Jump to content
 

Troublesome Trucks


Broadoak
 Share

Recommended Posts

Is it just me or do others have problems with OO scale Dapol wagons?

I modelled the American scene for twenty five years, including an exhibition layout for some five years and used the excellent KD couplings with no problems at all.

I have been modelling the British scene now for a couple of years and use the awful Triang type coupling which are OK with most makes of wagon except Dapol. They don’t couple very well, they un couple for no apparent reason. When shunting in the yard if there are derailments or wagons becoming un coupled the culprit is always a Dapol product. In fact the early versions with the large loop seem less trouble than the latest versions.

Compared to Bachmann or Hornby wagons they are a very poor thing indeed. I certainly would never buy any more. I now know why they are cheaper than Bachmann or Hornby wagons they really are rather poor.

Regards Peter M


 

Edited by Broadoak
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep I've always had trouble with Dapol wagons staying on the track , I always end up replacing the wheels. Shunting with them is impossible, if I try pushing them I end up with a Thomas the tank Engine style crash scene, I don't know if it's just the flanges Dapol are using on their wagon wheels or what but they are dreadful. It's a shame because Dapol wagons are very reasonably priced and they do lots of ltd edition wagons for various companies and there's always lots I'd like to purchase but they're unusable until I change the wheels. 

 

Edit: hooks have a tendency to easily fall off Dapol wagons too

Edited by GreenGiraffe22
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a couple of sets of wagons with varying numbers of Dapol wagons. The only ones I’ve had repeated problems with are the six-wheel tankers, all the others can be a little jumpy but improve considerably with weight added. I started off with copper pennies but use lead ballast for the stranger-shaped vehicles. I now wonder if the reason the tankers give me problems is because I can’t get any weight inside them...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Wheel replacement should cure your running problems, Peter, but not the droopy  NEM couplers for which Dapol use their own  screw in mounts.  I have given up on them and don’t buy them any more unless it’s something I want for which there is no available alternative.  By the time you factor in new wheelsets and Parkside PA34 NEM mounts, the price advantage is negated.  Their 16ton and 7 plank minerals are the wrong wheelbase in any case.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another Dapol product I am a little disappointed with is the Western class diesel. It looks very good and runs quietly and smoothly except over some of my points. The secret seems to be to run the loco at very slow speeds, this is not a problem as the model is a shunting layout. The track is all code 100 Peco and over thirty years old but gives no trouble with my other six axle loco.

I attach a few photos to give a flavour of the layout.


 

g30Zho1l.jpg


 

2pge2NIl.jpg


 

OArWtIAl.jpg


 

Regards Peter M

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Broadoak
wrong codes
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Broadoak said:

Another Dapol product I am a little disappointed with is the Western class diesel. It looks very good and runs quietly smoothly except over some of my points.

 

I had exactly the same problem. Improved by adding extra power pickups on the unpowered bogie.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 01/02/2021 at 09:20, GreenGiraffe22 said:

Yep I've always had trouble with Dapol wagons staying on the track , I always end up replacing the wheels. Shunting with them is impossible, if I try pushing them I end up with a Thomas the tank Engine style crash scene, I don't know if it's just the flanges Dapol are using on their wagon wheels or what but they are dreadful. It's a shame because Dapol wagons are very reasonably priced and they do lots of ltd edition wagons for various companies and there's always lots I'd like to purchase but they're unusable until I change the wheels. 

 

Edit: hooks have a tendency to easily fall off Dapol wagons too

 

I have always found that RP25 profile round, concentric wheels work extremely well. Sadly the few Dapol wagons I have seem to fail in that regard.

The flanges are extremely fine, much lower than RP25. And the wheels seem to be not quite round or concentric. A recipe for derailment! I use my Dapol wagons for testing newly laid trackwork. If they do not derail, nothing will!

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit I have rather given up on the Western and use her only on parcels trains, which involves a trip from the bay platform to the fiddle yard. Later in the operating session another loco, usually a Hymek or a 37 picks up the parcels train and returns it to the bay. Later the Western then returns light engine and couples onto the parcel train in the bay and the sequence is repeated.

I am relieved to know that I am not the only one with problems with Dapol wagons.

I certainly won’t be buying any more Dapol OO scale products.

 

Regards Peter M


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since recently returning to the hobby, I have bought a few Dapol wagons.   I've experienced similar issues with derailing, droopy couplers etc.    I purchased a back-to-back gauge from Ebay, which arrived today, and it's certainly cured the derailment issues with 4 out of 5 Dapol wagons.   The other wagon has a wheelset that seems off-centre, and the wagon wobbles and rocks along the track.  Replaced the wheelset and it's fine.     But the back-to-back gauge was £6 well spent.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I've found similar with recent production Dapol wagons, which is a pity as all the older ones I have (from around 2000 to 2010ish) run well and have no issues. I think adding additional weight might help somewhat, and I hope so as I like the various liveries that Dapol offer

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't just Dapol.

