DJ Models J94

[mistahjim]

So mine arrived today, and OK so it isn't strictly a J94. I bought a model of the Dean Forest's Wilbert, for reasons many, varied and entirely irrelevant to this post. Now I am in no way an expert on the Hunslet Austerity tanks, but I wanted to share my thoughts on this new model.

I decided to compare it with my Hornby (ex-Dapol) model, and initial impressions are rather good, as they should be when comparing models 20+ years apart in technology. The cab detail is superb, the spectacle plates are very neatly done and the smoke box door dart and hinge are wonderful.

Beneath the running plate though is where the age difference really shows; no block with rudimentary brackets here. Instead the frames and rivet detail are, as near as I can tell, fully realised. The wheels are also much finer, though oddly the coupling rods seem heavier - a detail difference from the prototypes? I dare say someone can confirm that.

One final point I found interesting- the older model weighs marginally more AND is balanced slightly better. The balance point is slap bang on the centre axle whereas the DJ model is balanced aft of the central axle.

Running tests will hopefully take place tomorrow, small child allowing. I have heard some slightly negative things regarding performance over some point work, but my suspicion is that, as with the Kernow O2 that is a back-to-back issue that can be rectified. We shall see, but I'd love to know what any other new J94 owners think.

[mick b]

Sorry haven't been impressed .

All geared drive seems to be causing a number of problems relating to derailing/poor running.

Detail is very poor

Steps clunky , missing water tank steps, god awful injector moulding under cab, missing cab doors, weird lamp irons , dire rear steps on High Bunker version and totally ignored the lower bunker rear step . Prominent mounting holes in the Buffer Beams as only one version has been moulded.

The cordless motor doesn't seem to be a favourite with anyone using older control systems either. The owner has given a "sniffy" reply on the dark side saying basically everyone should modernise their systems.

The dark side leader is wonderful in his praise especially of the Bright yellow (yuk) version , strangely that is the dark side special version as well !!.

DJ have shot themselves in the foot with the claims of "Setting Higher Standards" as their selling phrase.

The most telling fact is they RT Models have already brought out a detailing etch for the DJ effort.

Save your money buy a cheap Hornby/Dapol version and upgrade with the RT Models etches and castings.

The only much better thing done on the DJ version is the seamless water tank sides. IMHO

[Atlantic 3279]

It seems I should be glad that I don't have a need or a place for a J94 of any kind.

[Diamond Gaz]

Who, or what is the dark side?!

[earlswood nob]

G'day all

The Darkside is RMWeb.

The J94 is far too modern for me.

However, whispers, I did pick up a Cotswold L&Y 0-6-0 Saddletank recently at a bargain price.

The L&Y did have lines in the West Riding, where most of my prototypes worked.

Dreadnoughts also worked through to York via LNER metals.

Earlswood nob

[Hatfield Shed]

...I'd love to know what any other new J94 owners think.

Me too. I am waiting for at least ten years of satisfactory user input before purchase of any split chassis steam model, following the high wear out rate of intensively used Mainline and Bachmann specimens of the breed. Steel axle force fitted into wheel centre has a long and reliable track record in RTR OO steam models, and the split axle has got nowhere near its performance on any of the RTR OO steam models offered in the past with this construction.

I suspect that the all geared axle configuration may be an attempt to prevent the split axles 'working' under the constantly varying loads applied by coupling rods, when these are used to transmit the power from wheelset to wheelset. If that is the objective it can only be accomplished by having the coupling rods 'floating'; so free fitting that they can never apply any real force to the crankpins.

[S.A.C. Martin]

It is really difficult to be objective about this model when the designer has made such sweeping statements about his own work and those of others.
I have one on loan for a review of my own and I am wondering whether I should bother to publish it.

I personally feel it doesn’t matter where criticism comes from: if its fair criticism, its fair criticism. I’ve seen the criticism of the J94 on a number of forums and all of it looks fair and reasonable to me because it matches up with my own experience.

