Is this group dead or what



Letter in latest model rail issue.... First he complains that 7 out of 8 recent purchases were duff but of those, 4 were of same model that had a design fault and 2 of the others (again of the same model) had loco to tender connection too long so fouled on tracks. To me that 7 out of 8 is meaningless. However he sent back the two with the overlong cable - of course thats his right, but makes me agree with Paul on the question of what happened .... So heres the competition, whats the least 'error' that has given rise to a return ? May be one youve sent back yourself, received or have nth knowledge of...
Cheers, Simon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
simon wrote:

Ah, but I think the person who sends back faulty RTR stuff is doing the right thing. Then the makers might actually do some quality control. This is a million miles from "no modelling skill" or "box-opening modelling".
Example, in N, the little Farish 04 shunter is often (usually?; all five I've seen were wrong) assembled with the pickups not touching all the wheels. To get inside is a collection of small screws, 8 of them, different sizes, four of which are a sod to put back in. Now, in all the cases I've ended up fixing them; two were my own locos (which I modified to 2mm FS, so the warranty is out of the window), three belonging to others. Bought over quite a long period with different liveries, so not all from the same manufacturing batch.
But, there is no pressure on Bachmann-Farish to fix their quality control from my actions. They can carry on selling duff product which works erratically unless passed to someone with suitable skills to fix it. Pickups fixed and they run superbly.
- Nigel
--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That is a valid point, but is returning the product the only way of letting them know. What about an email to customer care or a comment to the retailer ? What do you think is the cutoff at which the product should be returned - for the average person that is, special cases can be ignored for this question.
cheers, Simon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
simon wrote:

Retailers vary from box shifters to serious model shops. The latter might pay attention, but how much attention will the Bachmann/Hornby rep pay to them ? Box shifters shift boxes.
I have my doubts about some maker's customer care.

Difficult for me to say as I buy so little RTR. I think I've bought three locos in the last two years and no rolling stock; two Farish 04's and a Bachmann 20 in OO. All were re-wheeled to finescale standards, couplings replaced. The 04's were DCC'd (see sagas elsewhere about the DCC controlled couplings inside them), and the class 20 is about to have various modifications.
I build a few kits, and kits are in some respects worse than RTR. I think there are a few kits on the market where a full refund for being "unbuildable piles of crap" would be supported if the claim went to trading standards. There are also some totally superb kits which are a delight to build. I tend to research what I buy and stick with the stuff from designers with a good reputation.
- Nigel
--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nigel Cliffe wrote:

Try some reviews of Starfix model aeroplanes: "traditionally used as non biodegradable landfill, as place holders on Ebay" is one. I have one on my shelf, bought in a sale at a pound shop in Hull. People peer at it and say "WTF? OK, just maybe it is a little bit like a Spitfire. Well, except for the shape."
Maybe I've just not found them, but there don't seem to be many railway kit review websites around. There are lots - maybe too many to keep track of - for 1:72 aeroplanes and 1:35 Panzers, but even things like the Airfix/Dapol and Revell plastic loco kits only appear as lone oddities tagged on the end of other review sites.
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 25 May 2009 01:01:42 +0100, Arthur Figgis

There does seem to be some modellers who behave as if model manufacturers are charities who are all doing us a favour by allowing us to buy their products and they think that we must not point out that their models have serious errors or else they will switch to making ping pong balls.
Fred X
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I find the quality and accuracy of the info on Model Rail Forum far higher than that on RMWeb. It seems to be a bit more "grown up".
Having visited once, I will not be going back to "New Railway Modellers".
MBQ
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Man at B&Q wrote:

I think that might be a specific forum (or subforum) issue. I've seen a fair few MRF threads where I dispair at the replies.
There are vast bits of both which are of no interest to me, and probably amount to the majority traffic on both - 00 RTR items !

Agreed.
- Nigel
--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I find Model Rail Forum is a bit of a mess with people posting in the wrong sub forums, especially the Hornby Magazine section. The posts are mostly about anything but the magazine, especially the Ask The Editor section, were everyone but the editor answers the questions that I am surprised why you would want to ask the magazine editor specifically about in the first place. The moderators do nothing to remind people about posting in the right forum section. RMWeb is very tidy in this respect.
Dobbin
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sentiments with which I totally agree, RMWeb and NRM are a complete waste of space.
Alistair
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I agree. I got thrown out of RMWeb for correcting the views of one of the moderator's mates. The fact that I am an acknowledged expert in the area concerned cut no ice. I had to retract my staememt (which was the truth) and apologise or out I went. RMWeb is not for serious enthusiasts.
Alistair

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Theres an art to criticizing a model in a review that was wonderfully demonstrated by MW in the june issue of hornby magazine ... "....what we have is a well-made model (albeit with some caveats) of an unusual prototype ..... it has got its bad points, but there are lots of good points too and the bad do not outway the good, as this is a good model, but one which isn't quite perfect in every respect."
Following which the fence collapsed in confusion.
Cheers, Simon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
simon wrote:

How about, "The colours on the London-Midland Class 170 are absolutely correct, but not necessarily in the right places"? {With apologies to Eric Morcambe)
Kim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Can you see the join?
--
Martin S.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I know it was he that said it, but wasnt it Les Dawson that could play the piano slightly out of synch ?
Cheers, Simon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Alistair Wright wrote:

Sorry to hear that Alistair. I saw something similar recently and it put me off the whole idea of registering with RMWeb. The arrogance of the moderator concerned was unbelievable.
(kim)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 25 May 2009 22:07:48 +0100, Alistair Wright

Yes, the moderators behaviour is over the top with respect to some of the posts. In fact only last week an American member started a thread about his experiences of his recent visit to Britain which was critical of some aspects of the country, but was totally fair and nothing worse than what we natives would say. But for some reason one of the moderators thought the author was being deliberately provovative and locked the thread!
Fred X
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 24 May 2009 22:08:44 +0100, simon wrote:

<snip>
I have to agree there. I stopped using RMWeb when it became apparent that the new/different ideas would be shouted down until silence was achieved - presumably scoring some sort of "victory". It also has fair number of resident "experts" who would rather perpetuate model railway/real railway myths than accept being told different.
Cheers Richard
--
I have become...............comfortably numb

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Agreed. Some of the regular posters seem to have a lot of leeway and are startlingly rude to other posters. Unfortunately over the time I've been reading it, the place has gained a terribly prissy, sanctimonious tone, with warnings and threats from the moderators about behaviour posted all over the place. It seems to have adopted Chris Leigh's line that opinion has to be "controlled". FFS. It's a shame, because there's some really good stuff on there, especially the DCC forum and posters' layout/workbench blogs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Stuart Smith wrote:

Ah, that might be why I haven't bumped into the nasty bits of RMWeb; I tend to hang out in only the DCC forum and a couple of layout/workbench areas. Those tend to be fine.
Even so, I have noticed, even in the DCC bit, the occaisional trigger-happy locking of a thread, and the growth of the "rules" postings at the top of the pages is annoying (I complained about it once, pointing out that having a vast number would ensure all were unread, and they were trimmed back a bit, but they are growing again like the weeds in my garden).
I'm sorry that some decent modellers have left due to the actions of the RMWeb management/moderators.
- Nigel
--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.