Large Scale Central

Bachmann Quality Control (or lack there of!)

I have no argument with the ‘quality’ of the Bachmann Anniversary range, as stated earlier I have made over 20 Annie loco purchases. If there was a quality issue then I would have stopped purchasing previously. I have the manual dexterity to fix something that is not right. The majority of so-called ‘modellers’ these days, have very little ‘manual’ skills, preferring a ready to run loco, complete with handrails fitted. For these people, manufacturer ‘service’ centres are a must, as if something breaks then who else do they turn to. If something breaks for me, then if unable to repair myself, then it is into the spares box.

The problem at Bachmann is the point of assembly. It seems that we are forever hearing of pieces rattling in the box on arrival. Too much faith is invested in the power of superglue and little time invested in mechanically fastening pieces. Superglue will deteriorate over time. Many locomotives, like the one that I purchased, have been sitting idle in wharehouses for years ‘deteriorating’. However, rattling pices after several years sitting idle is not the problem. There are systematic quality problems at the point of assembly and we are really to blame, because to make the item attractive to the consumer, the manufacturer is forced to drive assembly/manufacturing costs down to maximise profit at the expected wholsale cost to the distributor.

Several years ago I was termed a racist by a person on another forum because I made the statement that the assembly worker in China is employed to do a job on the assembly line. It could be a $0.50c toy or a $5000.00 live steam locomotive. He is employed to assemble the item in front of him, whether he is interested in the item or not. On the contrary, an assembly worker building a live steam loco in England is a live steam fanatic. He is doing the job because he wants to do that particular job, not merely because of economic necessity. This is where the work ethic comes into play. If the worker is interested in the item that he is building then he will do his best. If he is disinterested then he will do what he can in the assembly timeframe that he has on the process line.

As consumers, we have told manufacturers that we want our models to be cheap and good to excellent quality. While they are inexpensive then we accept a degree of poor quality control. This is the tradeoff - cheap versus quality. However, when a manufacturer starts producing an expensive item, then we expect that the assembly techniques will match the engineering that has gone into the model. We will not tolerate lapses in quality control.

In Australia, if one were to purchase a Bachmann Spectrum Centennial mogul, then at retail level the shop price is around $1000.00. There is no ‘street’ price. A ‘comparable’ LGB mogul sells for the same price. If price were the determining factor, then one would assume that both were of equal quality. The reality is that one is and one is not!

Cale,
with reference to your posting, the loco in question is an old 2119D Lake George & Boulder mogul made in the late 80’s. The circuit board is part of a voltage regulating circuit. From memory the early moguls did not have low voltage smoke units/lights, so I am unsure of the exact function of this board (18 volt smoke unit?) or the ‘abuse’ that this loco has been subjected to. I believe that the operator may have derailed the loco over a switch and was possibly using a power pack putting out far more amperage than was required.

   However,  full kudos to LGB as even with the board,  a crispy critter,  the loco still runs,  albeit with no smoke fitted.  Poster does not comment as to operation of lights.    My take on this is that all manufacturers should similiarly 'fry' their smoke circuit boards before dispatching to their customers!!!!!

<<Bachmann doesn’t run wires from the sound contact plug into the tender>>
Huh?
I’m on my second Px install on new Bachmann 2-8-0’s in the last two weeks.
The first one had all the necessary plugs and wires for the sound actuator.
Kevin, I have been installing PX’s since they were first available. Let see–maybe 15 years.
I have been taking locos apart since I first got into large scale–1986.

<<I can, a brand-spankin’ new LGB mogul. Took it out of the box, disassembled it, and put a proper coat of paint on it. >>
That’s called Kitbashing, in case you didn’t know. You weren’t rebuilding them just to make them run.

<< (i.e., generations 1 - 3 Big Hauler>>
Those are the ones.

Kevin, You can defend Bachmann until you are blue in the face.
They are and always be junk (mechanically and electrically) until they prove to me to be better.
j

Tim Brien said:
Cale, with reference to your posting, the loco in question is an old 2119D Lake George & Boulder mogul made in the late 80's. The circuit board is part of a voltage regulating circuit.
Yeah, I know, but I thought it'd fit here, if for nothing else...a grin

I have bought 12 Bachmann Units since getting into LSTrains just 4 years ago.

