[PAPPA.B]

Hi Fathers day coming soon and so is the Dapol and Accurascale Manors. Both are new models and with sound similar priced but DCC fitted my choice £30.00 difference in Dapol's favour Hatton's . If I read it right !
I would pay £30.00 extra if I thought that the Accurascale's performance was better but since these are both new models I don't know. I have been avoiding buying new models until I have some track to run them on . However I got all my engines out to make make an up to date inventory and I noticed I was a bit light in the mixed traffic department and a Manor would fit the bill. As the money for this engine would be coming via fathers day it won't hurt the shed budget . I have a Dapol 43xx which seems to run ok (on a temp track on the floor with no points) and is a nice model . I was tempted with their 61xx but I already had a Hornby version along with two earlier versions . Accurascale I no nothing about and I have no products of theirs to relate to.

I do want to support these new companies but at the same time I would like them to be reliable . So anyone with any thoughts that may help me decide . Jim

 

[boxbrownie]

Accurascale’s Irish Diesel locos run as good (if not better) than anything on the market, the detail is outstanding.

My choice would be Accurascale as I have had many problems with Dapol locos in the past with very poor customer service after, I am putting my money where my mouth is and have pre ordered both the AS Deltic and Class 37 and have no doubt whatsoever they will be “on the money”.

And although completely wrong for my modelling period I have been soooo tempted by the As Manor after seeing some samples.

 

[34C]

I doubt there will be a shortage so why rush?

We have no way of knowing which will show to greatest advantage, until a fair number of owners have their purchases out of the box, on the rails and subjected to independent appraisal.

Bottom line is that both models are coming out of the same Chinese product development and manufacturing system that produces practically all our RTR OO, and I can write a list as long as my arm of the various defects that have troubled various of the brands participating to date. Causes as simple as inconsistently work hardened pick up wiper alloy, a bogie suspension spring over spec. for loading, marginally 'off-dimension' mechanical or electronic components, a slight assembly alignment error, colour matching incapability, packaging moulding a tad undersize causing damage in transit. Seen various examples drawn from that list for all of Accurascale, Bachmann, Dapol, Heljan, Hornby, Oxford Rail, Rapido; there are limitations in what is possible at the price we are prepared to pay. (Any current RTR manufacturer not listed means I have neither bought nor at least had a friend's purchase of that brand's product to have a good look at.)

Personally I would lean toward Accurascale based on the wagons I own, hoping that the shallower flange depth on the wagon wheels will be repeated on the locos. You never know, they might venture a dry side steamer of interest on some future day! (Reduction of the flange depth on RTR OO is something I feel is long overdue.)

Final thought, good chance that at least one model will quickly enough be discounted...

 

[butler-henderson]

Agree, wait and see what issues emerge and equally would expect prices to tumble after a few months on less popular versions.

 

[PAPPA.B]

Yes there is indeed no rush . Most of my engines are Hornby which seems ok. It would good to see others doing well as it gives us all more choice .

 

[boxbrownie]

Yes there is indeed no rush . Most of my engines are Hornby which seems ok. It would good to see others doing well as it gives us all more choice .

Seem OK really isn’t good enough at the price of models nowadays IMHO, I used to pay 60-70 quid for a 4-6-2 years ago and it ran OK, detail was OK and it felt like reasonable value for money, I have recently paid over 200 squids for locos which have had very basic engineering cock-ups which really should have been sorted in development, and having been in vehicle R&E for over 40 years it’s the making or breaking of a reputation.

 

[PAPPA.B]

OK not to overdo the word but when I say ok I mean they seem ok in the fact that I can not run them as there is no layout to run them on! Maybe when I have a layout then I will know for sure . Yes the detail is much improved and so the prises rise but you can't realistically expect them to stay the same however I do agree just as the prise rises so should the reliability . So how else can can I describe my experience with the models I possess is seems ok!

 

[34C]

...Most of my engines are Hornby which seems ok. It would good to see others doing well as it gives us all more choice .

The choice in RTR OO has expanded very significantly since Hornby ceased to be the the near sole supplier of steam locomotive models. When Bachmann launched their 'Blue Riband' range from the late 1990s, Hornby's tender drive, power bogie and traction tyre dependent range of 'old Margate stuff' was immediately mechanically outclassed, and they were forced into catch-up, achieved by transferring tooling and manufacture to China, where the proven technique for superior mechanisms used in American HO production was long established.

