Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Ask questions or give advice on any other model railway Manufacturers and Gauges
GWR_fan
Posts: 4822
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Dean Goods, next loco from Oxford Rail

Postby GWR_fan » Sun Jun 25, 2017 1:33 am

Alas, I fear the release has done nothing to diminish the voice of dissent from the minority. For the rest of us, other than the heavy handed lining on the cab sides, I am very pleased. Then again I would go for the unlined version.

Bigmet
Posts: 6211
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: Dean Goods, next loco from Oxford Rail

Postby Bigmet » Sun Jun 25, 2017 6:48 pm

Early reports show much that is good, it clearly looks like a Dean goods which is the first necessity, even though there are aspects to criticise.

Second loco from Oxford and this time clear airspace under the boiler is achieved thanks to a neat and competent looking drive arrangement. (Consider that Bachmann with considerably more experience in models of UK subjects needed several goes to learn how to fully conceal the drive train in their fairly recent group of small 0-6-0 releases, while Hornby were persisting with ancient designs of tender drive until very recently for the 0-6-0s in their range...)

User avatar
D605Eagle
Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:58 am
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: Dean Goods, next loco from Oxford Rail

Postby D605Eagle » Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:52 pm

I think at the moment Hornby still holds the crown for the best 0-6-0 model and mechanisms as in the J15 and Drummond 700 classes. Both are absolute gems. Hornby at their very best.

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 10663
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: Dean Goods, next loco from Oxford Rail

Postby Bufferstop » Sun Jun 25, 2017 11:13 pm

That's what's so annoying they can do it when they try. The Sentinel diesels and the Pecket are first class engineering. Let's just hope they keep trying.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

GWR_fan
Posts: 4822
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Dean Goods, next loco from Oxford Rail

Postby GWR_fan » Sun Jun 25, 2017 11:50 pm

I recall some years ago an American manufacturer of largescale model trains was totally dependent on the designs of but one engineer. A company with a talented design engineer can create wonders when they have him in their employ. If he moves on then the company suffers. This could explain moments of brilliance followed by complete lemons.

Bigmet
Posts: 6211
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Postby Bigmet » Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:27 am

This is most evident with Heljan in the current OO RTR scene. Their output of diesel and electric traction falls into two groups as far as external appearance of the plastic moulded body shells goes. These groups are the 'very convincing' and the 'visibly not quite right'. There has to be something to account for this, but there is no way to get the information from what us a privately owned family firm...

GWR_fan
Posts: 4822
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Postby GWR_fan » Sun Jul 02, 2017 9:56 am

I had hoped to be more forgiving of Oxford Rails with the Deans Goods, however, given the design issues with the Radial, one would think the Deans Goods would be tested to destruction in the factory to guarantee that they would not score another own goal. I will not criticise the cosmetic design features as scale fidelity to me is less important than a reliable, smoothly running chassis. Perhaps we did not get either. Such a shame as failure to impress the market will impact on other planned releases.

One unfortunate downside will be an escalation in the sale price of earlier Hornby and Mainline Deans Goods releases. For months I have seen Hornby Deans Goods on Hattons website approaching the GBP60.00 mark (Mainline GBP40.00 - 50.00) and wondered why anyone would spend so much when a highly anticipated release was coming from Oxford Rails for around GBP90.00. Given the company's reluctance to retool the discrepancies will the model ever gain the acceptance it may have if more care was taken in manufacturing the locomotive. As Hornby have finally discovered, research is as important as actually getting a product to market.

My old Mainline model will have to keep plodding on until an acceptable model is forthcoming. I doubt another manufacturer will step up to the plate given the lukewarm reception the OR model has received, so I have a few spare parts to keep the old girl humming in the meantime.

Edit: Oh what a fickle lot we are. I am finding it hard to believe but members on another site well known for its regular criticism of this model are actually defending a poorly running example as reviewed on You-tube. The reviewer is criticised for not following a comprehensive running-in procedure before determining if the locomotive was defective. In my experience of several hundred locomotives, if a locomotive performs poorly out of the box (assuming no mechanical or electrical defect present) then no matter how much you run it for it's performance will not improve.

