Jump to content
 

Dapol 101


Butler Henderson

Recommended Posts

Picked up a thread on Yahoo that Dapol are to release a Met Cam 101 at Warley.............in N :huh:

 

Seems very strange given the forthcoming release from Farish unless its an assumption its N and its actually OO ?

 

Amazing stupidity if it's N - duplicating a model is bad enough, but duplicating one that's an update (and hence plenty of secondhand ones available) seems madness. Whilst many will immediately ditch their old Farish 101s for new models for good reason (myself included) I'm sure there are some that won't. Just the same as the old Trix 2MT tanks that still sell for good money - that must take some sales from Dapol.

 

Reports are that Bachmann are trying to cover as many variants with their tooling as possible, hence some livery changes to the promised releases.

 

I do wonder too why Dapol are announcing yet more new models given how far behind they now are:

86 supposed to be released Sept 09, now April 10, 2010 liveries now backing up

58 still waiting, 09 catalogue now May 10

Britannia supposed to be released at Warley 09 - seems only at 2nd shot stage, liveries already dropped as 2009 and 2010 releases amalgamated

B1 - still to come

HST still to come (some advanced CAD shown)

26 still to come

56 still to come

Pendolino still to come

121 still to come

142 still to come

+ OO + reliveries/re-releases

 

That's some list (which is great for N - the range of stock forthcoming is mindblowing) - I'd prefer they just got on with that than started announcing yet more, especially duplicates. Seems Dapol are now like Bachmann used to be - lots of promises, but lots of waiting for them to turn into reality.

 

Cheers,

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Picked up a thread on Yahoo that Dapol are to release a Met Cam 101 at Warley.............in N :huh:

Seems very strange given the forthcoming release from Farish unless its an assumption its N and its actually OO ?

 

Why don't you talk to Dapol about it and let us know?

 

G.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing stupidity if it's N - duplicating a model is bad enough, but duplicating one that's an update (and hence plenty of secondhand ones available) seems madness.

 

Thats a bit unfair! This is a RUMOUR - not an announcement.

 

I do wonder too why Dapol are announcing yet more new models given how far behind they now are:

 

They aren't

 

That's some list (which is great for N - the range of stock forthcoming is mindblowing) - I'd prefer they just got on with that than started announcing yet more, especially duplicates. Seems Dapol are now like Bachmann used to be - lots of promises, but lots of waiting for them to turn into reality.

 

It looks like you're trying to turn this rumour into reality...

 

We will know if and when Dapol announce something - I'm sure Dave would be on here telling us all.

 

This kind of comment is unhelpful and completely unjustified. You are attacking Dapol based on a rumour that has little or no basis in fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This kind of comment is unhelpful and completely unjustified. You are attacking Dapol based on a rumour that has little or no basis in fact.

 

Merely passing on what has already been posted on other lists from those who have talked to Dapol and found that was what they were saying....apparently Dapol were stating 101 and that they didn't know of Bachmann's plans.

 

Either way, I hold my opinion - they are now well behind with delays left right and centre, and whilst I'd rather there were delays and models are good, it's all very reminiscant of criticism Bachmann have received in the past for late models.

 

Dapol will no doubt respond though as readers of this and other lists....

 

Cheers,

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gents

 

Regardless of what may or may not have been posted on other forums or lists which may or may not have been attributed to Dapol or any other manufacturer, such speculation and comment should ideally be reserved until after formal announcements have been made from any manufacturers concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After the 121 it would seem sensible to do other 64' length DMUs like the 116-118 (or even 120s). The 101 is a 57' chassis so will involve more work.

 

Having said that the 101 is a tempting choice for a manufacturer as it was the most numerous 1st Gen DMU by a fair margin, worked all over the country and has plenty of liveries. If Dapol are doing a 101 (and that is still an if) then they must have this fact in mind. Bachmann have been promising a revamped 101 for years but they have also been promising the 9F and that did not stop Dapol beating them to the market with a good selling product.

 

Like others I would rather manufactuters avoid duplication but I cannot entirely blame Dapol. Just because Bachmann have been talking about the 101 for years does not give them exclusive rights. Given how well Dapols recent DMUs have sold I guess they feel there is a good market for multiple units and going back in time seemed a logical choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A class 117 would be a more logical follow on from the 121.

 

Dapol did say of the 121 "we are also making provision within the tooling for a replacement front end incorporating high intensity headlights, and a replacement roof/headcode plus engine to allow class 122 to also be made at a later date".

