Trix wagon

[relaxinghobby]

I bought this one from a swap meet, I have not seen such a one before. The chassis is slightly warped into a downward bow, is this common?

 

 

 

[Il Grifone]

It's one of the last series of plastic wagons with the pinpoint underframe. Usually they had the Trix version of the Peco coupling fitted, but there was provision for fitting the Tri-ang MkIII tension lock type, as on this one. They are not very rare (I saw one at the local boot sale on Sunday, but bought a Wrenn R1 tank instead!). I think the bow comes from the plastic underframe being a fraction shorter than the mazak underframe fitted to the earlier series and for which these bodies were designed. Certainly the CONFLAT body, I fitted to one, has the same bow. It would appear to have been fitted with replacement wheels. The originals were a solid brass disc affair.

 

They came in BR bauxite or grey self coloured plastic and unpainted*. The scale is supposedly 1:80, but the open wagons, at least, look OK with 00 stock - the vans appear low in overall height. The width is definitely 4mm however.

 

*The RCH mineral wagons were an exception to this, of course.

[BernardTPM]

IIRC these wagons scaled out (in 4mm) at 16' 6" so the 7-plank, steel mineral and pig iron (nice unusual subject!) were correct for 4mm scale, though the J-hangers fitted chassis was a little OTT for such humble rolling stock. It suited the BR(LMR) van they did (with a rather neater working door than the later Mainline version) which was the right length in 1:80 scale.

[Fat Controller]

It's one of the last series of plastic wagons with the pinpoint underframe. Usually they had the Trix version of the Peco coupling fitted, but there was provision for fitting the Tri-ang MkIII tension lock type, as on this one. They are not very rare (I saw one at the local boot sale on Sunday, but bought a Wrenn R1 tank instead!). I think the bow comes from the plastic underframe being a fraction shorter than the mazak underframe fitted to the earlier series and for which these bodies were designed. Certainly the CONFLAT body, I fitted to one, has the same bow. It would appear to have been fitted with replacement wheels. The originals were a solid brass disc affair.

 

They came in BR bauxite or grey self coloured plastic and unpainted*. The scale is supposedly 1:80, but the open wagons, at least, look OK with 00 stock - the vans appear low in overall height. The width is definitely 4mm however.

 

*The RCH mineral wagons were an exception to this, of course.

The bow might also be down to the use of two dissimilar plastics for body and underframe- that used for the underframe gave very good rollability, to the extent that wagons would wander off in a stiff draught. Sadly, the 'greasiness' of the plastic made it impossible to attach anything to it (at least with the adhesives of the time), which precluded modifying the brake gear or fitting vacuum cylinders.

Trix did some interesting stuff at the time- I remember the Conflat (with various containers), the three-planker and a pig iron wagon, but I'm certain there was more. I have an inkling that they'd looked at doing a Freightliner wagon, and possibly some 45t tanks- it would have been interesting to see what these would have been like.

[Il Grifone]

From what I remember, the Trix plastic wagons consisted of:- 16T mineral wagon (also with ore and coal loads), LMS design van, pig iron wagon, CONFLATs (with containers both on short and long underframes), 3 plank open (LWB), brake van and various fuel tanks (an improved version of the the TTR ones, at first still tinplate later plastic). At first on a Mazak u/f with tiny wheels (10mm IIRC) and later a plastic one. The diecast WELTROLS were also still available.

Later additions were the RCH mineral and grain wagons. These 2 were 4mm scale I think. The mineral certainly is and appears to be based on the South Wales type, complete with handrails on the end door.

 

http://www.trix.co.uk/

[Pixie]

IIRC these wagons scaled out (in 4mm) at 16' 6" so the pig iron (nice unusual subject!) were correct for 4mm scale.

 

I'm a dense sod at times - I'd assumed that because they were 10' wheelbase, that they were 17'6'' over head stocks and the Trix body was underlength. Quick double check in Bartlett et all and you're right! Sadly I think I've long disposed of the bodyshell that I had, but I wonder if these could be made into something reaonsable? I seem to recall the walls were a little thick but I reckon they might be usable with some careful weathering.

 

Pix

[Fat Controller]

I'm a dense sod at times - I'd assumed that because they were 10' wheelbase, that they were 17'6'' over head stocks and the Trix body was underlength. Quick double check in Bartlett et all and you're right! Sadly I think I've long disposed of the bodyshell that I had, but I wonder if these could be made into something reaonsable? I seem to recall the walls were a little thick but I reckon they might be usable with some careful weathering.

 

Pix

Wasn't it the Coil J that used these as their basis? A very 'South Walian' wagon during the 1970s, with hordes of them at ADJ.

[Pixie]

Wasn't it the Coil J that used these as their basis? A very 'South Walian' wagon during the 1970s, with hordes of them at ADJ.

