  a bar has been raised, then others are likely to follow, if only to match the existing standard.  So, you might see locomotives with different topfeeds, ATC plungers to replace  the NEM pocket box; that sort of thing. 

 

Hope does indeed, springs eternal.

Ian.

[Karl]

Good morning everyone, 

 

Like people have said this is a very impressive model and I'm very optimistic about the manor! Mine has a slight soft spot that I'm hoping will free up with use but there is one minor issue I'd like some help with.

 

The middle tender wheelset isn't rotating when the model runs, it turns as freely as the other two when turned by hand. Has anyone got a simple solution for this? I was wondering about a tiny bit of oil but not sure which to use to not affect the plastic.

[melmerby]

57 minutes ago, Karl said:

Good morning everyone, 

 

Like people have said this is a very impressive model and I'm very optimistic about the manor! Mine has a slight soft spot that I'm hoping will free up with use but there is one minor issue I'd like some help with.

 

The middle tender wheelset isn't rotating when the model runs, it turns as freely as the other two when turned by hand. Has anyone got a simple solution for this? I was wondering about a tiny bit of oil but not sure which to use to not affect the plastic.

Hi Karl

Are you sure it is actually sitting on the track with the other wheels?

It could be sitting slightly high for some reason.

[rembrow]

1 hour ago, Karl said:

Good morning everyone, 

 

Like people have said this is a very impressive model and I'm very optimistic about the manor! Mine has a slight soft spot that I'm hoping will free up with use but there is one minor issue I'd like some help with.

 

The middle tender wheelset isn't rotating when the model runs, it turns as freely as the other two when turned by hand. Has anyone got a simple solution for this? I was wondering about a tiny bit of oil but not sure which to use to not affect the plastic.

I've checked mine and it doesn't turn fully with the two outside sets, when tested on flat glass,but it does rotate better on the rails due to friction with rail sides. In checking this out I found that the centre wheelset of the tender has a small amount of vertical sprung movement, so presumably is sprung, as is the centre driving wheel set on the loco. The sprung effect is probably created by vertical elongated slots for the axle ends, with the spring being the centre contact strips that bear on the top of the wheel flange. If this is correct, easing off the pressure of the centre contacts might reduce the friction on the wheelset, but will leave the wheelset with more up and down play that may cause problems over points. 

Edited November 16, 2020 by rembrow

[Marshall5]

On 15/11/2020 at 10:56, Snowpig said:

David, I was going to order 6385 and 6336, but now it looks like 6385 doesn't have outside steam pipes, so I have only ordered 6336. I hope Dapol do another run and correct the error even if it's another loco. I hope it would be a shirt button livery too. Fingers crossed! 

According to the information in David Andrews' "The Churchward 2-6-0's" 6385 received outside steam pipes in 4/32 so it would likely be correct to portray it with o/s steam pipes and shirt button crest.

Conversely 6336 didn't receive them until 1/53 so, in this condition, could only accurately carry B.R. livery.

Hope this helps.

Ray.

[Ribird]

I've tried reading through the latest couple of pages since these have been released, I have not seen anyone mention anything about the new style tender coupler? Apologies if I have missed anything. I did watch Sam's Train video, but he really just glossed over the actual snapping of the coupler

• How well does it work?
• What are you thoughts for long term?
• Is it changeable to close coupling? Or is it "close coupled" already?
• If a train jerks at all, will it uncouple itself?
• Is this something all manufactures should switch over to?

Thanks,

 

R

[Karl]

1 hour ago, melmerby said:

Hi Karl

Are you sure it is actually sitting on the track with the other wheels?

It could be sitting slightly high for some reason.

 

1 hour ago, rembrow said:

I've checked mine and it doesn't turn fully with the two outside sets, when tested on flat glass,but it does rotate better on the rails due to friction with rail sides. In checking this out I found that the centre wheelset of the tender has a small amount of vertical sprung movement, so presumably is sprung, as is the centre driving wheel set on the loco. The sprung effect is probably created by vertical elongated slots for the axle ends, with the spring being the centre contact strips that bear on the top of the wheel flange. If this is correct, easing off the pressure of the centre contacts might reduce the friction on the wheelset, but will leave the wheelset with more up and down play that may cause problems over points. 

Thankyou for the responses. It does indeed seem that the middle wheelset is sitting almost imperceptibly high compared to the other two. When running it on my current track the middle wheel revolves periodically. I'll try your suggestion @rembrow, thanks!