All 4 Dizzies ran like a champ out of the box, minus the loose steps.
All 4 Annies (Sams Sets) ran like clock work, even if painted ugly.-and 2 Christmas Trolleys-both fine runners.
The Rail-truck was a fine runner on track power under the tree, even better with the RCS and Battery.
The American- NOS purchased at Christmastime this past year, had everything there and ran fine on it’s test loop.
The Used Climax ran surprisingly good on it’s test run at the SELSTS and once at home on the loop. the VHS tape was deteriorated beyond repair-bummer!
The Used Porter (slate creek 9) ran really well on the test loop and is in pieces now awaiting RCS.

The Bachmann Units listed above are considered “mine” due to the level of detail and scale qualities. That said, I’d really like a Forney…

For the Kids:
I have one LGB SV Diesel in the shop now, nearing completion of RCS and Dallee…Traded for an Annie Set…A gift for my Eldest-he wanted a “Diesel” for his Birthday. It ran good on the test loop, and I’m sure it will do fine on the main. I like how it is built and think it will serve the kids and I well…it is a little clunky, but small hands and clunky go good together!–anybody have an idea about replacing the bell with air horns on the hood?

I have a few Macks that are real good runners, minus the one that shorted out inside the block before I could convert to Battery. The rest are Bullet/Luke Proof-so far!

I buy what fits me, and I’ve yet to have an outta box failure from the any of the above, New/NOS/Used…guess I’m lucky!

cale

I’ve had two 2-8-0s apart, a 2-6-0, and a 4-4-0. None had wires leading from the plug on the tender for sound contacts into the tender. From my experience, none had them, therefore I came to the conclusion that they are not included. Perhaps my experience with non-sound-wired tenders is the same as yours with inoperable locos. :slight_smile: Maybe those wires are an “every-other-tuesday” thing at the factory. Who knows?

Quote:
...

I have been taking locos apart since I first got into large scale–1986.


Well, I’ve got 10 years on you, then, junior :wink:

Quote:
...

You weren’t rebuilding them just to make them run.


You didn’t specify making them mechanically better. You merely mentioned “better.” Aside from tightening screws, I’ve done nothing to make my B’mann locos mechanically better. I’ve replaced no gears (except on early 1st generation locos), and just kept things oiled. All run very smoothly.

Quote:
...

Those are the ones.


Generations 1 through 3 were $#!+. Why do you think there’s generations 4 and 5? The early 2-4-2s and 0-4-0 porters were equally horrid. Basing current performance on those is very much akin to saying a 2008 Toyota is crap because the first horse and buggy rode rough. I’d bet the ones you’re working on now run smoother than those early ones after you make sure the screws are tight. (And no, I don’t see having to tighten screws as an outlandish requirement for running a locomotive.)

Quote:
...

Kevin, You can defend Bachmann until you are blue in the face.
They are and always be junk (mechanically and electrically) until they prove to me to be better.
j


From your perspective, and what you characterize as “quality,” you’re right, and there will be no convincing you otherwise. From my perspective and what I characterize as “quality,” your arguments don’t hold water. SO, you buy what you want for the reasons you want, and I’ll buy what I want for the reasons I want, and we’ll both be happy.

Later,

K

Ah, Kevin.
You’re too young to remember the “Toyopet”.
176 new features, who could ask for more?
So, for the most in driving pleasure, you’ll be so relaxed,
in the Toyopet, the newest, imported family car!

We can compare the latest Toyota to the earliest, and since the early one was so bad they had to re-name it, well, I remember them, and you won’t see one of them in my driveway!

Or, the suBARu.
As opposed to the SUbaru.
I even test-drove one.

If it ever got to 55MPH, it was down-hill being pushed by a Model “T” Ford!

Yanked off the market, re-introduced with a different pronunciation.
Or, an emPHAsis on the wrong syLABle.

What surprises me is manufacturers that seem to learn from the mistakes, correct them, and then throw in a whole new list of problems to deal with on the next run.

Quote:
...