I’m using code 75 rail on all of my layout and I’ve had models with finer wheel sets have no problems with track work, whereas the J94 has encountered problems at every baseboard split, every set of points, to a wearying degree. I have checked the back to backs and can only conclude that the gear tower and fixed coupling rods are combining to make an extremely fixed wheelbase which has extremely limited side to side play and flexibility allowed. Great for N gauge models which have different track standards, not so helpful in OO and finer scale OO at that.

I do need a J94 for Copley Hill and Ganwick Curve, annoyingly, and I fear that despite the step forward in some of the aesthetics, the cost factor between buying this and binning the chassis, and buying a Hornby/Dapol version and binning the chassis and then improving the body shell will probably win out.

“Setting higher standards” seems to apply not to the models but the PR exercise given by the model’s designer. Some straightforward design decisions, such as allowing the coupling rods to do their normal job, rather than relying on the gear tower design, would have improved the model’s running qualities enormously.

The best running model I’ve seen to date has been Hornby’s Q6 and it also puts the J94 in the shade quite considerably in terms of detail. That model is considerably simpler under the body shell and only about £10 dearer than this 0-6-0T. It makes for an interesting comparison and I rather suspect Hornby’s forthcoming H class will be compared directly to the O2 already released. It is unlikely to be found wanting.

[mick b]

...I'd love to know what any other new J94 owners think.

Me too. I am waiting for at least ten years of satisfactory user input before purchase of any split chassis steam model, following the high wear out rate of intensively used Mainline and Bachmann specimens of the breed. Steel axle force fitted into wheel centre has a long and reliable track record in RTR OO steam models, and the split axle has got nowhere near its performance on any of the RTR OO steam models offered in the past with this construction.

I suspect that the all geared axle configuration may be an attempt to prevent the split axles 'working' under the constantly varying loads applied by coupling rods, when these are used to transmit the power from wheelset to wheelset. If that is the objective it can only be accomplished by having the coupling rods 'floating'; so free fitting that they can never apply any real force to the crankpins.

On looking at photos you can see a very large hole in the centre coupling boss. When queried on the dark side it was explained that the Rods do nothing at all and are cosmetic. It sounds like the loco has a severely limited side play and zero up/down movement. That would explain the derailments.

[Daddyman]

Sorry haven't been impressed .

All geared drive seems to be causing a number of problems relating to derailing/poor running.

Detail is very poor

Steps clunky , missing water tank steps, god awful injector moulding under cab, missing cab doors, weird lamp irons , dire rear steps on High Bunker version and totally ignored the lower bunker rear step . Prominent mounting holes in the Buffer Beams as only one version has been moulded.

The cordless motor doesn't seem to be a favourite with anyone using older control systems either. The owner has given a "sniffy" reply on the dark side saying basically everyone should modernise their systems.

The dark side leader is wonderful in his praise especially of the Bright yellow (yuk) version , strangely that is the dark side special version as well !!.

DJ have shot themselves in the foot with the claims of "Setting Higher Standards" as their selling phrase.

The most telling fact is they RT Models have already brought out a detailing etch for the DJ effort.

Save your money buy a cheap Hornby/Dapol version and upgrade with the RT Models etches and castings.

The only much better thing done on the DJ version is the seamless water tank sides. IMHO

Nice to hear an honest review, Mick - thanks! It's the only one I've read, and one that agrees with my impression. The dark side was falling over itself to praise the model for some reason.

[Pebbles]

Having previously seen reviews of the O2 the design philosophy of the range to me seems overly complex. I certainly don't like no-operational coupling rods and can see them assuming all sorts of strange angles relative to the crank pins. I ask, does the design seek to minimise the use of metal in construction, as its the only explanation I can think of.

[Hatfield Shed]

...buying a Hornby/Dapol version and binning the chassis and then improving the body shell will probably win out...

