I have had real good experiences and then really bad experiences with S suppliers, as I am not sure I should mention the run around I got for a engine I brought in 1993 to be used on a future layout that did not happen until 2007, the making of the layout..
I never ran this thing, and when I tried, a wire was off which was a easy fix but the truck being screwed into the engine base, fell out and could not be used again, the screw hole was too far gone. Brand new, never used, but 13 years later, owner charge me full price in replacing the truck, oh well. First he denied it was his engine, when I sent him pictures of it, as it is still made today, or at least it was until the China situation. Might still have some. I finally had to send him a picture of the box to proof it was his. I have no idea why the metal in the truck went bad as it probably was that way from the beginning. I learned my lesson, as yes maybe it was my fault for not running it around a circle of track in 1993. Mike From: Pieter Roos Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 2:50 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} Quality Problems...... It seems to me that the vast majority of our S model suppliers (and model railroad suppliers in general) are more than happy to rectify problems of manufacture in their products. While it's easy to stand on a soap box and announce we would all be happy to pay more for tested products that had no defects, I don't think we can offer much proof while some of the manufacturers can probably offer evidence to contrary. I really don't buy that AM, SHS and DPS are busy "brainwashing" us that we want to pay less. A simple solution would be to call the manufacturer when you want to buy a locomotive and offer to pay the cost of testing the model before it is shipped to you. I suspect if you were willing to pay something on the order of a 25% premium they probably would agree. What I hear is they get more calls asking for a discount. Beyond that, I'd like to see this thread get back to specifics of modeling. It started pretty well, talking about kits and converting and people's willingness to build or modify models. We seem to be verging on un-productive ranting at this point. Not an "Admin" message yet, please don't make me... Pieter E. Roos --- On Fri, 2/4/11, Ed <mailto:Loizeaux%40SBCGlobal.net> wrote: > > While there's enough blame to go > around, most of > > the soaring electronic failure rate experienced > > over the last decade is the responsibility of the > > Taiwanese. > > Stan > > Stokrocki > > > In my opinion, the firm making the bad parts is only > partially to blame. Most of the blame should be heaped > upon the maker/importer of the final product for not having > an incoming receiving inspection process. Yes, it > costs money to hire inspectors and provide them with test > equipment. Then again, there are outside laboratories > that can be contracted to do testing of the complex > parts. > > Merely assuming that all parts coming in the back door are > working and built properly is like a time bomb waiting to go > off. Sooner or later it will bite you. Likewise, > sending completed products out the front door without a > thorough final test/inspection is the same as telling your > customers to do the inspection that you should have done > yourself. > > Would airlines purchase Boeing airplanes if the planes were > not tested and inspected thoroughly? I wonder how much > Boeing spends on QC -- both incoming and final -- as a > percentage of the cost of an airplane? I wonder if > Gary Chudzinski would have willingly paid an extra $15 for > an HO mass-produced engine without any problems at > all? I bet he would, but he can answer for himself. > > To add a bit of S scale model railroading to this message, > even the best of S importers/manufacturers do not do > thorough testing. Some do not test at all, but just > send the box off to the customer after it clears customs > from the orient. Others do a test run on a short > section of straight track and do fix the obvious > defects. Nobody actually runs each and every loco > around a curve or up a grade before shipping to a > customer. Curves and grades are where many problems > surface because the pilot truck, trailing truck, wheelsets, > couplers, etc. all shift sideways and up&down and touch > things they should not be touching. Pulling a long > train up a grade would quickly expose wimpy u-joints and > rubber tubing slippage and the like. > > We, the model railroading consumer, have been brainwashed > to believe that we are not willing to pay for tested and > inspected merchandise. If Gary will pay extra for a > good loco, so will I !! I just wish every loco ran as > well as the UP turbine that performs during my open > houses. That is on heckuva piece of industrial > machinery. > > By the way, the "S"acto convention will have a clinic on > how to make engines run better. Is that a sign of the > times or what? > > Cheers...Ed L. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