 

All N-gaugers moan about Rapido couplers not staying coupled- Farish to Fapol, Farish to Arnold, Fleischmann to Arnold etc, and of stock being so light that you can walk past layouts at some shows and watch the stock bounce off the track.....

 

In OO for couplers read tension locks- Dapol to Dapol, Hornby to Hornby, Oxford to Oxford, Bachmann to Bachmann,  any of these to any other...  The beastly things won't stay coupled until the point at which you want them not to couple, and then try getting them apart cleanly.

 

On trackholding I find those wagons that stick to the track like glue under all circumstances are my ancient whitemetal kitbuilt wagons.  They have enough weight to keep them down.  To improve all other makes I use the self-adhesive lead supplied to do  fake leaded windows stuck on the underside to give the wagon some weight.  Keeps them on the track rather better.  

 

Les

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/03/2021 at 09:04, Caley 439 said:

I've found similar with recent production Dapol wagons, which is a pity as all the older ones I have (from around 2000 to 2010ish) run well and have no issues. I think adding additional weight might help somewhat, and I hope so as I like the various liveries that Dapol offer

 

I was just thinking the same thing- I've probably not bought more than a handful of Dapol wagons in the last 10 years, and most of my stock has been boxed up for several years following a house move and sorting out the garage ready to build a new layout, but I've got quite a lot of older Dapol wagons from the same 2000-2010 period you mention,  and back when they were being run fairly regularly, I don't recall them being unusually prone to derailment- Sounds like there's been a decline in quality, so what's changed?

Edited by Invicta
Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally the narrower couplers are less forgiving than the older broader ones.  Just substituting them without some form of sprung centring mechanism seems to be the main problem.

 

I run a mixture of 21 ton hopper and 12/16 ton open wagons from Dapol, Hornby, Bachmann and Oxford.  None is happy staying on the track when propelled over short pointwork, and my not using finescale track may be an issue in that- the drop at the frog seems to get them.  Broader couplings on a wagon definitely help it stay on the track better by absorbing more sideways play.

 

I have a few Dapol Heinz hoppers with a Dapol chassis (sold separately) underneath a box of a different type - some kitbuilt and some from toyfair scrappers.  these run just as well as any others.

 

As I said earlier weighting stock appears to be  the answer.  All of my full wagons have substantial weight under the load.  Fulls don't derail.  Empties have less weight as it isn't easy to hide that much under the frames.  

 

I talked to one or two US modellers who were horrified at how light UK stock is- and even by comparison with European stock it is light for its size.  Of course the downside of weighting stock is that locos then need a lot more grunt to move a train....

 

Les

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 11/03/2021 at 21:00, Les1952 said:

 

In OO for couplers read tension locks- Dapol to Dapol, Hornby to Hornby, Oxford to Oxford, Bachmann to Bachmann,  any of these to any other...  The beastly things won't stay coupled until the point at which you want them not to couple, and then try getting them apart cleanly.

One of my soap boxes.  Tension locks are universal in British 4mm RTR, and are supposed to be standard and compatible; they're not, even NEM ones differ between companies and in the case of Bachmann, there are 4 different types within the company.  You can get them to work reliably but it is a faff.  I have achieved this by the following means; firstly, I have standardised on one make of coupling as far as possible, Bachmann NEM in various forms in my case for no better reason than that the single biggest supplier of locos and stock on my layout is Bachmann.  There are some cases where Bachmanns cannot be fitted, but these are a minority.  The reason for doing this is to have as many couplings as possible of the same material, and bar/hook profile so that the hooks will engage properly and lock under tension with the bars.  Secondly, and this will be more faff, you will need to establish a standard height above the railhead for the bars.  A combination of straigh and cranked couplings and Parkside NEM dovetail coupling mounts (PA34) is used in this case; the mounts can be trimmed or packed to hold the couplings at a suitable height. 

 

Establish the bar height by measuring it on an NEM coupling mounted on a bogie or locomotive pony or trailing truck and getting those on wagons and locos where the coupling is mounted on the loco main chassis to conform to this height.  I have a height gauge made of a carved out piece of expanded poly.  Standard bar height is essential to prevent buffer lock when propelling; the buffers are effectively cosmetic detail and it is the bars that act as buffers.  The next thing to do is to establish a standard protrusion of the coupling at the bar beyond the cosmetic buffers, and this is where the different Bachmann lengths and the ability to mount the PA34s at different distances behind the buffer beams will come in handy. 