A goodly while ago I was presented by a friend with a couple of the Hornby to be 'breathed on', as the one he had tried was a lemon on terms of operation. When I tried the second specimen it was much better, quiet and decently smooth once it had jerked into motion at a scale 5mph. Now that was good news, as it meant that the lemon could be brought up to that standard at least. A little work on the 'flung together' mechanisms with flash on the motor mounting parts, and then some running, produced two smooth, quiet and capable runners. Adding extra ballast enabled the centre axle spring action to be beefed up for enhanced pick up. The one piece rod is vertically slotted on the centre crankpin to allow the vertical movement. These were subsequently improved externally by the owner, and still look well and run as sweetly as ever when I see them on the usual annual visit.

I was sufficiently impressed that while naturally preferring J50 and J52 for my steam shunting equipment, a J94 was added when a very cheap s/h example was spotted. Fettled and weighted, with a Lenz decoder it will near match the Bach and Hornby 08s for running refinement.

[Atso]

Having previously seen reviews of the O2 the design philosophy of the range to me seems overly complex. I certainly don't like no-operational coupling rods and can see them assuming all sorts of strange angles relative to the crank pins. I ask, does the design seek to minimise the use of metal in construction, as its the only explanation I can think of.

I think that the OO DJM J94 has been designed based on the experiences gained when Dave worked at Dapol which primarily was producing N gauge products at the time (and Dave is a know N gauge modeller). In N gauge gearing all the driving wheels is still an accepted practice; Fleischmann, Minitrix and (formerly?) Kato all being examples of quality N gauge mechanisms that use this approach. The theory is that by gearing all the wheels, the model is not relying on the coupling rods to provide traction to each wheel and allows finer coupling rods to be used as they are not required to do any work with regard to the drive.

This is great in theory but it does have some disadvantages in N!. Gear noise is noticeably greater (my Dapol locos are all much noisier than my Farish examples) and side play can be reduced quite dramatically (bad on 9" radius curves!). Also the effect of a wheel jumping a gear tooth (known to have happened) can be quite disastrous to the coupling rods and valve gear - it is interesting that Farish do not employ this system and rely on slightly bulkier rods to physically carry the wheelsets round.

Similarly, the split frame system would appear to be directly linked to current N gauge practice where Kato, Bachmann (USA), Farish and Dapol all employ split frame methods with wheels running in brass or phosphor bronze bearings (as does the 2mm association). This system appears to work well for modern N gauge locos but it will be interesting to see what the long term effects of using this in a large scale will be. However countering this, the old Bachmann Branchline system had several known design flaws (i.e. squared axle muffs and no bearings) and if these had been worked out would split frame be viewed differently in 4mm?

Overall, I'd agree with Pebbles that this seems overly complex for a 4mm scale locomotive and seems to reflect many of the current N gauge philosophies simply scaled up.

[Hatfield Shed]

...the old Bachmann Branchline system had several known design flaws (i.e. squared axle muffs and no bearings) and if these had been worked out would split frame be viewed differently in 4mm?...

There's nothing wrong with the split frame principle, and very likely better materials and design choices and constructional standards in the Mainline and Bachmann rod coupled types would have saved it from the poor rep it acquired. In fact, while the manufacturers keep quiet about it, both Bachmann and Hornby make more recent product that relies on split frame pick up, and very good it is too based on the items I own.

But none of these good split chassis items are rod-coupled locos, and that's specifically where I have doubts over longevity; once bitten and all that, I'll now wait for others to find out if the previous problems are prevented by better materials choice, design and construction in these more recent products.

[31A]

I wondered whether anybody knew whether these locos were actually used in the London area? I know several were allocated to Hornsey near the end of steam to replace the J52s, and I have seen pictures of them on shed there but have never seen any pictures of them hauling trains. I dd see a picture of one at Hitchin, but suspect it may have been en route to / from works or reallocation.

[Caledonian]

Thank you for the various opinions above

I've not had a chance to see far less play with one close up, but as the possessor of three respectable Hornby austerities plying my colliery lines I was a bit wary of getting one of these lest it didn't fit in with the existing family. Sounds like it won't and aint going to be worth the bother.