New OO gauge Class 73

[SRman]

For the record, I contacted Dapol several times using my real name (which is not a secret on these forums either). Emails were ignored and so were queries/comments on their forum and on Facebook on their pages, until finally, after close to a year after the first attempt, they responded. I documented the livery errors (which I did not say were a design fault), and also the PCB faults, which are a design and/or execution fault. I asked if they would offer a replacement PCB when the corrected version appears in new models: once again, they ignored that question while acknowledging that errors were made - it was only after I persevered that I finally got an answer a couple of months ago: they will not replace the PCBs on the earlier models.

Mine arrived with an assembly fault: it had two right hand brake shoes on one wheel. To their credit, the retailer was able to get a replacement bogie frame, complete with the correct brake gear.

Nothing I have said is untrue or insulting or defamatory (I have kept documented records of my contact with them), although I believe there is another person who has been posting questionable material.

I do believe that Dapol were very remiss in not checking the liveries and in not testing the models on analogue and DCC to ensure that they worked properly before sending them out to retailers. 

In my opinion, Dapol's lack of communication, and eventual responses were too slow, and not very satisfactory. As such, I am retaining and detailing my eight Hornby and Lima/Hornby hybrid class 73s, all of which were bought at a fraction of the Dapol price and run perfectly satisfactorily on DCC without having to bodge the wiring, put bits of tape to turn off cab lights, or play with CVs to reverse the direction of travel and the lighting (the Hornby ones don't have lighting but I have some lighting kits and when I do fit them, they will be correct to start with).

I agree with the point that other manufacturers' products have also had the odd problem, and I have corrected some on my own models. More serious faults, such as the faulty PCBs on Hornby's early release class 50, were dealt with by the manufacturer sending out free replacement boards to anyone who requested them. My gripe is that the Dapol model had multiple faults and, for some time at least, no response from the manufacturer, then eventually a negative response.

 

[letterspider]

For the record, I contacted Dapol several times using my real name (which is not a secret on these forums either). Emails were ignored and so were queries/comments on their forum and on Facebook on their pages, until finally, after close to a year after the first attempt, they responded. I documented the livery errors (which I did not say were a design fault), and also the PCB faults, which are a design and/or execution fault. I asked if they would offer a replacement PCB when the corrected version appears in new models: once again, they ignored that question while acknowledging that errors were made - it was only after I persevered that I finally got an answer a couple of months ago: they will not replace the PCBs on the earlier models.

 

Mine arrived with an assembly fault: it had two right hand brake shoes on one wheel. To their credit, the retailer was able to get a replacement bogie frame, complete with the correct brake gear.

 

Nothing I have said is untrue or insulting or defamatory (I have kept documented records of my contact with them), although I believe there is another person who has been posting questionable material.

 

I do believe that Dapol were very remiss in not checking the liveries and in not testing the models on analogue and DCC to ensure that they worked properly before sending them out to retailers. 

 

In my opinion, Dapol's lack of communication, and eventual responses were too slow, and not very satisfactory. As such, I am retaining and detailing my eight Hornby and Lima/Hornby hybrid class 73s, all of which were bought at a fraction of the Dapol price and run perfectly satisfactorily on DCC without having to bodge the wiring, put bits of tape to turn off cab lights, or play with CVs to reverse the direction of travel and the lighting (the Hornby ones don't have lighting but I have some lighting kits and when I do fit them, they will be correct to start with).

 

I agree with the point that other manufacturers' products have also had the odd problem, and I have corrected some on my own models. More serious faults, such as the faulty PCBs on Hornby's early release class 50, were dealt with by the manufacturer sending out free replacement boards to anyone who requested them. My gripe is that the Dapol model had multiple faults and, for some time at least, no response from the manufacturer, then eventually a negative response.

 

 

Hopefully they will have learnt from these errors and can now move forward to producing more excellent models.

[Roy Langridge]

For the record, I contacted Dapol several times using my real name (which is not a secret on these forums either). Emails were ignored and so were queries/comments on their forum and on Facebook on their pages, until finally, after close to a year after the first attempt, they responded. I documented the livery errors (which I did not say were a design fault), and also the PCB faults, which are a design and/or execution fault. I asked if they would offer a replacement PCB when the corrected version appears in new models: once again, they ignored that question while acknowledging that errors were made - it was only after I persevered that I finally got an answer a couple of months ago: they will not replace the PCBs on the earlier models.

 

Mine arrived with an assembly fault: it had two right hand brake shoes on one wheel. To their credit, the retailer was able to get a replacement bogie frame, complete with the correct brake gear.

 

Nothing I have said is untrue or insulting or defamatory (I have kept documented records of my contact with them), although I believe there is another person who has been posting questionable material.