This move effectively opened the door to other parties, and now we are well past a dozen brands vying for a slice of the RTR OO pie, and most of it good product. So I am 'in' for a purchase of the Sonic ex-GCR A5 4-6-2T which occasionally showed up in the KX suburban area in the 1950s, and any maker that cares to offer any of B16, E4, J6, J17, J19, J67-69, K2, N1, N5, may lift the cash from my wallet. There's rolling stock too, plentiful opportunity...

 

[PAPPA.B]

Thanks for the replies I am a little reluctant to wait though I get what is being said . I did this with the Robinson Rod GWR version now there does not seem to be many around I wonder if Bachmann will ever release another batch. I have bought some second hand loco's and I'm never sure how much they have been used and how much more mileage they have left. I will not pre-order one and wait a little maybe look at the reviews and comments on here. Jim

 

[boxbrownie]

OK not to overdo the word but when I say ok I mean they seem ok in the fact that I can not run them as there is no layout to run them on! Maybe when I have a layout then I will know for sure . Yes the detail is much improved and so the prises rise but you can't realistically expect them to stay the same however I do agree just as the prise rises so should the reliability . So how else can can I describe my experience with the models I possess is seems ok!

That’s fair enough, my point was the prices as they stand are the correct level, providing the models run much better than they did 30 years ago, and should not need “fettling” by the purchaser which really is a requirement on a lot of the models to get them to run reliably, just a look through the many pages of the forums to discover some very basic problems which should never have been there in the first place.

 

[34C]

...providing the models run much better than they did 30 years ago...

This requires standards work to define the required 'better' of reliable running. This would have to be a DC test, because there was no provision for DCC on UK RTR in 1992.

My personal opinion, if it were possible to 'time travel' to perform a side by side comparison, by sampling and testing N samples new in 1992, and comparing to N samples from 2022, the latter would significantly outperform the 1992 product, simply because of the superior mechanism design's delivery of such as:
more reliable starting,
lower starting speed,
smoother and quieter running throughout the speed range.

Now, whether there's been sufficient improvement, there's another question.

 

[boxbrownie]

This requires standards work to define the required 'better' of reliable running. This would have to be a DC test, because there was no provision for DCC on UK RTR in 1992.

My personal opinion, if it were possible to 'time travel' to perform a side by side comparison, by sampling and testing N samples new in 1992, and comparing to N samples from 2022, the latter would significantly outperform the 1992 product, simply because of the superior mechanism design's delivery of such as:
more reliable starting,
lower starting speed,
smoother and quieter running throughout the speed range.

Now, whether there's been sufficient improvement, there's another question.

Take them out of the box, put on the track (maybe require a running in period) and then turn controller on and the model crawls from a smart smoothly and very slowly without stuttering or finger prodding, it runs at mid speeds quietly with no “jockeying” along the rails.

Too many times (usually with steam locos) I have run them in on a rolling road at mid speed as instructed then on the track they either start and stutter a bit at slow speeds, or just jump from stand still to maybe 4-5 mph scale speed without the smooth accel between, also some sound like they have a mixture of brass and sandpaper gears installed

Ironically I have DMU and Steam locos in 2mm scale from Kato which are now over 20 years old which run beautifully and have done since day one.

 

[34C]

Take them out of the box, put on the track ... and then turn controller on and the model crawls from a start smoothly and very slowly without stuttering or finger prodding, it runs at mid speeds quietly with no “jockeying” along the rails...

That's my simple definition of RTR. Out of the box, straight on the track, it runs smoothly and quietly from dead slow. and up through the speed range, forward and reverse. (Before applying power I always check steam locos for potential fouling of the rods and correct as required, just too risky not to. Reckon on adjusting a third is my experience - note that most of my purchases have Walschaerts gear which is very vulnerable.)

Too many times (usually with steam locos) I have run them in on a rolling road at mid speed as instructed then on the track they either start and stutter a bit at slow speeds, or just jump from stand still to maybe 4-5 mph scale speed without the smooth accel between, also some sound like they have a mixture of brass and sandpaper gears installed ...

I doubt you are instructed to use a rolling road, but then I haven't bought every example of every RTR OO brand's products. Rolling roads are a snare and a delusion in my opinion, they don't properly exercise the mechanism in the way that running on rails does.

