coombe junction - moorswater

Are you just looking for a body of the 94xx? If so BRlines list them for £12.50 each, all nicely painted and ready to plonk on your chassis.

Excellent plan! There always seem to be lots of engineless and dis-chassied bodys on EBay but beware, somewhere in the presumably pretty distant past, the body was upgraded with much nicer detailling around the bunker. (Though you do have to fill in the surplus foot holds on one side if you are feeling picky)

 

The newer ones would be best for your project... oddly, I deliberately used an older 'shell for my 15XX pannier project, as it required less metal surgery inside to fit around the Dapol Ivatt chassis!

Pete

 

Looks like an interesting idea, but a word of warning on converting the 94xx to 2FS... ...it needs 9mm wheels and those are like rocking horse sh!t! I've tried unsuccessfully 3 time over the past year to get some - each time out of stock I did eventually manage to get a set at Oxford this year, but Mitziblue now wants to 'borrow' them for his 1F...

 

How about one of the 'small panniers'? The GWR 54xx (similar to the 57xx but with 5'2" (10mm) wheels at different spacing, or the BR (ex-Swindon) 16xx which had 4'1.5" (8mm) wheels - could be an interesting conversion project

The 57xx/8750 bodies are nicer than the 94xx which is a little overscale in height. But a 94xx converted to a 15xx would be very cool...

So that's what you've been cooking up is it?

 

Looks like a good idea and there appears to be a few options open to you as well.

 

Saying that-if your proposing to do this as a special in the 80's period anything goes-so a Dapol 14xx with autocoach or a 45xx could do the honours. I've both of these locos and the're brilliant runners. Not sure about converting them to 2mm FS though. but I'm sure I read on here somewhere about converting a 14xx with scale etched chassis and coreless motor. Might have been Missy?

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

 

 

The 15xx, like the 94xx had 4'7.5" wheels and would also need the 9mm association replacements (same problem) but the 14xx/48xx had the 5' (10mm) wheels...

 

...if it is to be non-powered, how about converting the Dapol to be an open cab 517 or even reverse the chasis (2-4-0T) for a 'Metro'?

So that's what you've been cooking up is it?

 

Looks like a good idea and there appears to be a few options open to you as well.

 

Saying that-if your proposing to do this as a special in the 80's period anything goes-so a Dapol 14xx with autocoach or a 45xx could do the honours. I've both of these locos and the're brilliant runners. Not sure about converting them to 2mm FS though. but I'm sure I read on here somewhere about converting a 14xx with scale etched chassis and coreless motor. Might have been Missy?

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

 

 

A replacement chassis is available for the 45xx. I have a memory that someone said there is a chassis under development for the 14xx. A few years back there was an article in the 2mm soc magazine about converting the 14xx.

Thank you all for the comments...I never knew there were so many different types of Panniers

 

When I return back to the UK in a couple of weeks, I will check on the old Farish pannier bodies that I gave to my father...as I cut my N gauge teeth 30 years ago with GWR BLT's which gave way to BR Blue as I got fed up with them stalling on my peco insulfrogs

 

I was going to go with the latest Bachfar Pannier assuming the body would be the most correct, but seeing Bernard's comment above begs a rethink...not sure I am up to converting steamers .

 

What I find strange about the big manufacturer's though is how things manage to stretch in scale. In my own capacity as an Architect, we draw scale plans and then build scale models of said design from those plans...without stretching it/altering it/modifying it...I wonder why this doesn't seem to happen with model trains and things end up altered?...

I never knew there were so many different types of Panniers

 

There are a lot more than have been mentioned so far, but we won't go there, yet

 

 

 

What I find strange about the big manufacturer's though is how things manage to stretch in scale. In my own capacity as an Architect, we draw scale plans and then build scale models of said design from those plans...without stretching it/altering it/modifying it...I wonder why this doesn't seem to happen with model trains and things end up altered?...

 

I guess for trains, certainly the older ones it was a case of space to get a workable motor / weight combo. If you look at the Peco Collett goods they still have not managed to sort out a sensible tender, and that's a modern loco. There is also constraints put on the manufactures to make sure that the models are robust, though this appears to have been mostly overcome now. That said there are some real shockers out there. I'm sure that a quick and cheap fix to make most of the older Farish stuff look better would be a new front bogie for the steamers. Not worth making these exactly right, it would just expose the rest of the model, but a simple change could boost the superficial appearance. I know that you can get the aftermarket solutions for this.

