Large Scale Central

Why did all the past mfg errors occur?

General Discussion
#61

Tim Brien said:

Ten years ago on a soon to be defunct ex-manufacturer’s forum, I coined the term “emperors new clothes” syndrome when referring to any new release product from that company. No matter what was released, it was seemingly without flaw and contrary to evidence over the years, those rabid supporters still condemn anyone with the audacity to criticise the product.

The emperor’s supporters tried many times to shout me down and hound me from the factory site. Those people are still with us today and continue their company allegiance on this site. Even after years of evidence to the contrary, they still hold the belief that their beloved company is without flaw. One such supporter even bad mouths me on an English site.

Anyone with the audacity to criticise that company’s product was eventually hounded off or banned from posting on the factory supported site. Those same people who exposed the product flaws are in the main now excluded from posting on this site after the demise of the factory forum site. They are now termed the ‘troublemakers’ and are belittled at every opportunity.

When a manufacturer has such devoted followers then why would he improve a product as obviously any flaw detected was a figment of the troublemakers imagination. Just ask the emperor and no one ever had issues with wheels moving on axles or wheels falling off or smoke units that rarely behaved as designed, or out of gauge wheels that prevented a locomotive running on the manufacturers own track, or electrical circuits designed to short circuit internally or numerous other faults. Anyone who experienced these apparently non-existent problems was deemed a troublemaker and regularly criticised until they stopped posting on forums.

These supposed troublemakers represented the experience level on this site and thus its foundations and yet they were hounded off the site to appease the newcomers and those long term supporters of that manufacturer, who were dispatched by the emperor to keep tabs on any who would criticise the emperor’s products.

#62

WOW!

#63

Wendell Hanks said:

The presumption is we want our hobby manufactures to be ethical.
If the product was designed accurately and the materials were chosen correctly, THEN random samples are the test of the manufacturing.

The tested samples are evidence of accurate design, material choices, and construction.

Ray’s observation (above post):
“You seem to think that doing this will add nothing to the final cost of the product.”

Response:
Good question. Cost will go up IF the manufacturer waits until the production run is over before pulling sample products for testing as used by the consumers. Late discovery means a no-no massive re-run vs. resolving now the soldering station goofs; stopping (again) the use of plastic floor sweepings; firing the assembly team fitting the motor block screws, etc. There has been NO evidence from Bachmann, USA, or Aristo that I ever have read or seen that gives assurance that they are able to, or want to, make an product evaluation at the start of a run by a production company they do not own.

That was not in LGB’s promo book.

Remember, LGB made a BIG deal about the endurance and quality of their products - they designed them and they made them – and they tested them at the onset of production. Check the video of the kid in the white lab coat running a Stainz into a fish tank then running it on track! Only LGB earned their product brand name as the generic name for large scale. Sure, they charged outrageous prices – and maintained the factory and workers demands. They knew, like Mercedes found out, if the product is too cheap then the public questions the company image . What? 90% of German LGB locos still running! Nah, not possible! Mine still do after 13 years.

HJ said it — repeatedly: Quality Control.
(Own your own factory or be tough on who makes your product1)

#64

Whenever I ask for advice on something, I don’t want the “oh you should have never bought that…” response. I ignore them. Because despite your high opinion of yourself. it really don’t mean jack to me. I could care less you consider yourself an expert and think that “things are not made like they used to be!!!” Your opinion doesn’t solve my problem.

This is what many have tried to explain to the “troublemakers.” Those that I would probably consider a troublemaker have very high opinions of themselves. I have no doubt they have some knowledge of certain things but that doesn’t make them know-all end-all.

We alluded to some that have left because they were so-called “shouted down by the emperors little minions.” I lurked the entire time and added input when I thought it was helpful but I saw the whole story. So here is how I saw it:

Those that left were never helpful, they just badmouthed the product and badmouthed the person who purchased said product, because really how dumb can you be for purchasing product from Aristo, Bachmann, USA, you name it…

Aristo-Craft came out with a 2-8-2 and tried to deny it had problems. The “troublemakers” pointed out the problem with the wheels and shouted down anyone who said, “its working for me fine.” There is the problem, there was a problem and the product should have never been released the way it did. But to shout down those that said it worked fine for them is not helpful. Perhaps we should have been asking them the parameters which allowed the 2-8-2 to work properly. I remember a particularly heated discussion about a review of the product. The reviewer commented on the problem with the wheels and stated that they worked fine in his situation. He got shouted down by the “troublemakers” for being in the back pocket of Aristo. The reality is he did an honest review taking into account the parameters he could control and only mentioning other issues others were having. That is what he should have done and he got blasted. That was not helpful. Why didn’t the “troublemakers” ask Kevin what the parameters were. They only did after “the emperors minions” asked.