 

The Pig Irons became the Coil C's but they seemed to of knocked around with the Coil J's which were cut down from iron ire tipplers. I've done a trio of Coil J's and been musing about the best way to do a couple of Coil C's to keep them company for quite some time now. Interestingly Paul Bartlett mentions (http://gallery6801.fotopic.net/c888438.html) that the Trix version is scaled at 3.8mm/ft which may be where I got confused. Some Ebay hunting beckons!

 

Pix

[Il Grifone]

I must measure mine up - if I can find which box it's in!

 

Scale is rather a loose term with Trix in any case.

[BernardTPM]

Some Ebay hunting beckons!

Pix

 

I've got a spare body I'm never going to use now - e-mail me.

[multiprinter]

I remember the first Trix wagon I bought - second hand. It was a revelation in free running compared to the Triang and HD wagons of the day.

[steve22]

I remember the first Trix wagon I bought - second hand. It was a revelation in free running compared to the Triang and HD wagons of the day.

 

Me too - I bought two of their Blue Circle private owner wagons (I liked the blue print on yellow bodies). Their running qualities were unbelievable for the time. I recall holding one of them upside down and spinning the wheels. They finally stopped a whole minute later. I bought a Trix Crawfords (I think) whisky hopper wagon. Second hand, couldn't afford new as a school kid (8/11 I think they were in the late sixties). I thought I'd entered the big league, owning that! I still have my Trix 'Scotsman'. Sadly it was manufactured with one set of drivers skew on the axle and slightly out of gauge so its hardly run in these last forty years. On the bright side it means its boxed, mint, more or less.

Steve.

[Pennine MC]

I remember the first Trix wagon I bought - second hand. It was a revelation in free running compared to the Triang and HD wagons of the day.

 

I used Trix wheels in some of my early kitbuilds, for that very reason

[hmrspaul]

The bow might also be down to the use of two dissimilar plastics for body and underframe- that used for the underframe gave very good rollability, to the extent that wagons would wander off in a stiff draught. Sadly, the 'greasiness' of the plastic made it impossible to attach anything to it (at least with the adhesives of the time), which precluded modifying the brake gear or fitting vacuum cylinders.

The underframes were 66mm over headstocks (so yes 16ft. 6in which was incorrect for Conflat, van, 3plank. They depicted a very rare brake rigging - conventional push rods with 1 brake shoe per wheel but with auxilliary (J) suspension (I say rare, I think none existent!). They had a vacuum cylinder - easily ripped off.

Not mentioned is that they also came as Completely Knocked Down kits - following Triang of the time. To attach the nylon type underframe to the plastic body they used double sided sellotape - it didnt work so you get the springing apart of frame and body.

 

OT but I always thought the BR Mark 1s were very nice for the time - good colour, thinnish side, Commonwealth bogies and interiors.

 

Paul Bartlett

[Il Grifone]

 

OT but I always thought the BR Mark 1s were very nice for the time - good colour, thinnish side, Commonwealth bogies and interiors.

 

Paul Bartlett

 

An early example of poor market research. When Trix upgraded their range in the late fifties, they chose a scale of (about/elastic) 1:80 rather than 1:76.2. This must have seriously affected sales. (This error was copied by Playcraft/Jouef, Lima*, Rivarossi* and Fleischmann (possibly others?), with the same unfortunate results.) The Trix wagons were a mixed bunch. Nicely detailed but dimensionally compromised. They weren't helped by their version of the Peco couplings being incompatible (for uncoupling) with the Dublo and Peco versions.

 

* Italians are particularly unfortunate in that their two major manufactures modelled in two different scales - Rivarossi in 1/80 and Lima in 1:87. (Their versions of the dunny seat coupling were also incompatible.) Rivarossi switched to 1:87 in the nineties so complicating matters even further. (Rivarossi US models are 1:87.)

[Fat Controller]

Electrotren also seemed to use 3.8mm/ft for at least some of their models- very handy when I made a Grainflow wagon.

The CKD 'kits' were intended as a way round Purchase Tax, which preceded VAT, I believe.

[Pandora]

The underframes were 66mm over headstocks (so yes 16ft. 6in which was incorrect for Conflat, van, 3plank. They depicted a very rare brake rigging - conventional push rods with 1 brake shoe per wheel but with auxilliary (J) suspension (I say rare, I think none existent!). They had a vacuum cylinder - easily ripped off.

Not mentioned is that they also came as Completely Knocked Down kits - following Triang of the time. To attach the nylon type underframe to the plastic body they used double sided sellotape - it didnt work so you get the springing apart of frame and body.

 

OT but I always thought the BR Mark 1s were very nice for the time - good colour, thinnish side, Commonwealth bogies and interiors.