Or, the suBARu.
As opposed to the SUbaru.
I even test-drove one.
If it ever got to 55MPH, it was down-hill being pushed by a Model “T” Ford!


Hmmm, if it was the 1980 2-door hatchback, I know what you’re talking about. The favorite prank of my friends in high school was for people to pick it up and move it. I was never 100% sure where I’d find it at the end of the day. The capstone was when they carried it to the pitcher’s mound on the baseball diamond.

Quote:
...

What surprises me is manufacturers that seem to learn from the mistakes, correct them, and then throw in a whole new list of problems to deal with on the next run.


I think engineers call that “job security.” :wink: So long as they’ve got something to “improve” the next go-round, they’re happy. :slight_smile:

Later,

K

Curmudgeon said:
BIG SNIP What surprises me is manufacturers that seem to learn from the mistakes, correct them, and then throw in a whole new list of problems to deal with on the next run.
.............caused by not listening to the tester(s) who found the original problems and worked out the fix(es) for them.

Just y’all wait until the ducking and weaving starts over the latest mechanical problem with the K-27.
…and believe me, IMHO it is just as big a problem as the loose counterweights.

Kevin Strong said:
I think engineers call that "job security." ;) So long as they've got something to "improve" the next go-round, they're happy. :)

Later,

K


Kevin,

Having dealt with the breed for most of my adult life, I’d say it’s a case of very selective and short memory. :wink: :slight_smile: :wink:

Kevin Strong said:
Quote:
...

I can’t recall taking apart any of my LGB locos right out of the box to make them “better”.


I can, a brand-spankin’ new LGB mogul. Took it out of the box, disassembled it, and put a proper coat of paint on it. Gone was the red boiler and green cab and tender. Oh, and then there was the 2017 “americanized” Stainz. Discarded every inch of anything that still looked german, re-wrapped the boiler, laminated the cab with mahogany… Oh, repainted garishly green stock car, brilliantly yellow box car, grotesque gondola… Definitely improved each and every one of them. After that, dad and I stopped buying LGB.

Kevin, you are still confusing concepts and refuse to learn. Design is not
quality control, this is obvious to most people but I have pointed it out
for you in my previous email. If you choose to repaint your LGB Mogul straight
out of the box this is your personal choice, as much as it is LGB’s marketing
choice to bring them to the market in whatever colours they please. By
using your logic I could say that all Bachmann Spectrum is junk because they
are wrong scale for me since I prefer 1:22.5 for 3ft prototypes. Scale, detail,
colours, etc. are all aspects of the design and I doubt that the locomotive
falling apart and failing to run straight out of the box are Bachmann’s
intended design, rather than systematically poor manufacturing standards,
assembly and quality control. If you have information that these are
Bachmann’s intentions please let us know. Neither me nor anyone else here I
believe is bashing Bachmann, we are pointing out the obvious and widely known
in the hope that Bachmann will bring these QC matters to the same quality level
as their designs.
However, you will not achieve much for Bachmann’s QC improvement by bashing
LGB designs. In 1968 when LGB started and you were probably not born yet,
their detail level was pretty high for a locomotive intented as an indoor
outdoor toy. My first ‘large scale’ plastic locomotive had much less detail
and worse proportions back in 1963. Compare the detail on some of the more recent
products such as Heidi. You seem to like to pick on the Mogul, but have you
actually ever measured one? In fact after the D&RGW #50 it is one of the more
accurately scaled LGB products, apart from some of the meter gauge
range. Finally, please realise that when LGB wanted to release more detailed
yet still sturdy products, they went to Aster and produced a series of models
of high detail, high fidelity and (in almost all cases) supreme performance.
For these reasons I continue to buy LGB but my last Bachmann was their Shay.
Best wishes from Tokyo, Zubi

<>
<Well, I’ve got 10 years on you, then, junior>

Kevin,
I should have said LGB scale locos and cars. :slight_smile: :slight_smile:
Back then, you were still in high school chasing cheerleaders. Or maybe grade school…

I think we’ve had our fun with this topic, don’t you?
You’ve got your ideas and I’ve got mine.
Oh, by-the-way, there ain’t a thing wrong with a BBT Bachmann.
Oops, that’s also an aftermarket improvement, isn’t it.
I wonder why there was a need for that?
I don’t see anyone making an after market LGB drive.

