My Bachmann 37 chassis looks like a banana ....mazak issue ?

[rob D2]

So I’ve had a reply from the service department at Bachmann .

 

- none of their samples from those batches exhibit the same issues.

- they say it could be environmental rather than production ( I have pointed out it’s not my environment , mine are stored in a centrally Heated bedroom , not even a shed or loft ),
- their chassis are not mazak , they use a different alloy and have done for years 

 

- they are sending me a new chassis block and plastic sub frame ( closest they have ), I have pointed out that although I am familiar with taking all the bits off and swapping out These as I did it on a 47, there will be those who won’t be happy doing this .

 

- I have mentioned the other versions people have had issues with other models, and that I’ll check 242 for the same .

 

- if you want to contact them, they say the easiest way is via the contact forms on service request on their website .

[rob D2]

242....

looks ok, except this slightly suspect bit of metal, and a very slight patina to one end cab bit.

will monitor ...

 

 

[phil-b259]

7 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

There were quite a few problems with deficient Mazak in the 1960s. Pocher car kits were renowned for it despite being very expensive and collectable. Since then, the problem seems to have disappeared until production was outsourced to China.

 

This is a basic manufacturing fault and, as such, under consumer law, comes outside the manufacturers' guarantee terms and conditions. These faulty products should be replaced free of charge.

 

We have been here before in the Class 31 thread.

 

Regardless of what you and others believe, because model railways are officially regarded as toys and thus 'disposable' to an extent, trading Standards etc will take no action once a few years have passed.

 

This will only change when someone takes a manufacturer to court and secures a judgement which specifically states that such manufacturing defects must be compensated for regardless of how old the 'toy' is.

 

Seen in that light, the actions of Hornby (replacement chassis units, £100 vouchers, etc) went well beyond what is deemed necessary for 'toys' with manufacturing defects and by no means confers any obligation on Bachmann to do the same.

 

Thats not to say that Bachmann will not try and be helpful in cases were their products are suspect - but insistence that manufacturing defects must result in replacement products is not, as far as toys go, is irrelevant until someone takes a manufacturer to court and sets a president.

Edited November 17, 2020 by phil-b259

[spamcan61]

For that matter "consumer durables" e.g. TVs are only considered warranted for 6 years or thereabouts.

[pheaton]

1 hour ago, rob D2 said:

242....

looks ok, except this slightly suspect bit of metal, and a very slight patina to one end cab bit.

will monitor ...

 

 

Thats oxidisation rob not mazak rot, quite a few of my 47s have it but no signs of failure on those as of yet, so that looks like its ok at the moment.

 

Whilst there chassis may not be under the Mazak name, they clearly use zinc and as a result can suffer from zinc pest. (Mazak rot)

 

An no they dont have to resolve the issue through refunds or replacement parts....but unless they take charge of the issue as Hornby did their brand reputation could suffer.

Edited November 17, 2020 by pheaton

[rob D2]

Let’s keep on topic.

information and reports about these 37s, not a debate about consumer rights, please .

[Phil Bullock]

Have gone through the Abbotswood stud - 8 locos - and not found any issues. Hurrah!

 

In the interests of calming others who may not want to take bodies off locos they are as follows... forgive me for using our running numbers, the Bachmann originals are listed for each one.

 

6601GFYE 32-782 D6984 GSYP

6785 BFYE 32-781 37251 BFYE nose end swap

6811 GFYE 32-782 D6801 GSYP

6875 GSYP 32-778 D6826 GSYP

6885 BFYE 32-778 D6826 GSYP respray

6972 BFYE 32-781 37251 BFYE

6974 BFYE 32-782 D6984 GSYP respray

6992 BFYE 32-781 37-251 BFYE

6997 GFYE 32-782 D6984 GSYP

 

Think that’s right with the model numbers. The only casualties have been MU jumpers which are fragile.... the Class 43 Warship ones are a good replacement and have loads of those but they are wrong handed. Softening in a jet of steam with gentle twisting sorts that out.... tomorrow’s job, a change from herrings! 

