Protectionist question

Here is a mystery which I cannot unravel.

The Midland Railway procured a fleet of locomotives from US manufacturers in 1899. This is what was said about them.

The American 2-6-0 tender engines were erected at Derby in 1899 and were supplied by Burnham Williams and Co., namely Baldwin Locomotive Works, Philadelphia and by the Schenectady Locomotive Works, New York. Recourse was made to America as the Derby shops were full to capacity with work, and the private locomotive builders were in the midst of a boom and suffering from strikes. As more six-coupled locomotives were needed Johnson (the Midland Railway’s Chief Mechanical Engineer), in company with his opposite numbers on the Great Central and Great Northern Railways, obtained sanction to purchase from the USA and orders for thirty locomotives were placed with Baldwin and ten with Schenectady. 

Within a few weeks the first crates arrived at the Derby Works on 24 May 1899, the engines having been previously assembled and then dismantled again at the parent companies works. Space was found at the bottom end of No 3 bay in No 8 shop at Derby for the re-erection of the Schenectady locomotives, but the Baldwin's exceeded the capacity of the shops and space was cleared in front of the Locomotive Works offices and they were erected out in the open, this fortunately being summer time. The first Baldwin was ready to go into service by the end of May, the range of running numbers allocated to this type being 2501-10 and 2521-40, and the first ten locomotives were completed by the end of the following month. 

These engines were almost entirely American save the Johnson coal-rails and MR buffing and drawgear. They had the normal (for the USA) bar frames and outside cylinders (18in x 24in) with inside valve gear. The driving wheels were 5ft diameter on a wheelbase of 6ft 3in + 8ft 6in and the pony truck wheels were 2ft 9in diameter, being 7ft 5in in front of the leading driving wheel. The boiler was pressed to 160psi and had three domes of varying sizes, one being a sand box on the first ring of the boiler, the next the steam dome housing the regulator and twin Coale pop safety valves and the last and smallest one housing chime whistle and spring safety valve. The cabs were very large by Midland standards with two side windows. One unusual feature was the bar steel support struts from the smokebox to the footplating over the pony truck. 

The last 20 Baldwins were built between September and November, 1899 and the class was divided between the Toton, Sheffield and Leeds running depots. A driver of that day, James Gibbs Hardy, observed very rough workmanship when the crates of material arrived, but modified his criticism when the first commenced running on 21 June commented in his diary, splendid weather cab, upholstered seats and the engine looks considerably better now it is in working order. He had one of these engines No 2503, booked to him to do 1000 miles and found them hard to reverse and rather poor steamers. He took the first one to Normanton where everyone stared at it, and on 24 July took the first one up the Peak to Manchester, recording that she went up the bank with 80-901b of steam. By August 8, he had completed his 1000 miles and was very glad to get rid of her. 

The Schenectadys were rather nearer to looking like Midland engines, although they also had bar frames. The outside cylinders were 18in x 24 in and the tapered boiler was pitched 7ft lin from rail, the working pressure being 160psi. Driving wheels were 5ft diameter on a 7ft + 8ft 6in wheelbase and the pony truck, having 3ft diameter wheels was placed 7ft 6in in front of the leading driving wheel. Total wheelbase was 43ft and length over buffers 51ft 11¼in with basically Midland 3,250gal tender on a shorter 12ft 3in wheelbase. Working weights were engine 49.75 tons and tender 37 tons. 

These were all stationed at Wellingborough. These engines were not popular and some criticisms reached America causing bad feeling. Johnson (the MR Chief Mechanical Engineer) gave some comparable figures quoting that, work for work, they consumed 20-25% more coal, and 50% more oil than his standard goods engines, while repairs cost 60% more. To their credit he observed that the engines cost £400 less than their British counterparts, and were at least supplied within a few months of the contract being placed, while he had to wait about three years for locomotives ordered from British firms, due in the main to the engineering strike which had forced the Midland Company to buy Yankee in the first place.
http://www.steamindex.com/locotype/midland.htm

They didn’t last very long on any of the three railways which had them, which was a pity, as the basic design concept was advanced by British standards.

With their large comfortable enclosed cabs and easy access to working parts, they should have been popular with the enginemen and set the standard for future production. Similar locomotives, the 4300 class were built soon after by the Great Western, and then by the South Eastern and Chatham Railway (class N) and Great Northern (LNER class K2), and after 1923, several hundred, such as as the LNER K1 class, the LMS classes 4MT and 2MT, and the British Railways classes 2, 3 and 4. They were a popular and versatile type suitable for both passenger and freight trains. But the imports were not up to the job and were quickly scrapped - all were gone by 1914.

What was the reason for the unpopularity and poor performance? Could it be that the US manufacturers were protected by trade tariffs and therefore not worried about competition?

The US railways were not unconcerned about efficiency. An inefficient locomotive does less work than an efficient one of the same size. So a larger locomotive is needed to pull the same load as an efficient smaller one could have done. Efficiency adds next to nothing to the construction cost of a steam locomotive, as it is a matter of getting critical dimensions right and putting the machine together so that the steam and oil does not leak away. The Chicago and Northwestern Railway had its own testing plant, where in 1896, experiments were conducted for the Master Mechanics’ Association under the supervision of Professor W F M Goss of Purdue University - just in time for the information to be used for the Midland Railway machines.

This makes the example of the locomotives supplied to the Midland Railway is curious. The thermal efficiency of the Midland’s own locomotives, such as the 2P class 4-4-0, was poor, due to the short-travel valves; they were no match for the superficially similar Southern classes D1, E1 and L1. Standard Midland Railway axleboxes were a perpetual nuisance. Worse still, like most British locomotives at the time, they had internal cylinders and a crank axle, an expensive item. They were an easy target to beat.

Foreign appearance notwithstanding, the Yankee engines ought to have been an immediate success and forerunner of large orders for the US companies.What is behind this story?