MTH Premier Amfleet Truck Repair Questions

I have 2 Metra Amfleet sets that were in the same condition.  I just had to replace the couplers, not the full trucks.  They replaced pretty easily as I recall.

I have done the same, and since I had a bunch of both Lionel and MTH couplers around, I just found ones that are roughly the same length, I used those.

What I do is remove the screws at the ends of the Amfleet chassis, pull it up far enough to turn the truck to the side, remove the e-clip holding the pin in place, swap out the coupler and reassemble.  Maybe 5 minutes per car...

Just don't go crazy putting the frame screws back in, as they're just in plastic...

I had to do this on all my first run Amfleets.

Thanks!

- Mario

@Chris Rick posted:

I have a set of O-Scale Premier Amfleet Passenger Cars, MTH 20-6520 from AN  1998 Volume 1 - BNSF Dash9, with disintegrating trucks. Best guess is Zinc Pest. It looks like two of the trucks are a complete loss and will need to be replaced. Looking for Amfleet on the new MTH Parts website, I see two complete truck assemblies, DA7100025 and the newer style DA7200010 are both available. Are these interchangeable? Phrased differently, will I need to change anything else on the older frame to mount the new style trucks?

It looks like the others will only need new lobster claws and thumb tacks. Unfortunately, DD0000073 which I have used previously appears to be out of stock at MTH Parts. I do see DD0000043 and DD0000044. Are these the same parts in loose form, or are they only for the newer style truck? If they will work, I might be able to salvage the other parts from the existing installation. Thanks for you advice.

Oh, and as for the whole truck, I've used both and they are interchangable.  They might have the new style "hidden tab" uncouplers, but will drop right in.

I've used them a lot as it seems the plastic spring retainer castings on the side like to break and I've had to swap them out on several trucks, including new ones from recent catalogs.  Every dealer that I’ve bought them from has been super awesome in getting me replacements, though!  There’s great shops in this world.

Thanks!

- Mario

Thanks everyone. I ordered two of the newer style DA7200010 trucks. I also ordered six of DD0000043 and DD0000044. That should give me enough parts to fix all four cars.

The parts arrived and I was able to replace the six broken couplers and thumb tacks. I ran into two issues with mounting the newer style DA7200010 trucks. The old truck used two miniature ring terminals for the power pickup. The newer style trucks use one miniature spade terminal and one miniature ring terminal. That was easy enough to fix with spare 3.8 mm female spade connectors.

The second issue is the mounting screws needed to attach them to the frame seem to be slightly different. The threads in the newer trucks seem to be finer than those on the broken trucks and the existing screws won't go in. None of my spare screws seem to fit. Does anyone know the correct screws to mount the DA7200010 trucks? I could not find that part listed amongst the Amfleet results on the MTH Parts website.

The cars have all been fixed. My friends at @Berwyns Toys and Trains were able to find the two screws I needed to mount the replacement trucks. Thanks everyone for your assistance!

My 20-6519 set had this problem too. Weirdly a few of the couplers were largely unaffected, and none had broken uncoupling tabs.

I found it easiest to undo the two bottom screws for the shell on one side to be able to turn the truck past the skirting to get the pin drop out.

Grrr, I really hate zinc pest!

I wonder if we collected all this rotted metal up across the hobby if the US could pursue a class action against China for all their garbage die cast metal.

@rplst8 posted:

Grrr, I really hate zinc pest!

I wonder if we collected all this rotted metal up across the hobby if the US could pursue a class action against China for all their garbage die cast metal.

So does everyone else, and I hear ya, but ...

Why would you immediately jump to the conclusion that China is the problem?  There's enough responsibility to go around nearly everywhere.

I have a pair of hinges on my 13 year old Ford with zinc pest that didn't start to disintegrate until three years ago.  Made in Mexico.  Just finally replaced them this past November because the window on the liftgate finally ended up in my hands the last time I activated the release.  At least it didn't reach the ground.

Then I have a diverter handle on a very expensive Kohler tub faucet installed in 2004, and found suddenly crumbling similarly, in 2014.  Also zinc pest.  Also made in Mexico.  No replacement available.