[rob D2]

Nice one Phil, that’ll save some folk some time 

[tractor_37260]

Hi Rob

             Having worked em call that "butchered" a number of Bach 37 chassis blocks to fit EM2 speakers, I often had to straighten the chassis block after cutting it as they bowed a bit. The metal is fairly soft and with care straightens fairly easily, use a straight edge along the bottom edges to confirm.

Take the plastic chassis frame off and check your model, if bowed can be either be straightened carefully in a vice or if not file the bottom edge where necessary to get it back straight again.

 

HTH

Ken

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 17, 2020 by tractor_37260
correct text

[rob D2]

12 hours ago, tractor_37260 said:

Hi Rob

             Having worked em call that "butchered" a number of Bach 37 chassis blocks to fit EM2 speakers, I often had to straighten the chassis block after cutting it as they bowed a bit. The metal is fairly soft and with care straightens fairly easily, use a straight edge along the bottom edges to confirm.

Take the plastic chassis frame off and check your model, if bowed can be either be straightened carefully in a vice or if not file the bottom edge where necessary to get it back straight again.

 

HTH

Ken

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Ken ,

But I’m not touching it, filing it, messing with it or anything else to be honest , Bachmann can send replacements and I’ll do my best to swap them out,

 

 

[fezza]

I wonder how often zinc is tested for impurities in Chinese factories? Mine seem okay but full marks to Bachmann for responding. Oxidisation is common I think and something that is not usually fatal. 

 

BTW surely in the EU these have to be sold as "operational scale models for adult collectors" rather than toys? Not sure if that makes any difference to what in law may be a 'reasonable' operational life for the product? 

[phil-b259]

5 hours ago, fezza said:

 

 

BTW surely in the EU these have to be sold as "operational scale models for adult collectors" rather than toys? Not sure if that makes any difference to what in law may be a 'reasonable' operational life for the product? 

 

Nope!

 

Despite what many may say model trains (even German models trains from the likes of Roco) are still officially 'toys' as far as Germany, the EU and WTO are concerned. Indeed we should be grateful for this as toys are 'zero rated' when it comes to imports / export tariffs where as engineering models do usually attract charges which would have to be passed on to the consumer.

 

On your second point, given how consumer law treats domestic appliances (costing much more in many cases), I can't see having model railways classed as something else would help in extending the amount of time the courts would hold manufacturers liable for defects.

Edited November 19, 2020 by phil-b259

[JSpencer]

On 16/11/2020 at 18:03, Tony Walker said:

Had a look at the five I have and there's definitely a problem with 37174 and 327254. 254 is banana shaped, but 174 isn't too bad at the moment, but there's something wrong. I've taken both bodies off, but need to have a closer look this weekend. I've had a look at 37242, 37405 and 37421 and they all look OK, but I haven't taken the bodies off, as they appear outwardly to be OK, which wasn't the case with the other two.

 

It will be interesting to see what comes back from Bachmann on this. Hope I don't have to send them away to get fixed, as I've modified 37254 by putting a large speaker in the fuel tank! Don't think that would cause the banana effect though.

 

It will probably be best to leave the bodies off. This will avoid expansion splitting them.

[pheaton]

So after a recheck of mine....the only model that stands out with a notably twisted chassis at one end is the model rail special edition 37 "grainflow" after taking the model apart though I cant see tell tale cracking, i can see oxidisation which has very slightly "rust-jacked" the middle of the chassis, and some oxidisation on the block itself but I cant see evidence of surface cracking.

 

Has anyone else got grainflow and do they mind having a look?

 

In addition, the risk to body's should be lower than the risk to say the Hornby 31 bodies, I would expect the glue to have aged sufficiently to allow the noses to "pop off" before damage occurs but I fully agree with he advice about removing body shells for piece of mind.

 

 

 

[sulzer71]

Reading all this makes me glad I got rid of all my Bachmann 37's !

[Roy Langridge]

4 minutes ago, sulzer71 said:

Reading all this makes me glad I got rid of all my Bachmann 37's !

 

To be honest, I think we are looking at a possible issue with a very small number of Bachmann 37s. Mine all seem ok (18 of them).

Roy

[D7100]

After reading through this thread I thought (with some trepidation) I would check my  37174 & 37242.

 

And it's NOT good news I'm afraid.

 

37174 shows signs of chassis bow at one end whist 37242 seems to be the worst of the pair.