Bachman came out with the new C-19. First of all, it is a completely different model of the Connie. The “troublemakers” claim it is a reboot of the Connie and have screamed down anyone who says different. On a few occasions I have attempted to add constructive input on the C-19 since I own one. When I do, I always get a response from the “troublemakers,” “its a Connie reboot,” “its junk’” “you should have never bought it,” “things aren’t made like they used to,” blah blah blah. That is not being helpful.

In fact I posed the question to several “troublemakers” when in the middle of another rant, “In your opinion, what product would you purchase or do you consider good products.” The answer is always, “None.” I follow up with, “How would you form a company to produce a product that you think is up to your standards.” I have yet to get an answer that makes any sense. Most answers lead me to believe there is pleasing these people.

The whole point of this is, you are entitled to your opinion and can keep posting all you want. But every time you make a post about this company is junk or that. All you are doing is showing that you really have no idea what you are talking about and that high opinion of yourself is really in your own mind.

#65

Aside from quality control in manufacturing and general lack of QC in China, there is the lawsuit filed by LGB against Aristo-Craft Trains for alleged track copyright infractions. Long story short, it cost LGB 50 million dollars and their company to sue Aristo-Craft Trains which in turn cost Aristo-Craft Trains 17 million dollars to counter, it took 6 years and LGB lost. This left both companies out of cash and we know the results.
Bob MacGregor in CT

#66

Jake Smith said:

…

In fact I posed the question to several “troublemakers” when in the middle of another rant, “In your opinion, what product would you purchase or do you consider good products.” The answer is always, “None.” I follow up with, “How would you form a company to produce a product that you think is up to your standards.” I have yet to get an answer that makes any sense. Most answers lead me to believe there is pleasing these people.

The whole point of this is, you are entitled to your opinion and can keep posting all you want. But every time you make a post about this company is junk or that. All you are doing is showing that you really have no idea what you are talking about and that high opinion of yourself is really in your own mind.

First of above paragraphs: For our own layout we bought BRAWA, KISS and LGB engines. Very good value!

EMM was founded on the premise “do it better, there has to be a better way”. First customers were our friends, buddies and acquaintances, who then told their LHs dealers.

QC has always been #1, the market didn’t need more so-so product. Not up to our standard?, it didn’t ship. As it says on my Facebook page: Now semi-retired (from) Self Employed and Loving It!
Second paragraph: The “junk” topic arises when another batch of shoddy merchandise hits the market and people run into problems. Could be that first they check for a review of the item (if there is one), then it’s on to the fora. At which point the “record” of X, Y or Z mfg is rolled out. Most often nicely detailed with suitable links, pictures etc. etc.

I guess that would count as

All you are doing is showing that you really have no idea what you are talking about and that high opinion of yourself is really in your own mind.

I can easily understand why some of those who know the NA product inside out stopped posting their solutions to factual, existing problems. Apparently it is a wasted effort and one could repeat the same advice umpteen times, the result would be the same.

Which reminds me of a Swiss-German proverb:

Born stupid, never learned anything and forgot that too.

#67

Biggest reason is the Communist Chinese are not our friends, they want all our money, not our respect. Killer dry wall and baby formula should be enuf of a clue…

Bring manufacturing back to where a handshake really seals a deal and once again we can look forward to new and improved.

#68

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:

Which reminds me of a Swiss-German proverb:

Born stupid, never learned anything and forgot that too.

Nice, clear insult. Don’t do that again. Bob has run out of patience.

#69

Jake Smith said:

Whenever I ask for advice on something, I don’t want the “oh you should have never bought that…” response. I ignore them. Because despite your high opinion of yourself. it really don’t mean jack to me. I could care less you consider yourself an expert and think that “things are not made like they used to be!!!” Your opinion doesn’t solve my problem.

This is what many have tried to explain to the “troublemakers.” Those that I would probably consider a troublemaker have very high opinions of themselves. I have no doubt they have some knowledge of certain things but that doesn’t make them know-all end-all.