Enough of this crap, lets move on.
You ain’t all bad, I do like your articles in the magazine…

TOG

Actually, having worked in a manufacturing environment, I personally believe QC STARTS at the design bench.
Absolutely no amount of QC at the end of the production line can fix a bad design.
ESPECIALLY if what they are checking for is in accordance with design criteria.

Beauty is skin deep, but ugly goes clear to the bone.

Curmudgeon said:
Actually, having worked in a manufacturing environment, I personally believe QC STARTS at the design bench. Absolutely no amount of QC at the end of the production line can fix a bad design. ESPECIALLY if what they are checking for is in accordance with design criteria.

Beauty is skin deep, but ugly goes clear to the bone.


Curmee, Obviously! But a bad quality control at the level of manufacturing, assembly and final QC can spoil the best design and this was my point. Bachmann’s design is top notch in my opinion (glitches happen to everyone) but they spoil it themselves by failing to implement QC level matching their design level. Best, Zubi

To me, the long-time plea to Bachmann mg’mt. is simple:
TEST THE PRODUCTS FULLY BEFORE DELIVERY

None, and I repeat, NONE of the problems that Dave Goodson has uncovered in his continual post-retail loco sales testing have been hidden. Any of us, after making our own purchases, and looking in the right direction, could see the evidence he discovers – just that he finds out sooner. Once the locos were run – on a track configuration that included more than 24" of straight track and some turnouts – the problems were noted and Dave offered us and Bachmann, Corp. his remedy.

Kudos, Dave!

Meanwhile, there are those who did not and have not had any production problems. Fine. Say so. And, you do. However, that is not evidence other purchasers are fantazing imaginary problems.

OK, Bachmann, when are you going to realize that this limited marketplace is ready for products that you are willing to produce that are tested, truly tested, and offer the satisfaction of NOT having a web site thread of disappointed users?

Can anyone deliver the message any clearer?

Selah,
Wendell

HOWEVER, pleas reported to me by Dave to have a pre-production sample, or even a sample pulled from the assembly line before boxing and shipment for his testing has proved to be absolutely futile.

Wendell,
it is to Dave’s praise that he continues to post findings on problems related to products. The usual scenario is that a whistle blower is crucified into silence. Several high profile modellers, many years ago, were severely rapped over the knuckles when reporting their findings on problems and required modifications needed to fix the problems on a well-known motor drive block. I also was ‘reprimanded’ by the same person over another problem which I considered to be important, but was met with not only abuse from the emailer, but denial that the problem existed. I was accused of inventing the problem to harm the future of the particular company. I retained the emails for my bedtime reading.

Quote:
...

I should have said LGB scale locos and cars.
Back then, you were still in high school chasing cheerleaders. Or maybe grade school…


I got my first LGB set in 1976 at the tender age of 5, actually. Been playing with/disassembling/kitbashing them pretty much ever since. Dad, being an electrical engineer, made darned sure I knew how to wire things properly at an early age. I think it was more so he wouldn’t have to keep fixing what I broke…

As for the BBT chassis, you said it best–generations 1 through 3 were “herky-jerky POS’s.” They needed something, and Barry’s chassis is absolutely bulletproof. But like LGB’s similarly bulletproof chassis, it emphasizes ruggedness at the expense of scale fidelity. (i.e., the lacy nature of an bar-frame locomotive is lost with those styles of chassis.) I personally prefer the openness of the bar-frame locos, so I’m willing to deal with a drive that may not be quite as robust.

Zubi, we must be reading each other’s posts through odd translators. I get what you’re saying about the differences between design and QC. Bachmann has QC issues, that’s very evident, and I don’t deny that. But they’re not insurmountable; most can be corrected by a simple going-over with a screwdriver as part of routine maintenance. They’re more often plagued by design innovations gone awry. As TOC said, they keep seeming to invent new sets of problems with each new product. There’s definitely room for improvement, but it’s not as horrific as you or John seem to believe.