 

I do believe that Dapol were very remiss in not checking the liveries and in not testing the models on analogue and DCC to ensure that they worked properly before sending them out to retailers. 

 

In my opinion, Dapol's lack of communication, and eventual responses were too slow, and not very satisfactory. As such, I am retaining and detailing my eight Hornby and Lima/Hornby hybrid class 73s, all of which were bought at a fraction of the Dapol price and run perfectly satisfactorily on DCC without having to bodge the wiring, put bits of tape to turn off cab lights, or play with CVs to reverse the direction of travel and the lighting (the Hornby ones don't have lighting but I have some lighting kits and when I do fit them, they will be correct to start with).

 

I agree with the point that other manufacturers' products have also had the odd problem, and I have corrected some on my own models. More serious faults, such as the faulty PCBs on Hornby's early release class 50, were dealt with by the manufacturer sending out free replacement boards to anyone who requested them. My gripe is that the Dapol model had multiple faults and, for some time at least, no response from the manufacturer, then eventually a negative response.

 

 

 

Sorry if you thought I was trying to suggest your comments were out of order - that was not the point I was trying to make. Rather I was trying to support your view that customer services have maybe taken a step back in the light of some individuals' postings.

​I have nothing against usernames where individuals post fair and just comments - it just seems to me that in the vast majority of cases where inflammatory comments are made, an alias is used.

 

Roy

[SRman]

Thanks, Roy. 

In turn, I would also like to apologise to you, because I did not intend that post to be aimed at you. I did want to ensure i was not being associated with the troll person, so just stated my point to keep the record straight.

[Gwiwer]

I know this much.

Many 73s are wrongly liveried;
Bits fall off my 73 (one of the few which is almost correctly coloured) every time I try to use it;
A very high proportion of the same manufacturer's signals do not work as they should;

That manufacturer chooses to not reply to emails seeking support and expressing concern for the points above.
That manufacturer is also responsible for delaying projects of interest to me by several years through doing next to nothing with them.

 

That manufacturer will be very lucky if any more of my hard-earned drinking vouchers are ever offered to them.  

[JSpencer]

Thanks, Roy. 

 

In turn, I would also like to apologise to you, because I did not intend that post to be aimed at you. I did want to ensure i was not being associated with the troll person, so just stated my point to keep the record straight.

 

 

Thanks for sharing your experience with us. I do agree - based on that - they leave something to be desired customer service wise, perhaps they are too busy. I guess with the legal fight, it is hard for them to admit anything publicly.

In my own experience, I often find certain small suppliers difficult to contact via e-mail at least.

 

Believe me, I respect your experience and opinion.  But equally wonder if there is now a trend in Chinese manufacturers to not supply spares anymore too (even Heljan seem less inclined these days).

[Roy Langridge]

 

Believe me, I respect your experience and opinion.  But equally wonder if there is now a trend in Chinese manufacturers to not supply spares anymore too (even Heljan seem less inclined these days).

 

I think the Chinese will supply what is asked of them - whether the cost of spares from them is cost-effective or not is probably the issue. I suspect that the manufacturers are now in the position that the minimum order quantities for spares are so huge that they have the equivalent of another x hundred items sat unbuilt - way beyond whatever demand there may be.

 

Roy

[JSpencer]

I think the Chinese will supply what is asked of them - whether the cost of spares from them is cost-effective or not is probably the issue. I suspect that the manufacturers are now in the position that the minimum order quantities for spares are so huge that they have the equivalent of another x hundred items sat unbuilt - way beyond whatever demand there may be.

 

Roy

 

I know some manufacturers on here have stated that spares were ordered but not delivered and now waiting for a future production run. That can mean several things. In the past, with Heljan, we could get easily any spare we want (along as said model had been produced within the past year). Hornby are good in some areas like chassis items and additional detailing packs.... but try getting spare detail parts! Of course managing spares for a large of models is almost certainly a costly affair which is best outsourced (you could say) to spares specialists!

Dapol have had PCB issues on three different classes now. It should be possible to design a generic reliable PCB board and one hopes that Dapol internally at least, have looked at the feedback and dealing with the issue. If they do get a reliable PCB board done, the next step would be to sell as a spare I suppose (I know and can understand that many think the existing PCBs should be replaced free of charge, maybe Dapol did try to see to that with the manufacturer but to no avail, but at least we got a workaround for our models).

[Roy Langridge]

I know some manufacturers on here have stated that spares were ordered but not delivered and now waiting for a future production run. That can mean several things. In the past, with Heljan, we could get easily any spare we want (along as said model had been produced within the past year). Hornby are good in some areas like chassis items and additional detailing packs.... but try getting spare detail parts! Of course managing spares for a large of models is almost certainly a costly affair which is best outsourced (you could say) to spares specialists!