We alluded to some that have left because they were so-called “shouted down by the emperors little minions.” I lurked the entire time and added input when I thought it was helpful but I saw the whole story. So here is how I saw it:

Those that left were never helpful, they just badmouthed the product and badmouthed the person who purchased said product, because really how dumb can you be for purchasing product from Aristo, Bachmann, USA, you name it…

Aristo-Craft came out with a 2-8-2 and tried to deny it had problems. The “troublemakers” pointed out the problem with the wheels and shouted down anyone who said, “its working for me fine.” There is the problem, there was a problem and the product should have never been released the way it did. But to shout down those that said it worked fine for them is not helpful. Perhaps we should have been asking them the parameters which allowed the 2-8-2 to work properly. I remember a particularly heated discussion about a review of the product. The reviewer commented on the problem with the wheels and stated that they worked fine in his situation. He got shouted down by the “troublemakers” for being in the back pocket of Aristo. The reality is he did an honest review taking into account the parameters he could control and only mentioning other issues others were having. That is what he should have done and he got blasted. That was not helpful. Why didn’t the “troublemakers” ask Kevin what the parameters were. They only did after “the emperors minions” asked.

Bachman came out with the new C-19. First of all, it is a completely different model of the Connie. The “troublemakers” claim it is a reboot of the Connie and have screamed down anyone who says different. On a few occasions I have attempted to add constructive input on the C-19 since I own one. When I do, I always get a response from the “troublemakers,” “its a Connie reboot,” “its junk’” “you should have never bought it,” “things aren’t made like they used to,” blah blah blah. That is not being helpful.

In fact I posed the question to several “troublemakers” when in the middle of another rant, “In your opinion, what product would you purchase or do you consider good products.” The answer is always, “None.” I follow up with, “How would you form a company to produce a product that you think is up to your standards.” I have yet to get an answer that makes any sense. Most answers lead me to believe there is pleasing these people.

The whole point of this is, you are entitled to your opinion and can keep posting all you want. But every time you make a post about this company is junk or that. All you are doing is showing that you really have no idea what you are talking about and that high opinion of yourself is really in your own mind.

#70

John Caughey said:

Biggest reason is the Communist Chinese are not our friends, they want all our money, not our respect. Killer dry wall and baby formula should be enuf of a clue…

Bring manufacturing back to where a handshake really seals a deal and once again we can look forward to new and improved.

Agreed…:wink:

#71

Nick they say a picture is worth a thousand words…

#72

Bob McCown said:

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:

Which reminds me of a Swiss-German proverb:

Born stupid, never learned anything and forgot that too.

Nice, clear insult. Don’t do that again. Bob has run out of patience.

STRIKE ONE!

#73

I will give you an example of QC and its merits. A particular UK manufacturer contracts out production of its UK outline prototype trains to the same company that makes Bachmann UK outline trains in ‘OO’ scale. The British company has continuing issues with QC problems. The Bachmann models from the same source are of a relatively higher quality and more or less trouble free.

Now the same British company under another brandname, contracts out its European continental outline production in ‘h.o.’ to the same Chinese company and in general the product is flawless. Same company producing the different items for the same UK based manufacturer.

What could possibly be different between production standards for the UK outline and the European outline products? One has QC issues and the other basically flawless production. The answer is in the expectations of those that model each prototype. The continental modeller has high expectations of quality and performance and is willing to spend more on the product. For the UK based modeller price is the over riding factor and it seems the product is dumbed down to meet a lower price regime. One way to meet lower production costs is to remove QC from the balance sheet.

The continental modeller is happy as in general he has a very high quality product. The UK outline modeller is relatively happy as he has a relatively good product, albeit with flaws, but at a good price. Same production source but wildly different quality output. The Chinese company will produce to the highest quality standards but with added costs to production. If the company outsourcing the production is willing to pay for higher production standards then he will receive a higher quality product. Alas, the bottom line is if the consumer has similar expectations of quality and is prepared to pay for that quality.

#74

Tim I think you pretty much nailed it there. A good segment of LS has for a long time been catering to a Walmart type consumer. I myself have been guilty of this. The trouble when prices went up (for various reasons) but the quality stayed the same. This skewed the equation and alot more folks realized that they really weren’t getting what they expected for the extra money they had to now had to invest.

#75

Jake,

Quote: “Perhaps we should have been asking them the parameters which allowed the 2-8-2 to work properly.”

The 2-8-2 drivetrain was flawed in its design in that the taper designed to hold the wheel (Morse taper) does not prevent the wheel from rotating on its axle. The shallow angle taper’s function is to grip the wheel to the shaft. However, for this to happen the wheel must be securely located by way of the retention screw fitted to the end of the axle. The preferred alternative is a locking key fitted to the shaft, but after conversations with Lewis, I was informed that there is “more than one way to skin a cat”.