A good middle-of-the-supply-chain customer demands quality and keeps their eyes open.  In this case it's incumbent on them to demand an assay for each batch of material.  Such an analysis would easily show if there are impurities in the zinc alloy.

If there are, then all the parts made from that batch need to be scrapped before being assembled.  Does it cost extra? Definitely.  Is it the right thing to do? Absolutely.

Did MTH do so?  How about the supplier of the parts to the assembly house in China?

How much of this is the fault of the those in China?

We can't tell, can we?

Mike

@Mellow Hudson Mike posted:

So does everyone else, and I hear ya, but ...

Why would you immediately jump to the conclusion that China is the problem?

...

In this case it's incumbent on them to demand an assay for each batch of material.  Such an analysis would easily show if there are impurities in the zinc alloy.

Because on the box it says "Made in China".

I really doubt any of the O-gauge manufacturers has the knowledge or ability in house to do chemical analysis on any of the alloys being used in their products. The way most of global commerce is done now-a-days is a specification is given for a type of material. I'm not a metallurgist, but I'd venture a guess that lot of those specs are probably just a pre-defined thing. Like I want a ISO-STD-ACB.123 die-cast alloy. If you advertise you can produce that, then it's on the supplier to ensure they are meeting the standard.

I'm not saying that MTH is off the hook. The buck should still stop there. That said, WE don't demand a metallurgical analysis of the products we buy, no do we? Because we rely on a company's reputation. It's part of the reason we offer trademark and servicemark protection in this country.

China has long been known for using garbage raw materials. Fifteen or so years ago there was a big stink about all the lead contained in children's toys.

The other part of it is - just because I don't test your product, doesn't mean you are absolved from providing what I asked and paid for. That's basic fairness, and even without a test there are recourses for when one company defrauds another. Whether it was the mine in China that dug the metal out of the ground, the refinery, the factory that casts the material, or the "general contractor" that does the final assembly (if that exists) I don't really care.

Basically, the metallurgy standards suffer when items are made outside the ability to monitor production very closely. Having production in questionable far away places to save money, has made the problem common. Basically, lack of quality control supervision. If parts were made in Japan, Korea or Taiwan or the USA, the metallurgy quality would be noticeably improved.

While China doesn’t deserve all the blame, they get a good portion of it because they produce the most.

Here is my Amfleet scrap pile from a couple years ago. Year 2005, produced cars which  developed defective couplers, including the four cars I have…

Tom

@rplst8 posted:

Because on the box it says "Made in China".

I really doubt any of the O-gauge manufacturers has the knowledge or ability in house to do chemical analysis on any of the alloys being used in their products. The way most of global commerce is done now-a-days is a specification is given for a type of material. I'm not a metallurgist, but I'd venture a guess that lot of those specs are probably just a pre-defined thing. Like I want a ISO-STD-ACB.123 die-cast alloy. If you advertise you can produce that, then it's on the supplier to ensure they are meeting the standard.

I'm not saying that MTH is off the hook. The buck should still stop there. That said, WE don't demand a metallurgical analysis of the products we buy, no do we? Because we rely on a company's reputation. It's part of the reason we offer trademark and servicemark protection in this country.

China has long been known for using garbage raw materials. Fifteen or so years ago there was a big stink about all the lead contained in children's toys.

The other part of it is - just because I don't test your product, doesn't mean you are absolved from providing what I asked and paid for. That's basic fairness, and even without a test there are recourses for when one company defrauds another. Whether it was the mine in China that dug the metal out of the ground, the refinery, the factory that casts the material, or the "general contractor" that does the final assembly (if that exists) I don't really care.

Don't you realize that your comments apply universally?  Why is China your only target?

I get the point that it's made in China.

Do you think that it's any better if made in  Thailand, Viet Nam, Mexico, India, or any other place?

The buck stops here. It's MTH's fault because they didn't hold their suppliers accountable.

If they need to learn newer quality control methods, like requiring their supplier to assay the batch, then they need to.  Period.

I'm holding them accountable.

All the promises in the world won't fix this problem.  Hiding behind empty words, either published by supplier or marketer, won't fix this problem.

Yes, you're supposed to get good product when you buy from a firm that advertises quality.

What do you do when they don't deliver it?

Mike