Dapol have had PCB issues on three different classes now. It should be possible to design a generic reliable PCB board and one hopes that Dapol internally at least, have looked at the feedback and dealing with the issue. If they do get a reliable PCB board done, the next step would be to sell as a spare I suppose (I know and can understand that many think the existing PCBs should be replaced free of charge, maybe Dapol did try to see to that with the manufacturer but to no avail, but at least we got a workaround for our models).

 

It has astounded me that every model seems to have a different PCB - that must be additional costs. As you say, a generic PCB must be possible with the various light options possible, even if through soldering jumpers as part of the manufacturing process.

 

Roy

[srihaggis]

Making a mass produced pcb to fit a space is easier than trying to make your tooling fit the pcb...

[Roy Langridge]

Making a mass produced pcb to fit a space is easier than trying to make your tooling fit the pcb...

 

I can't agree with that. The PCB for most locos only needs to be very small, probably not that much bigger than the footprint of a sound decoder. A bit of careful design engineering would allow a common PCB that fitted a lot of locos. For example, Heljan could say that the class 58 body is the narrowest and specify to fit that width. Length would then be determined by the number of components that needed to be fitted plus solder pads (or whatever approach is preferred). Sort of job that we used to love taking on when I was an engineering apprentice many moon ago.

 

Roy

[metropolitan cammell]

I can't agree with that. The PCB for most locos only needs to be very small, probably not that much bigger than the footprint of a sound decoder. A bit of careful design engineering would allow a common PCB that fitted a lot of locos. For example, Heljan could say that the class 58 body is the narrowest and specify to fit that width. Length would then be determined by the number of components that needed to be fitted plus solder pads (or whatever approach is preferred). Sort of job that we used to love taking on when I was an engineering apprentice many moon ago.

 

Roy

Heljan do have genetic pcbs shared by multiple models my 33,hymek and western are the same for example.

[letterspider]

Heljan do have genetic pcbs shared by multiple models my 33,hymek and western are the same for example.

If they have genetic pcb's surely they would be constantly evolving

[metropolitan cammell]

If they have genetic pcb's surely they would be constantly evolving

Sorry generic.

[Gwiwer]

If they have genetic pcb's surely they would be constantly evolving

 

No.  But you need to be running DNA not DCC

[Steven B]

Tooling for new PCB is small change compared to the costs of making the moulds. Having a different PCB for each class of loco add pennies to the overall price. A common PCB wouldn't be appropriate for all models anyway. If they ever did a small tank-engine then there's little point putting a PCB in that supports all the lighting functions of a class 68 for example; they'd be better using the space for more weight.

 

Dapol's circuit board problems wouldn't be solved by having a common PCB. They need to be designed (& tested) correctly and then built/populated correctly.

 

I've had problems with their N Gauge class 86 and HST, caused either by poor soldering of wires (loose wires, wires snapping off) or poor component choice (directional lighting diode packs going pop). Neither should cost much to fix - Bachmann/Farish, Hornby, Kato, Atlas etc all use PCBs yet don't have the problems that Dapol have had (at least in my experience). Farish often use sprung contacts to get power from the chassis to the body for lighting. Dapol use wires with connectors. The Farish method is much more elegant solution, less prone to accidental damage and easier to repair. Other companies use PCBs that bridge a split frame chassis, with body mounted light-pipes to take the light from PCB/chassis mounted LEDs.

 

Happy modelling.

 

Steven B.

[JSpencer]

For bogied diesel locos, it should be possible to have a common PCB. As the demands in lighting etc tend to be the same between one model and the next (cab lights, tail lights, head lights and so on...)

 

Most steam locos tend not to have PCBs other than a small one for the DCC plug but then most steam locos do not have working lights to worry about. I find it always odd that diesels have gone off had lighting pre-fitted, however firebox glow, cab light, plug points for head lamps etc, have yet to appear in British RTR (black label exempt).

Edited April 28, 2017 by JSpencer

[Roy Langridge]

Tooling for new PCB is small change compared to the costs of making the moulds. Having a different PCB for each class of loco add pennies to the overall price. A common PCB wouldn't be appropriate for all models anyway. If they ever did a small tank-engine then there's little point putting a PCB in that supports all the lighting functions of a class 68 for example; they'd be better using the space for more weight.

 

Dapol's circuit board problems wouldn't be solved by having a common PCB. They need to be designed (& tested) correctly and then built/populated correctly.

 

I've had problems with their N Gauge class 86 and HST, caused either by poor soldering of wires (loose wires, wires snapping off) or poor component choice (directional lighting diode packs going pop). Neither should cost much to fix - Bachmann/Farish, Hornby, Kato, Atlas etc all use PCBs yet don't have the problems that Dapol have had (at least in my experience). Farish often use sprung contacts to get power from the chassis to the body for lighting. Dapol use wires with connectors. The Farish method is much more elegant solution, less prone to accidental damage and easier to repair. Other companies use PCBs that bridge a split frame chassis, with body mounted light-pipes to take the light from PCB/chassis mounted LEDs.