My best suggestion, redeploy the RR as a paperweight. Start running and assessing the mechanism on the rails: where it is going to have to work if it is to be of any practical use. (The real railway had a problem trying to assess steam traction on fixed test plant, they could not consistently achieve reliable correlation between performance on the rollers and on the rails; though not for the same reasons as in model form.)

...Ironically I have DMU and Steam locos in 2mm scale from Kato which are now over 20 years old which run beautifully and have done since day one.

Having worked extensively with Japanese engineers in my career from the 1970s onwards, this is a product of their national cultural attitude. I never encountered among them 'never mind the quality, feel the width' ; which is so disappointingly common among a large swathe of the UK population, and has done for so much of the UK's manufacturing reputation, as better educated and diligent competitors outperform us.

 

[boxbrownie]

I find the rolling road extremely valuable for setting up sound decoders, and as all manufacturers I know say run in on D.C. before fitting a decoder for me a rolling road is the only option for me.

 

[34C]

... So anyone with any thoughts that may help me decide .

A look at this pair of side elevation views compiled from production samples, posted on RMweb, might swing it?

Manor Announced for 00

www.rmweb.co.uk

Click on the image in the link to enlarge.

The Accurascale for appearance by a country mile. Look at those wheels, rods, the crosshead; the slightly deeper cab sidesheet with the unequal height boot holes in the cab steps; the height match between loco and tender footplates. That's just at a glance as 'better/accurate' when compared to the Dapol. Detail on the firebox side is 'interesting': an upper row of five wash out plugs on Dapol, four on the Accurascale; were there variations of these fittings within the class? As for the flowerpot chimney on one, correctly parallel on the other...

OK, just manufacturer images of their samples, we're not to see the actual items in our grubby mitts until Q3/Q4 by my estimate. But, assuming that both are mechanically competent, I wouldn't look further than the Accurascale. Here's hoping they think about something from the dry side fairly soon.

 

[PAPPA.B]

Neither look to bad but then i'm not that knowledgeable . I did take a look at a recent book that I bought on the Gloucester former GWR Horton road shed under British rail around the last years of steam there were a few Manors the problem though is that most photo's are taken from a 45 degree angle and the dirty state of the engines thus are not showing the side elevation clearly . However I did see five hole's on the fire box in one picture . Castle and Hall class loco's have five but their fire boxes are larger? As for the chimney they are straight . Some interesting thoughts and opinions from the RMWeb thanks for the link. Jim

 

[Cofga]

Just noticed from the Accurascale website that their model has a 3 pole motor! That is a deal killer right there for me. I cannot understand why they went that route, after all most manufacturers have been using 5 pole skew wound motors for years and more recently switching to coreless motors. So I guess it will be the Dapol for me even though thier GWR Moguls are gut less wonders that are so underweighted they can barely pull themselves up a grade without traction tyres. Hopefully their Manor will be “improved” in that respect.

 

[dwb]

I cannot understand why they went that route

Does seem odd given the just released Deltic with a five pole motor. A google search for "Accurascale manor with 3 pole motor" might turn up other discussions* and maybe some video...

Best regards

David
* Links to competing forums are frowned upon

 

[Cofga]

Does seem odd given the just released Deltic with a five pole motor. A google search for "Accurascale manor with 3 pole motor" might turn up other discussions* and maybe some video...

Best regards

David
* Links to competing forums are frowned upon

DWB, thanks for the reply. I have searched everyhwere and there is no other mention of this that I can find yet it is still there in the technical details on the Accurascale website. @Accurascale Fran seemed to suggest it was a space thing, but if Dapol can get a 5 poll motor in their Mogul and likely the same one in their Manor I cannot see why Accurascale cannot, and for £30 less!

 

[34C]

Just noticed from the Accurascale website that their model has a 3 pole motor! That is a deal killer right there for me. I cannot understand why they went that route, after all most manufacturers have been using 5 pole skew wound motors for years and more recently switching to coreless motors...

Your call, but seen from the perspective of near twenty years of very efficient three pole motors in Bachmann steam models in particular, it would not concern me at all. DCC irons out all variation in response such that you wouldn't know from on track performance what motor is inside. What might surprise is that it is five pole motors that tend to have the most non-linear response that requires straightening out - examples that bolt away on a whiff of current, or won't start moving on less than three quarters of nominal 12V. No difference in smoothness, noise, tractive grunt or longevity in operation, once decoder set up has been optimised.