You also operate under the assumption that I don’t like LGB. Quite the contrary; they make a very robust, rugged product that I have a lot of respect for, regardless of the fact that I’m not personally interested in any of their models. I’ve been very favorable on every LGB product that’s crossed my desk for review. My “beef”–if you can call it that–is that they’ve got so much untapped potential.

Let’s put drivetrains aside, and go with just simple cosmetics. Bachmann has their “big-hauler” line of cars which are a bit lacking in detail, a bit coarse, and may or may not be necessarily to scale. I think it’s fair to describe LGB’s product line in those terms, also. Bachmann also has their “Spectrum” line of cars, which are almost completely accurate with very fine details, down to prototypical Camel Co. door latches on the box car. LGB has the knowledge and the potential to produce models with this level of detail, built with LGB’s reputation for quality. (Mass produced, not the limited-edition Aster collaborations.) While I respect their commitment to their “program,” it’s frustrating as a consumer knowing that they have the capacity to compete with Bachmann and Accucraft in that arena, and raise the quality ante for those guys but simply refuse to do so. (The same holds true for their unwillingness to compete directly in the 1:29 market).

Recall that the crux of my argument isn’t that Bachmann (or anyone) is being unfarily accused of sub-par products, but that they’re not alone in that, and everyone can stand to improve on durability and/or detail fronts. It doesn’t matter where you are, there’s always room for improvement.

Later,

K

“…knowing that they have the capacity to compete with Bachmann and Accucraft in that arena…”

Well written Kevin, although I believe the above “Have” should be “Had”…

cale

Kevin Strong said:
... You also operate under the assumption that I don't like LGB. Quite the contrary; they make a very robust, rugged product that I have a lot of respect for, regardless of the fact that I'm not personally interested in any of their models. I've been very favorable on every LGB product that's crossed my desk for review. My "beef"--if you can call it that--is that they've got so much untapped potential.
Kevin, That's good. I must have misread your posting. Sorry about that. However, this entire discussion is a bit academic. After all how many of us have a couple of million Euro to invest in a new large scale product - this how much a new development costs in plastic. In brass, you can have both development and production at this investment level. However, in plastic you need to sell a lot more pieces. The problem is that mass market in large scale does not exist. This is why LGB chose to make limited edition series with Aster. And even this came to an end four years ago and is not likely ever to be resurrected. Please check the pricing of the Harz 2-10-2 both in plastic and in brass. Yes, I also believe that LGB has the potential, but they are unlikely to use it. They have committed enough suicidal acts already. If LGB were to make a K-27 at the same level of detail and complexity as that of Bachmann, and make it all in Europe, it would have to cost per piece 2.000 to 2.500 Euro at least. And they would have to sell at least 10.000 of them only to amortize the investment. My guess is that the entire sales of a K-27 (in whichever of large scales of choice) at that price would not exceed 1000-2000 pieces. How Bachmann achieves their financial goals is entirely beyond me, but I guess that an integral part of their strategy may be to employ a few highly skilled designers and developers equipped with most modern design machinery, but to cut costs on materials and manufacturing, and heavily suppress costs of actual assembly, QC, etc. I guess if we persist to ask, we may actually get what we want from Bachmann in terms of their QC - but they will give us a price ticket twice as high, at least. Now how many of you would prefer to pay 2000$ for that K-27? Skilled and motivated employees would cost that much also in China, and believe me, cheap Chinese products are likely soon to become the thing of the past. I have just been to Beijing a couple of weeks ago and I was shocked how expensive it is. Of course that is Beijing and there must be a lot of cheap labour still available but perhaps not at 1% of the European salary but perhaps 10% or more. To make a long story short, get that K as long as it is produced because this may not last forever, and do not count on LGB ever to release one., unless LGB India is in sight. Best wishes, Zubi

My two cents: Most or all of the problems of a scale Bachmann product can be fixed.

Can the same be said for the scale problems on LGB products?

:wink: :confused: :slight_smile:

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:
My two cents: Most or all of the problems of a scale Bachmann product can be fixed.

Can the same be said for the scale problems on LGB products?

:wink: :confused: :slight_smile:


Hans-Joerg, Sometimes, yes. I remember that I onced changed the scale of the Lehmann Porter from 1:20 to 1:22.5. But it was not easy, I admit! Best, Zubi