 

Happy modelling.

 

Steven B.

 

I wasn't suggesting one that covered steam, and diesel, but hey ho. As for costs, the savings could be significant. Order quantities for PCBs increase (per PCB type) so cost decreases. Only one set of design / tests, not one for each class, spares become possible / cheaper.

 

Roy

Edited April 28, 2017 by Roy Langridge

[Johnfromoz]

I have fitted a Bachmann/soudtraxx decoder to mine and have changed cv33 to 2 and cv34 to 1 which reassigns the lights to the correct direction.

With the cab lights being on all the easiest solution looks to be insulating the wiper between the pcb and roof to turn them off completely though after the western and class 22 with independent switchable cab lights this seems a crude solution to the problem.

Hi all,

 

Further the notorious 73 lighting stuff up and yes, I am a bit late to the party on this , but today fitted my 73 with a Hattons cheapie 21 pin decoder. In trying to fix the lighting direction I have tried both the decoder cv resetting mentioned by Metro Cammell above and the settings put forward by Olivias on their web site, with no success.

 

I realise I can resolder and reverse the wires, but being a lazy sod, wanted to try to rectify the light direction through CVs. Does anyone out there have clue about which CVs and values would work for the Hattons decoder? Am I right in thinking they are vaguely Gaugemaster based in origin?

 

Cheers

[Johnfromoz]

Further to the above, have now unearthed the early advice put out by Dapol themselves about 16 months ago: (CVs 49 & 50) need their values reversing. Repeated here for the benefit of others who may require the info.

 

Thanks to all

 

John

[swiftbeam]

Hi,

 

I have been directed to this thread as I asked a question about the 73.

 

I don't want to double post what I said in my original post, but I would just like to re quote what the guy at Dapol said to me today when I rang. He sounded like an older gent and he seemed to speak with authority on this model.

 

I asked if Dapol knew of any issues with the 73 and if there were, were the problems being corrected. His reply was.

 

"we've actually had very little problems with that loco".

 

The more I think about his reply, the more I'm inclined to cancel my pre-orders for the new 00 GWR railbus and 73!!

 

If he'd have said we have had issues, but we're working them out, I'd have been OK with that and been happy to put up with issues, but this total denial, makes me mad!

[Roy Langridge]

Hi,

 

I have been directed to this thread as I asked a question about the 73.

 

I don't want to double post what I said in my original post, but I would just like to re quote what the guy at Dapol said to me today when I rang. He sounded like an older gent and he seemed to speak with authority on this model.

 

I asked if Dapol knew of any issues with the 73 and if there were, were the problems being corrected. His reply was.

 

"we've actually had very little problems with that loco".

 

The more I think about his reply, the more I'm inclined to cancel my pre-orders for the new 00 GWR railbus and 73!!

 

If he'd have said we have had issues, but we're working them out, I'd have been OK with that and been happy to put up with issues, but this total denial, makes me mad!

My, that is all a bit extreme. Don’t forget that a relatively few moans on here may actually represent and even smaller percentage of sales. Other models that have slated by a few have been reported as having little by way of returns. He didn’t say no problems did he? So perhaps there have only been a few issues, that have now been resolved.

 

Also, trolling Dapol seemed to amuse a few posters a while ago, which may have biased the view.

 

As for me, I love mine.

 

Roy

[leopardml2341]

As for me, I love mine.

Roy

Me too, first Dapol loco I bought and mine has performed without fault from day 1.

 

But, I do tend to carry out routine exams and maintenance on my locos rather than playing trains until they stop working.

 

Yes, the BR blue is a bit 'odd' but nowt that a bit o' weathering didn't sort out. As for bits fallin' off, I know nuffin guv'nor.

 

Edit: added second sentence

Edited October 20, 2017 by leopardml2341

[JSpencer]

I have 2 of these, a 73/0 in green and a 73/1 in Pullman colours.

The only issue to report were the bearing pick ups getting dirty causing it to stutter. Cured by cleaning them with meths (cooking alcohol).

Run perfectly over my bumpy roller coaster like layout hauling decent loads. No bits have fell off mine yet.
(This is not to discount others experience and recommendations, merely stating my own).

Edited October 20, 2017 by JSpencer

[SRman]

When I put together a video recently of various trains running through Newton Broadway, I noted a few stutters on my Dapol 73, which has sound, so the stutters were more obvious. It has behaved perfectly in terms of running qualities up to now. I'll have to try the meths method of cleaning; it will be a lot easier than adding extra pickup wires as described elsewhere.

I still won't be buying any more unless they are properly fixed, electrically and livery-wise ... unless they are very heavily discounted.