The reviewer is even criticised for not checking the locomotive's performance off camera first to ensure its running capabilities. At some point all of us have to test run a locomotive initially and on camera is the honest way to do this. If we spent time fixing a manufacturer's shoddy work before reviewing a model then surely this is dishonest as it is not as presented by the manufacturer. A steam outline locomotive is more critical in gauging its performance due its relative complexity as compared to a diesel/electric outline model. When a manufacturer offers a model for a magazine to review then I am sure the locomotive is thoroughly tested first prior offering it for testing/reviewing. As a purchaser we are not given this opportunity. We are required to take a production sample untested. Surely an honest review would be that of an untested/unrun model chosen at random from the production run. This would be an accurate test of the model. A review done months prior a production release of a model is of relative little use to us other than showing what a model is capable of and not what we as consumers can expect to actually receive.

How many times has a purchaser heard these words from a seller when a locomotive performs erratically out of the box on test in a shop, "Oh Ignore the performance as a good running-in will settle it down." The seller is thinking oh, another locomotive I will have to return unless I can satisfy the customer to purchase it. I do not understand the philosophy of a running-in period for an hour or so in each direction as stated by say Bachmann. If one hour's running in each direction causes sufficient wear to ensure a smoothly running locomotive, then surely further running will impart further wear. At what point does running not cause wearing of the mechanism? . Initial running may erase manufacturing high spots on gears and slight tightness of axles in bearings or rods but surely any running-in will cause further general wear. Running-in will not cure a badly assembled mechanism no matter how convincing the seller is to offload a sale.

I am looking at an international purchase of this model and am unable to see the loco run prior purchasing and am now of two minds as to a purchase or not. All new cars are driven off the assembly line floor and yet our model train manufacturers cannot even test run a loco prior boxing. Perhaps a simple reason is that there would be too many rejects, unless the assembly line QC worker was blind to the model's defects.

User avatar
D605Eagle
Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:58 am
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Postby D605Eagle » Mon Jul 03, 2017 12:26 am

Which review was it? The Brockwell Lane review model seemed to run very well straight out the box.

GWR_fan
Posts: 4822
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Postby GWR_fan » Mon Jul 03, 2017 12:35 am

Sam's Trains review. Sam was even criticised for lubricating the bearings on the flywheel, given that the OR instruction sheet indicated the axle bearings only. Given Sam's maintenance expertise the critics were definitely "shooting the messenger". This is the sort of tripe dished out by these assassins -

".......he appears to be Oxford's ideal punter - loves a pretty looking loco that is cheap but hasn't got the knowledge to know the flaws" OK, given that he spent GBP90.00 on this locomotive, how much is one expected to spend to expect receiving a reliable model? Is it flawed simply because it is "cheap" and thus that is an acceptable excuse? As regards "he hasn't got the knowledge to know the flaws", well I believe him to be the same Sam that lists his maintenance services on eBay and has a good deal of expertise given the number of favourable comments received.

While I do consider Sam's reviews to be rather basic and toyish given the manner in which he tests his models, I do consider him experienced enough to know when a pig's ear is just a pig's ear, unlike that other fellow I/C 82 that oohs and aahhs over everything. To I/C82 if it is heavy and has sprung buffers then it is wonderful. Personally, I would favour Sam to give a more honest appraisal of a model. He is though reviewing just the model he has purchased and giving his opinion on that sample. If he received a good running sample then his review would have been completely different. Sam received a lemon which will show to be the exception rather than the rule (I hope!).

I do wonder though as to the motive of these assassins. They do not criticise the cosmetic defects and yet when a reviewer with some expertise gives his honest opinion of the performance of the model he received then they get out their knives. Reminds me of a certain Roman emperor and his senators.

Richard Lee
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 6:00 am

Re: Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Postby Richard Lee » Mon Jul 03, 2017 6:04 am

@GWR_fan - I have a lot less locomotives than you, so neither my experience nor my skills can be compared with yours. However, I have had a couple that have improved on running in or adjustment.