 

Cheers

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like others I would rather manufactuters avoid duplication but I cannot entirely blame Dapol. Just because Bachmann have been talking about the 101 for years does not give them exclusive rights. Given how well Dapols recent DMUs have sold I guess they feel there is a good market for multiple units and going back in time seemed a logical choice.

 

 

Yes, you're right they don't have exclusive rights. FarBach do seemed to have 'reserved' this for ten years, perhaps unreasonably, by putting it in every years catalogue for a decade but without any sniff of actual development and delivery (although about five years ago I understand it was claimed that they had a working example 101 chassis at Barwell and needed to convince the Chinese but nothing has yet come of it).

 

You can understand Dapol looking and thinking perhaps they're not going to do it this year again, perhaps not even next year, or perhaps not for ever how much longer. I even understand that Dapol laser measured a real class 101 before the launch of this year Farish brochure re-confirming yet again their intention to do a class 101. But I do still get the impression that it's all bit, well, un-necessary.... and could have been avoided if there had been a little more trust, a little more communication, a little less posturing, a little bit more honesty, a little bit more adhering to promises in a reasonable timescale, a little more delivery and a little more whatever between the two companies.

 

And then us N gauge enthusiasts could have had two new MU products - and perhaps one an EMU. ;)

 

G.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bachmann confirmed at the N Gauge Show last year (if not before) they were doing a new 101. The chassis on the 108 I understand was originally developed for the old 101 then they found the body tooling was damaged beyond repair. Having done the research for the OO 108 it was relatively simple for them to do a N gauge one. Dapol would do a lot better to come up with a 116 / 117 / 118.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bachmann confirmed at the N Gauge Show last year (if not before) they were doing a new 101. The chassis on the 108 I understand was originally developed for the old 101 then they found the body tooling was damaged beyond repair.

 

Developing a chassis for a 101 but bringing out a 108 instead is not a very clear or obvious way of confiming it - and a pretty odd one IMO. I can fully understand Dapol not reading it that way. The 108 has been out for nearly two years and in that time still no development or sign of a 101 body and neither is it one of their OO range - I certainly wouldn't have wanted to put money on it really happening after the history. But it's all by the by now; all bets are off, except for who will be first :lol:

 

G.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Developing a chassis for a 101 but bringing out a 108 instead is not a very clear or obvious way of confiming it - and a pretty odd one IMO. I can fully understand Dapol not reading it that way. The 108 has been out for nearly two years and in that time still no development or sign of a 101 body and neither is it one of their OO range - I certainly wouldn't have wanted to put money on it really happening after the history. But it's all by the by now; all bets are off, except for who will be first :lol:

 

G.

 

Eh ? September 2009 - N Gauge Show - Bachmann are to produce a new 101. How is that confusing to Dapol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh ? September 2009 - N Gauge Show - Bachmann are to produce a new 101. How is that confusing to Dapol

 

Simply because they have effectively been saying that every year in their catalogue since they took over Graham Farish and have still failed to have anything to show for it. It's a bit like the boy who cried wolf, after hearing it so many times without anything substantial to back it up one starts to wonder if it's really true or if and when it will actually really happen.

 

Consequently it's not that difficult to understand how Dapol might not have believed it that particular time. And it's quite possible that in September last year Dapol had already decided and started to make plans for their own class 101 - after all I understand that have already laser measured a real one. We are where we are - it's pretty pointless trying to blaim one more than the other; IMO they're both culpable.

 

G.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"...and could have been avoided if there had been a little more trust, a little more communication, a little less posturing, a little bit more honesty, a little bit more adhering to promises in a reasonable timescale, a little more delivery and a little more whatever between the two companies...."

 

It's probably worth reminding everyone that these days, discussion between competing firms is illegal under the Competition Act and likely to lead to significant fines from the Office of Fair Trading. Just because we are talking about toy trains ;) doesn't exempt them from the same laws that apply to all businesses and which are very strictly enforced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the original intention was for Bachmann to make a new chassis for the existing Farish 101 body and release that like they had done with their previous Class 47 etc, but then they found out that the body tooling was knackered. So they then announced that they were making a whole new model with which they are taking their time as usual.

 

Perhaps Dapol should pretend that they are releasing a 101 model as then Farish will then magically be able to get their version to market in record time, like they always do when they have a bit of competition! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...