Now back to the Aristo design. The success of the design required precise machining standards which alas were not adhered to. Often the machined recess in the wheel casting was machined too deeply allowing the wheel to mount too far in on the axle thus allowing the shoulder of the axle to stand proud of the installed wheel casting. You will see that in this case the fitment of the retaining screw will have no retention effect as the screw will thread up to the shaft shoulder and not touch the retention outer face of the wheel casting. Thus the wheel is free to rotate on the axle taper, plus generally being undergauge.

If the machined recess is not machined to correct specifications and is machined too shallow then the wheel will be retained but but will be well overgauge.

The solution to the problem was not to maintain designed specifications but to use the correct spec standard Loctite to retain the mount screw. Lewis blamed the problem on the assembly line substituting the incorrect grade of Loctite. In reality the Loctite should never have been used to retain the wheel on the taper. The purpose of the Loctite was purely as a thread locking function to retain the axle screw. However, to overcome the machining issue, the wheel was Loctited to the axle taper, contrary to the original design.

In the real world it was the likes of Greg Elmassian who worked out that a thin shim placed under the wheel would space the wheel casting out on the axle allowing the retention screw on the axle to do its job. Similarly, it was he who also worked out that the shouldered end of the axle could be reworked allowing the retention screw to bed down further on the axle thus contacting the outer face of the wheel. Both of these fixes were no doubt far superior to gluing the wheel to the shaft, thus ignoring the real problem.

In an ideal world, with machining tolerances retained within design standards, the drive train would have been entirely successful. Alas, vagaries in production and assembly ensured that the original design criteria were not met for every chassis.

Yes, there were successful chassis manufactured and it would seem it was the ardent Aristo fans that received them because it was they that apparently had no problems with the chassis. Those who did have issue with wheel rotation were not so lucky and perhaps were not ardent Aristo supporters and thus reported on their results.

The ideal parameter for the 2-8-2 chassis was most likely the mantlepiece as a shelf queen. No doubt you own numerous examples and all have proven to be without fault. I say that you have been indeed very fortunate as others were not so fortunate.

Yes, you may speak of me and troublemakers as a ‘know it all’, but unlike many here, I keep myself aware of quality issues that beset our hobby. You belittle the troublemaking ‘know it all’ as a show off, but in reality, the know it all is the repository of much of the technical information on this site.

One has only to read a couple of your postings over the term of your membership here to expose your allegiances. I truly hope that when the time comes for you to plead for assistance to correct an issue, that some one is still around on this site to help you out, because in the main your responses do little to want some one to assist you should you ever have a technical issue. You could of cause search a fix on the internet, but of cause we all know the source of most fixes on the internet and it is down to the expertise of those dreaded ‘know it all’ troublemakers that those fixes exist.

#76

Now THATS an informational post without being snarky, or coming across as a knowitall or “youre an idiot for buying one”.

#77

Agreed…Well done…well done…

#78

John Caughey said:

Biggest reason is the Communist Chinese are not our friends, they want all our money, not our respect. Killer dry wall and baby formula should be enuf of a clue…

Bring manufacturing back to where a handshake really seals a deal and once again we can look forward to new and improved.

There are two plane loads of fresh milk flown from Melbourne Australia every day to China. Not even the Chinese consumer trusts the quality of Chinese products. It is expensive by the time it gets there too.

Andrew

#79

**Garratt Steam said:**There are two plane loads of fresh milk flown from Melbourne Australia every day to China. Not even the Chinese consumer trusts the quality of Chinese products. It is expensive by the time it gets there too.

Andrew

So you are saying that Chinese cows had manufacturing flaws? If so how did these errors occur and how is this related to our hobby of model trains?

Holy Cow this actually scares me as it could turn into an UTTER disaster!

#80

David Russell said:

**Garratt Steam said:**There are two plane loads of fresh milk flown from Melbourne Australia every day to China. Not even the Chinese consumer trusts the quality of Chinese products. It is expensive by the time it gets there too.

Andrew

So you are saying that Chinese cows had manufacturing flaws? If so how did these errors occur and how is this related to our hobby of model trains?

Holy Cow this actually scares me as it could turn into an UTTER disaster!

The statement was relevant to what it was replied too but you conveniently removed that to poise your regular piddle in the pool of conversation.

The cows in China are not the ones in the business of distribution which is an aspect of ‘Quality Control’.
Any old moo knows that. You really have no idea at all do you!

Andrew