Firstly, the Bachmann E4 0-6-2T misbehaved on track terribly out of the box. The rear 2 wheels caused derailments. :( It nearly got returned to the UK. However, after running in (which was not particularly convenient on an end to end layout) it runs very well and I consider it to be one of my best runners. Although some kind people had suggest fixes for the rear wheels, I haven't bothered to implement them, although I did copy and paste the text just in case.

The other one was the Kernow/DJM 02 0-4-4T. That was a shocker out of the box, and would derail on a 30" radius curve. If I hadn't have seen the advice on how to alter the back-to-backs of the driving wheels, or I hadn't happened to have a back-to-back gauge, it would have gone back to the UK. It holds the track well now, and doesn't run too badly although running suffers a little because I have to turn off the "electronic track cleaner" because it has a coreless motor.

In general, I hold the opinion that the manufacturer should not assume a lot of skill experience or possession of tools by the purchaser. What would happen if a novice bought it? I only started playing trains a few years ago; we all have to start somewhere, let us be optimistic and hope that there will be some new (inexperienced) modellers around.

GWR_fan
Posts: 4822
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Postby GWR_fan » Mon Jul 03, 2017 6:24 am

Richard,
I am not talking of simple derailments but a locomotive that will not run out of the box. As far as I am concerned a loco that splutters down the track starting and stopping is a non-performer. A derailment may be due numerous reasons, however, a poorly performing loco will require some form of rectification, not simply placing on rollers and running it. I have never returned a loco preferring instead to fix it. I do not like to be defeated by a mechanical monster that misbehaves. I have purchased numerous non-runner locomotives from a popular online website and to date not one has defeated me. Running-in will only improve a mechanism that is within design tolerances.

If a consumer decides to return a faulty purchase then that is his decision, however, the consensus on the other site is to criticise the buyer for not fixing the problem. Why should we the consumer compensate the manufacturer for faulty products by not making them aware of an issue? Many years ago I was personally accused by the president of a major model railway manufacturer for single handedly attempting to destroy his business. My sabotage consisted of merely pointing out the poorly engineered retention of a wheel on an axle. The president was quite outraged in his email to me as he stated that no one had reported the issue and I alone was damaging his business. When I pointed to his own manufacturer sponsored forum that was littered with such complaints his tune changed immediately and he offered free return shipping for anyone who had experienced the problem to have their issue dealt with. It seems no one had claimed warranty on the product and were fixing the problem themselves. Oddly, some months later he requested my design experience on correcting flaws in his trackwork.

GWR_fan
Posts: 4822
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Postby GWR_fan » Mon Jul 03, 2017 7:44 am

I rechecked the video as Sam was criticised for testing a loco with one set of wheels derailed. In fact, the trailing axle set derailed transiting a frog with the loco in reverse just as he stopped it (the body was removed). It traversed the previous point frog in reverse but in that case it entered the frog from the toe end. As it traversed the frog from the heel end in reverse direction it can clearly be seen that the loco derails at the frog. Funny that the assassins make no mention of the derailment preferring instead to criticise Sam for failing to get the wheels on the track.

I did a Google images search and found #2309 in 1914. The dome appears to be painted however, while it has Great Western with a crest, I cannot see if it is lined. I am starting to realise the compromises OR has taken with the model like the location of the washout plugs plus the missing hinge straps on the smokebox door. Obviously, OR did not intend this to be an exact model of #2309 and merely a renumbering of a generic model, much like badge engineering in the automotive trade.

http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrbsh55.htm

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 10663
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Postby Bufferstop » Mon Jul 03, 2017 10:29 am