The 57xx/8750 bodies are nicer than the 94xx which is a little overscale in height. But a 94xx converted to a 15xx would be very cool...

 

Thats being quite polite to the 94XX. It is generally overscale (length and height), as it was designed to fit the 'generic' 0-6-0 chassis that GF did in the old days. So it also has the wrong wheelbase. Once I discovered this, I abandoned trying to design an etched replacement chassis for it, as it wasn't worth upgrading to 2FS.

 

Chris

The 15xx, like the 94xx had 4'7.5" wheels and would also need the 9mm association replacements (same problem) but the 14xx/48xx had the 5' (10mm) wheels...

 

...if it is to be non-powered, how about converting the Dapol to be an open cab 517 or even reverse the chasis (2-4-0T) for a 'Metro'?

 

Technically speaking, 4' 7.5" works out at 9.52mm, and there is a new 9.5mm driving wheel in the Association range - watch out that the flange still fits the body though. Similar argument for the 14XX, wghere 10.5mm is the true scale equivalent.

 

I also believe that the famine of 9mm drivers is now over, or if not, will very shortly be.

 

Chris Higgs

Technically speaking, 4' 7.5" works out at 9.52mm, and there is a new 9.5mm driving wheel in the Association range - watch out that the flange still fits the body though. Similar argument for the 14XX, wghere 10.5mm is the true scale equivalent.

 

I also believe that the famine of 9mm drivers is now over, or if not, will very shortly be.

 

Chris Higgs

 

I stand corrected . Whilst I'm still getting to the point where I need them, I have been getting increasingly concerned over the shortages with the 9mm drivers since they are the predominantly required size needed for GWR conversions (57xx/8750, 45xx, 42xx etc) - having a complete mental block, I never considered that 9.5mm would be a more accurate fit (but as you noted, the flange clearence will need to be considered).

 

Thanks again, that's two useful bits of info I've learnt today

Thanks again, that's two useful bits of info I've learnt today

 

We aim to please on this blog

 

Thanks Chris - that has certainly answered a few questions...the 37 and Mk I's will remain...but the Pannier will be put on ice.

 

If I really wanted to have my favourite steamer then it would have to be a Q1...but I guess IKB will turn in his grave at the thought of that on a GW branchline

PS...my 'brown paper package tied up with string' courtesy of Hattons arrived today, so sparks can recommence on Monday on the Moorswater board.

 

A few additional items of rolling stock also made their way into the package too...more on those shortly...

If I really wanted to have my favourite steamer then it would have to be a Q1...but I guess IKB will turn in his grave at the thought of that on a GW branchline

 

Fully understandable! However my justification for a Q1 on a GWR branchline is that in wartime anything could happen... I'm pretty certain that it didn't actually happen, but there's no reason why a Q1 hauling a load of AEROs (thats a GWR propellor wagon) in to Calne couldn't have happened ; The RAF stations at Yatesbury and Lyneham, and the Maintenance Unit at Melksham could easily justify the potential for such a routing.

 

If you're running a 'steam special' in the 80's, well, the world is your oyster when it comes to picking excuses...

We aim to please on this blog

 

Thanks Chris - that has certainly answered a few questions...the 37 and Mk I's will remain...but the Pannier will be put on ice.

 

If I really wanted to have my favourite steamer then it would have to be a Q1...but I guess IKB will turn in his grave at the thought of that on a GW branchline

 

Shame about the pannier, and as for the Q1 and IKB. Well it didn't start off as a GWR line did it, so he couldn't complain that much.

Shame about the pannier

 

...it's only on ice...we may not have seen the last of it yet

 

As Steve says...we makes our own rules...

In terms of modifying the basic 94XX bodyshell, I have posted my latest progress (the result of some bending with pliers and intermittent swearing to add some handrails) on my latest blog entry... see the bottom of the page at:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/blog/351/entry-4788-a-tale-of-two-very-different-n-gauge-models-people-mover-mark-ii-and-a-pannier/

To celebrate GWR 175 there will be steam working on the line this weekend.

Don't know exactly what will be running, but the flier shows a pic of a 94XX

 

Maybe someone who is planning to go can let us know exactly what is running.

To celebrate GWR 175 there will be steam working on the line this weekend.

Don't know exactly what will be running, but the flier shows a pic of a 94XX

 

Maybe someone who is planning to go can let us know exactly what is running.

 

Greybear - It's actually the second consecutive weekend of it...take a look at this excellent thread which now shows some excellent photos from last weekend - hth