 

Some mountings will be more challenging than others, and you will have to accept that older locos and stock will be the most challenging and may not be capable of bringing within your standard remit.  But I have achieved a very high rate of reliability on my layout with tension locks by the above method, and by paying attention at the tracklaying stage to ensuring that the track is laid level and smoothly joined to the next piece.  Coupling up is automatic, and uncoupling achieved with a shunting pole, a small torch with a piece of old rail strapped to it to which is soldered a suitably shaped piece of stiff wire.  This is placed between the bars and used to lift the hooks.  One can use a 'spade' lifting the droppers for this, but I find the ability of the shunting pole 'hook' to access the underside of the hooks from overhead useful in situations like bay platforms where it is difficult to access from the side.  I don't use ramps, to unsightly for me.

 

I reverted to tension locks when I found, after returning to the hobby some 5 years ago, that I could no longer manage scale couplings.  They are ugly and unrealistic, but no worse than Kadees in that regard and less faffy than Sprat & Winkle, and painted in track colour can be mentally 'tuned out' and ignored.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, The Johnster said:

One of my soap boxes.  Tension locks are universal in British 4mm RTR, and are supposed to be standard and compatible; they're not, even NEM ones differ between companies and in the case of Bachmann, there are 4 different types within the company.  You can get them to work reliably but it is a faff.  I have achieved this by the following means; firstly, I have standardised on one make of coupling as far as possible, Bachmann NEM in various forms in my case for no better reason than that the single biggest supplier of locos and stock on my layout is Bachmann.  There are some cases where Bachmanns cannot be fitted, but these are a minority.  The reason for doing this is to have as many couplings as possible of the same material, and bar/hook profile so that the hooks will engage properly and lock under tension with the bars.  Secondly, and this will be more faff, you will need to establish a standard height above the railhead for the bars.  A combination of straigh and cranked couplings and Parkside NEM dovetail coupling mounts (PA34) is used in this case; the mounts can be trimmed or packed to hold the couplings at a suitable height. 

 

Establish the bar height by measuring it on an NEM coupling mounted on a bogie or locomotive pony or trailing truck and getting those on wagons and locos where the coupling is mounted on the loco main chassis to conform to this height.  I have a height gauge made of a carved out piece of expanded poly.  Standard bar height is essential to prevent buffer lock when propelling; the buffers are effectively cosmetic detail and it is the bars that act as buffers.  The next thing to do is to establish a standard protrusion of the coupling at the bar beyond the cosmetic buffers, and this is where the different Bachmann lengths and the ability to mount the PA34s at different distances behind the buffer beams will come in handy. 

 

Some mountings will be more challenging than others, and you will have to accept that older locos and stock will be the most challenging and may not be capable of bringing within your standard remit.  But I have achieved a very high rate of reliability on my layout with tension locks by the above method, and by paying attention at the tracklaying stage to ensuring that the track is laid level and smoothly joined to the next piece.  Coupling up is automatic, and uncoupling achieved with a shunting pole, a small torch with a piece of old rail strapped to it to which is soldered a suitably shaped piece of stiff wire.  This is placed between the bars and used to lift the hooks.  One can use a 'spade' lifting the droppers for this, but I find the ability of the shunting pole 'hook' to access the underside of the hooks from overhead useful in situations like bay platforms where it is difficult to access from the side.  I don't use ramps, to unsightly for me.

 

I reverted to tension locks when I found, after returning to the hobby some 5 years ago, that I could no longer manage scale couplings.  They are ugly and unrealistic, but no worse than Kadees in that regard and less faffy than Sprat & Winkle, and painted in track colour can be mentally 'tuned out' and ignored.

 

Whilst I agree with over 90% of that there are two other points I would make-

 

1.  If you have small radius track - as industrial prototypes often do - then you need to be able to ensure that narrow coupler heads can stay above the centreline of the track.

2.  You still need weight as a narrow coupler moving sideways can throw a light wagon off the track.

 

I try to ensure that my locos that need to propel have slightly wider couplers if possible for that reason.  The heads supplied by DJM were slightly wider and the slight curve on the outer edge is more forgiving when propelling round curves.  

 

Les

Edited by Les1952
typos...
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Good points, Les.  RTR wagons are not so bad, but plastic kits need ballasting to ‘hold’ themselves to the track, especially when propelling, even in the short trains of my BLT.  I avoid kit conflats and 1plankers because of this, and my Parkside minerals all run in the loaded train.  I use Liquid Lead in the chassis of kits, as my general merchandise opens must be capable of running empty or with loads.  My minimum radius is a no.2 in the fiddle yard. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have had the same issue with my Dapol trucks. I don't like tension lock couplings so always replace them with Kadees. When doing this I tighten up the Dapol NEM pocket mounting screw (inserting a washer if necessary) to cure the "droop". The result is the coupling is at the right height and the Kadee provides enough sideways flexibility to make up for the "tightened" NEM pocket. I also tend to add a bit of weight to the trucks. The result of this is they all run fine now.

Given that I convert all my trucks to Kadees anyway (Dapol or otherwise) the additional cost of making the Dapols run properly this way is negligible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...