One cannot really criticise a model for either requiring lubrication, or a period of running in when first removed from the box. It's all down to lubrication or lack of. This is a point on which a manufacturer can be damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. You buy a new automobile from a dealer, the first thing they do is a pre-delivery check. You buy your model from a box-shifter to save money, you open the box for the first time since the manufacturer put it in there, it's either going to need lubricating, or it's going to need the lubrication re distributing around the mechanism. Apart from first deliveries of a new model, who knows how long it has been in there. If you buy face to face from a good retailer, he will unpack the loco and give it a test run, if it doesn't run perfectly it's likely to require either lubricating because it hasn't been, or cleaning and re-lubricating because it has and it's dried up whilst the model has been in the box.
When it comes to things like wheel back to back dimensions there is a case here for dealers to complain to a manufacturer if it's a common problem, either their assembly procedure should leave it within tolerance or their final QC tests should pick up the fact that they are not. Unfortunately for the dealer if the manufacturer doesn't respond there's not a lot they can do about it, other than stop dealing with that company. It's worth knowing that UK case law has determined that a purchaser who discovers and corrects faults "within their competence" does not negate the vendors liability to ensure the item is fit for purpose, also that partial dismantling for the purpose of fitting or installing an anticipated accessory or modification, as in a plug in DCC decoder, does not invalidate a warranty. UK law is commonly an ass, UK courts frequently act like wise men when applying it.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

GWR_fan
Posts: 4822
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Postby GWR_fan » Mon Jul 03, 2017 10:40 am

Some years ago to comply with EU pollution laws LGB stopped releasing their locomotives with lubrication. The lunacy of the decision spread like wildfire and the company soon realised the insanity of this situation. Even though manufacturers supply information detailing lubrication procedures, I honestly doubt that most modellers actually perform maintenance on their models.

Given that the Oxford release is relatively recent, I would not expect lubrication to be an issue affecting running. I have seen locomotives with internal motors in the drive blocks where the factory grease has the consistency of lard. The only remedy is to completely remove the old lubricant and reapply a more modern alternative.

It would seem that the latest Golden Valley Models (Oxford Rails developed) "Janus" may have the troublesome Heljan type motor. I am interested in this model but will await the hype to settle down before purchasing as the Deans Goods may have a similar "cheap" motor.

User avatar
D605Eagle
Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:58 am
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: Dean Goods, second loco released by Oxford Rail

Postby D605Eagle » Mon Jul 03, 2017 2:06 pm

GWR_fan wrote:Sam's Trains review. Sam was even criticised for lubricating the bearings on the flywheel, given that the OR instruction sheet indicated the axle bearings only. Given Sam's maintenance expertise the critics were definitely "shooting the messenger". This is the sort of tripe dished out by these assassins -

".......he appears to be Oxford's ideal punter - loves a pretty looking loco that is cheap but hasn't got the knowledge to know the flaws" OK, given that he spent GBP90.00 on this locomotive, how much is one expected to spend to expect receiving a reliable model? Is it flawed simply because it is "cheap" and thus that is an acceptable excuse? As regards "he hasn't got the knowledge to know the flaws", well I believe him to be the same Sam that lists his maintenance services on eBay and has a good deal of expertise given the number of favourable comments received.

While I do consider Sam's reviews to be rather basic and toyish given the manner in which he tests his models, I do consider him experienced enough to know when a pig's ear is just a pig's ear, unlike that other fellow I/C 82 that oohs and aahhs over everything. To I/C82 if it is heavy and has sprung buffers then it is wonderful. Personally, I would favour Sam to give a more honest appraisal of a model. He is though reviewing just the model he has purchased and giving his opinion on that sample. If he received a good running sample then his review would have been completely different. Sam received a lemon which will show to be the exception rather than the rule (I hope!).

I do wonder though as to the motive of these assassins. They do not criticise the cosmetic defects and yet when a reviewer with some expertise gives his honest opinion of the performance of the model he received then they get out their knives. Reminds me of a certain Roman emperor and his senators.

I've watched that review now and I would agree with Sam, there is something very wrong with it. I wouldn't even have bothered taking the body off, it would be going straight back. I do have two Oxford Adams Radials, both run exceptionally well, so I would say in the is case Sam was just unlucky. It happens.
As for the comments on RMweb, OMG! Its times like that that remind me how glad I don't use that forum anymore. Talk about a load of hypocritical pretentious self appointed knowitalls!. I think the main reason they assassinated Sam is the way he does his reviews. I honestly think he is doing so much to attract younger people into the hobby unlike the assasins with their never ending very loud demand for 100% correct detail who are killing the hobby by driving the costs through the roof.


Return to “Other Model Railway Manufacturers and Gauges”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest