Peter Bedding Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 ..................Now for the equally, if not better O2 and i have 1 or 2 nice ideas for that as well. Thanks Chris, it's been a great start cheers Dave Thank you for the insight. I can only add that the BWT does not run like a dog - in fact it runs rather well, and has no problem with insulfrog points. A number of modellers, self included, have all stated that it was worth a wait to get the requisite quality, and we have been particularly well served. As to the O2, most probably your customers will be the same. But do, please, keep us informed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewartingram Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Hi Stewart, i think you do Dapol a disservice as we could make for ourselves at this kind of standard, and i am looking to unleash the 10000 and 22 upon you all soon to prove it. Shame there's not an icon here for blowing your own trumpet, as i'd probably be using it here. Where the Beattie project was first mooted, the specifications came from Dapol, which were readily agreed to by Kernow as they parralel current model railway thinking. The design of the chassis mechanism was also done by myself at Dapol and Kernow had no hand in this either. However as we laid down a great set of 'rules' as to what was expected regarding the model and we were both on the same hymn sheet it was, like the Sentinel before, it rather easy to do. Chris must be congratulated for 'giving me my head' (no tittering at the back) and letting me loose on what was the most important part (IMHO) as if it runs like a dog it does'nt matter if it looks like a Rolls Royce. However Chris knew what he wanted and subsequent tweeks were made at his suggestion to make things better, and what you see with the Beattie is a welcome meeting of minds. Chris's fastideousness to getting it looking 'just so' combined with Dapol's ability to manufacture to an agreed standard have proved once again that we are here to stay in the OO locomotive business. All coming from an after dinner meeting at Yeovilton 2 years ago and a throw away remark Now for the equally, if not better O2 and i have 1 or 2 nice ideas for that as well. Thanks Chris, it's been a great start cheers Dave Dave, I apologise profusely if I give ANY impression of doing you a disservice! That was not my intention - as stated towards the end, you have produced a magnificent result with the Sentinel (that I have), and it seems also with the BWT (which I don't alas aspire to). I was probably using the concept of your involvement with Kernow in more general terms of any manufacturer/any commision. To be fair, our last sighting of a Dapol 00 loco was many moons ago anyway so we had no idea what to expect from you? I was merely pointing out from my own experiences within a totally different industry that the man paying the money (ie Kernow) needs to have contractual (& hopefully, & indeed it seems to be true in your case, a fantastic working relationship) standards in place & ensure they are met before acceptance, with the manufacturer (ie Dapol). I've seen some awful results in my time, where the comissioner had high hopes but was let down by the manufacture working within the contract but to a poorly written contract so no redress was available! I have no desire to delve into your contracts, pricing or whatever I can assure you, but thanks for the info you have presented here. Best wishes for future production, you have some interesting thing coming up that I shall be hopefully purchasing. Stewart Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 One thing (two actually) strike me here. First the model railway hobby is indebted to a small number of people to get it all right.and not compromise. And second the collective feedback from communicating with the purchasing audience and keeping people in the picture - i.e. communication. Long may both continue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butler Henderson Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Perhaps an explanation as to why the factory is capable of producing black driving wheels in OO but seemingly cannot in N would be useful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Are the loco buffers really 2mm below those of the carriage? if so which is at fault? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy L S Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Perhaps an explanation as to why the factory is capable of producing black driving wheels in OO but seemingly cannot in N would be useful. With all due respect given the comments above, because someone has been prepared to say "no" until they get a standard that is acceptable to them as the one who commissioned the product possibly? Good to note also, that in a similar vein Osborns of Bideford who commissioned a special edition run of the N Gauge "Hall" have now got Dapol to do black wheels. The improvement is so obvious. I fail to understand why anyone suggested (and/or Dapol accepted) that metallic/grey wheels were in any way prototypical when the overwhelming body of evidence (all readily available online and elsewhere) is clear that it is not the case.. Roy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 2ManySpams Posted September 24, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 24, 2011 Are the loco buffers really 2mm below those of the carriage? if so which is at fault? Both are probably correct - the BWT rear buffers really are low, see this image Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 IMO Dapol have come on by leaps and bounds over the last few years. I am really looking forward to receiving my Beattie Well Tanks; so it has been a bit of a wait, however well worth it. We have all seen models that have been developed in a shorter timescale where in some cases the end product then has a number of shortcommings which end up beeing the subject of some very long threads on this forum! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian777999 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Both are probably correct - the BWT rear buffers really are low, see this image I hope that they are not too low on the model as I use three link couplers ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Graham_Muz Posted September 24, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 24, 2011 Brian I can assure you as per the image posted by 2ManySpams that the model is correct to the prototype with its rear buffer beam being lower then the norm. I do not see why 3 links would not still work Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 That's where modelling gets really interesting: accurate reproduction of the prototype leads to an operational difficulty with the model. Buffer height mismatches and locking/derailments were a real feature of the steam railway, especially where curvature was tight of necessity and track profiles not especially good. For some months I was in an office overlooking a confined yard access from a minor branch, and wagons came off the road from just this cause. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian777999 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 As in real life, I am sure that I can find a ''work around'' solution if the buffer height causes problems. No point worrying until I run it and see how it goes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Hale Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Brian I can assure you as per the image posted by 2ManySpams that the model is correct to the prototype with its rear buffer beam being lower then the norm. I do not see why 3 links would not still work Are the NEM boxes at the optimum height? Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibber25 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Anyone notice the difference in buffer height between the Mk2 and Mk3 coaches coupled together at Barrow Hill last weekend? And that's on two vehicles that were not built 80 years apart...... I should have taken a photo for those who think all buffers are the same height. CHRIS LEIGH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Bedding Posted September 25, 2011 Share Posted September 25, 2011 I should very much like to know if a forum reader has successfully fitted a decoder to a BWT. Having received advice that a TCS EUN651 would be appropriate, I duly bought one. Come the time to fit, i discovered that it was too long by several millimetres. So, back to investigation mode. Presumably the Bachman product is a possible fit, but so many readers have given it a bad press, I hesitate. All advice will be welcome! PB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Hale Posted September 25, 2011 Share Posted September 25, 2011 I should very much like to know if a forum reader has successfully fitted a decoder to a BWT. Having received advice that a TCS EUN651 would be appropriate, I duly bought one. Come the time to fit, i discovered that it was too long by several millimetres. So, back to investigation mode. Presumably the Bachman product is a possible fit, but so many readers have given it a bad press, I hesitate. All advice will be welcome! PB Zimo MX621N, but by the same token there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Bachmann product and it is approx. 50% the cost of the Zimo. BTW are the NEM coupling boxes set at the correct height? Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Bedding Posted September 25, 2011 Share Posted September 25, 2011 Zimo MX621N, but by the same token there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Bachmann product and it is approx. 50% the cost of the Zimo. BTW are the NEM coupling boxes set at the correct height? Tim Many thanks Tim, Can I take it then, that you have fitted the Zimo and are happy with it? It would be nice if we could get a wide-base consensus on form, fit, and function. In the end, though, with TCS not entered this time, I guess that it will be a three-horse race (Zimo, Lenz and Bachmann). I'm sorry that I do not have a precise answer to your query on NEM box height, but in my pictures (page 19 above), the coupling height can be seen as compatible with another vehicle. Feel free to call round any time, and we can put various vehicles on my surface table, and try a more scientific approach. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Hale Posted September 25, 2011 Share Posted September 25, 2011 Peter, I can lend you a spare MX621N and you can try for yourself. Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted September 26, 2011 Share Posted September 26, 2011 I have bought a 6-pin TCS decoder in preparation for the arrival of my BR BWT. That could still be a couple of months away, yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
autocoach Posted September 26, 2011 Share Posted September 26, 2011 Apologies Peter, I may have steered you to the TCS EUN651. I have several or order so that may be an issue when they arrive, On the other hand, I lucked upon a Soundtraxx MC1Z102P6 NEM 651 standard decoder while visiting a hobby shop in Portland Oregon and as my TCS decoders are several weeks away, I bought one. When I arrived home last night my BWT had arrived. This morning after a good nights sleep I fitted the decoder, At first I thought it was too long too. But I pushed it in a bit and then put the smokebox door back on and it fits. The smoke box door fits too. I now have to set up my NCE programming track and PowerCab and 3329 will have its first locomotive assignment running up and down the tracks of my slightly altered vision of Padstow,,,, You might try the TCS decoder again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
autocoach Posted September 26, 2011 Share Posted September 26, 2011 In answer to the question about successfully programming for DCC.... The answer is YES....3329 is now happily running back and forth on my warped Padstow Plank line using the Soundtraxx MC1Z102P6 NEM 651 standard decoder...and it only cost US 21.99. It has exited stage left and returned with a pair of Maunsell coaches (BTK-BCK) in emulation of a Bodmin service.... It needs a bit of a run in which will have to wait until I can get it to the 180 foot dogbone layout at my local Train store after their "Open House" (read UK trainshow) this coming weekend. Unfortunately they are closed today. I will post a pic on my Padstow thread later today. Peter, be sure the pins fit all the way in. On my first try I had them stuck below the actual receptacles. Also remember the card goes back in at about a 40 degree angle in the smokebox when the decoder is installed. Tight fit but it works. Yes the BWT 3329 is running under DCC on my layout... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
autocoach Posted September 26, 2011 Share Posted September 26, 2011 Unfortunately it appears the TCS EUN 651 is 14.4mm x 9.12mm whereas the Soundtraxx MC1Z102P6 is only 13mm x 9mm. That 1.4 mm makes the difference in fitting in the tight BWT smokebox. I have been using TCS decoders as standard and have never had any problem with them. The MC1Z102P6 like the Bachmann 6 pin decoder does not support the CV29 setting for running on DC. You have to remove the decoder and probably put the blanking plug back in to run on dc. Actually as Bachmann US is using Soundtraxx sound systems in their US locomotives, I wonder if they are not using the Soundtraxx 6 pin decoder. Or have a (presumably licensed) copy of it made in China. Soundtraxx on their website claim all their decoders are manufactured in the US at their facility in Colorado. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterH Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 How do all, My own excellent model arrived today, and have made a video of it running on the South West Herts. MRS test track. Enjoy! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tender Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 I should very much like to know if a forum reader has successfully fitted a decoder to a BWT. Having received advice that a TCS EUN651 would be appropriate, I duly bought one. Come the time to fit, i discovered that it was too long by several millimetres. So, back to investigation mode. Presumably the Bachman product is a possible fit, but so many readers have given it a bad press, I hesitate. All advice will be welcome! PB Hi Peter. I've fitted a Lenz Silver Mini+ to my BWT. No problems getting it in and runs superbly. A bit pricey compared to some other offerings. BTW thats a very nice looking coach you have on the back in your pictures. Regards Ray. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
£1.38 Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Thinking about buying one for gauge conversion - what diameter are the axles, please? Has anyone done one to EM or P4 yet, or even thinking about it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.