 

The first thing that struck me with 242 when removing from it's packaging was the way the buffers at both ends were distinctly starting to curl upwards like Aladdin's shoes.

 

Both models exhibited chassis protruding below the body (no photos sorry), but similar to other photos earlier in this thread.

 

Both models stored at room temperature since purchase when they were both released.

 

Now to find receipts and check other models.

 

Will this Mazak nightmare ever end.

 

cheers D7100.  

[rob D2]

1 minute ago, D7100 said:

After reading through this thread I thought (with some trepidation) I would check my  37174 & 37242.

 

And it's NOT good news I'm afraid.

 

37174 shows signs of chassis bow at one end whist 37242 seems to be the worst of the pair.

 

The first thing that struck me with 242 when removing from it's packaging was the way the buffers at both ends were distinctly starting to curl upwards like Aladdin's shoes.

 

Both models exhibited chassis protruding below the body (no photos sorry), but similar to other photos earlier in this thread.

 

Both models stored at room temperature since purchase when they were both released.

 

Now to find receipts and check other models.

 

Will this Mazak nightmare ever end.

 

cheers D7100.  

It’s not mazak according to Bachmann .

Buffer wise, I’ve always found both their 37/47 have upward facing versions generally 

[Tony Walker]

18 hours ago, rob D2 said:

It’s not Mazak according to Bachmann .

Buffer wise, I’ve always found both their 37/47 have upward facing versions generally 

 

In that case what is it, a new type of infliction on the metal that we haven't had before, maybe Covid19! In my case 242 is very bent and you don't need a ruler to see it. I've checked the rest of my 37's and there's only the two that are clearly suffering some sort of problem.

[spamcan61]

19 hours ago, rob D2 said:

It’s not mazak according to Bachmann .

 

That's because Mazak is a trademarked alloy made by a specific company. They haven't denied they use a zinc alloy of some sort ( given there are no cost effective alternatives).

[adb968008]

On 17/11/2020 at 17:40, spamcan61 said:

For that matter "consumer durables" e.g. TVs are only considered warranted for 6 years or thereabouts.

My TV cost a lot more than any of my locos.

So I wouldnt be using that as any benchmark.

 

How long is a blender designed to last ? I bought mine in 2002, still going a thousand daquiris later for less than £20.

Edited November 22, 2020 by adb968008

[rob D2]

2 hours ago, Tony Walker said:

 

In that case what is it, a new type of infliction on the metal that we haven't had before, maybe Covid19! In my case 242 is very bent and you don't need a ruler to see it. I've checked the rest of my 37's and there's only the two that are clearly suffering some sort of problem.

They want me to send back the knackered bits  and I’ll do that , but I doubt I’ll get time to mess with it till 2021 now...

 

the response has been guarded as you’d expect from a company where it’s going to cost them .

 

I didn’t realise mazak was like the word hoover , not a generic term 

[Alcanman]

21 hours ago, D7100 said:

After reading through this thread I thought (with some trepidation) I would check my  37174 & 37242.

 

And it's NOT good news I'm afraid.

 

37174 shows signs of chassis bow at one end whist 37242 seems to be the worst of the pair.

 

The first thing that struck me with 242 when removing from it's packaging was the way the buffers at both ends were distinctly starting to curl upwards like Aladdin's shoes.

 

 

 

cheers D7100.  

I've just checked my model of 37174 and it's fine except for the upturned buffers. This is the second model of 37174 that I've owned. The first one had buffers angled even higher than my current one.

 

[spamcan61]

2 hours ago, adb968008 said:

My TV cost a lot more than any of my locos.

So I wouldnt be using that as any benchmark.

 

How long is a blender designed to last ? I bought mine in 2002, still going a thousand daquiris later for less than £20.

Plenty of TVs and other consumer durables available for less than the cost of a DCC sound fitted loco.

Edited November 22, 2020 by spamcan61

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

Bachmann's explanation and their seeming to apportion some of the blame on storage conditions has me a tad worried, all my stock is stored in conditions where temperatures can vary between 5 and 50 degrees, with humidity levels of up to 80%, nobody mentioned I needed a temperature controlled environment when I bought them, why do they use materials they know might be subject to such issues?

 

Mike.