 

Paul Bartlett

The Trix  CKD kits were known as "Wagonmaster"

The Trix A2 body could be mated to a Triang Britannia chassis if the Trix wheelsets  failed.

[locomad]

Interesting thread, yesterday at a local toy fair I had a good root though the 50p bin always a source of odds and ends and came across this Trix/Hornby-dublo oddity.

 

It's a Hornby-dublo super detailed van on a Trix chassis, nice fit too, plus advantages of Trix free running axles, something I've never seen before.

 

It's slightly too low compared to standard sd van.

 

[Il Grifone]

Obviously one is loaded and the other empty or perhaps one is due for new wheels.

Fitting a floor to the body would probably resolve matters as the solebar looks a bit narrow and the body sits too low. Some of mine (the ones I've detailed/repainted not the couple in my Dublo collection) have lost the spurious panel under the number and load weight markings. (This still survives in the Dapol version). It's probable that the axle ends are rusty too and would benefit from cleaning up - the rusty axle is prototypical and can stay.

 

Certainly a bargain at 50p! 

[locomad]

Obviously one is loaded and the other empty or perhaps one is due for new wheels.

Fitting a floor to the body would probably resolve matters as the solebar looks a bit narrow and the body sits too low. Some of mine (the ones I've detailed/repainted not the couple in my Dublo collection) have lost the spurious panel under the number and load weight markings. (This still survives in the Dapol version). It's probable that the axle ends are rusty too and would benefit from cleaning up - the rusty axle is prototypical and can stay.

 

Certainly a bargain at 50p! 

Good idea, might do that add a floor, I've done some research and it seems it's a later Trix standard polypropylene 10 foot wagon chassis produced about 1965, wheels will go though standard peco 100 points. It's also slightly too short perhaps the scale 1:80.

 

It's very free running tested about 1:90 gradient I wonder if like the coach bogies it's had graphite impregnated into the chassis moulding.

 

I'am not really a Trix collector, don't really come across much stock but very impressed with the chassis again I like the peco coupling and simple too they look better more refined.

 

With my larger layout could do with another shed load of these chassis, so can use more modern rtr to haul trains, will be looking out for these especially at 50p

[sagaguy]

If the cahssis are anything like the Trix commonwealth bogies,you could probably drop in modern Hornby pinpoint wagon wheels.

 

                      Ray.

[Il Grifone]

Good idea, might do that add a floor, I've done some research and it seems it's a later Trix standard polypropylene 10 foot wagon chassis produced about 1965, wheels will go though standard peco 100 points. It's also slightly too short perhaps the scale 1:80.

 

It's very free running tested about 1:90 gradient I wonder if like the coach bogies it's had graphite impregnated into the chassis moulding.

 

I'am not really a Trix collector, don't really come across much stock but very impressed with the chassis again I like the peco coupling and simple too they look better more refined.

 

With my larger layout could do with another shed load of these chassis, so can use more modern rtr to haul trains, will be looking out for these especially at 50p

 

The Trix wagon underframe was made in two lengths. One was 17 '6" in 1:80*, which conveniently is about 16' 6" in 4mm scale. This meant the Trix RCH mineral wagon is usable as a 00 model. It was state of the art in the 60s, but the Bachmann model has put it out of the running. The same applies to their 16T steel mineral wagon, but the body here is less than satisfactory and there was the Airfix/Dapol kit.... The other, longer, one was used under a CONFLAT and a 3 plank open IIRC.

 

Both underframes exist as a rather crude die-cast version, later replaced by this plastic one, made from the same plastic as the bogies AFAIK. The suspension system portrayed was rather OTT for most of the wagon range.

 

The plastic underframe is renowned for its ability to run away on a 'level' surface.

 

* Nominal scale! It tended to vary between 1:80 and 1:82 (or more - the buffer spacing is the 00 dimension or even greater) I have seen the scale variously quoted as 3.8 and 3.75mm to the foot. (I suspect the later, but it is rather elastic....)

[BernardTPM]

The other useful plastic body on that chassis was the Pig Iron, unavailable elsewhere as far as I know. The plastic underframe has J hangers rather like those used by the LMS.

[5050]

I've used the wooden mineral wagon bodies on Cambrian underframes to create a 'generic' coal wagon.  The paint comes off with (old style) brake fluid leaving a 'translucent' body which can be stuck with normal solvents.  Painted in a '50's  typical grey/brown/no paint well weathered finish and 'P' running number they look fine in a rake of ex -PO wagons.

 

Even in P4..................

[Il Grifone]

I've never measured up the pig iron wagon, though it is near enough the right length (the 1:80 17' 6" underframe again). However it is the only model AFAIK, so one shouldn't be too ctitical.

The RCH mineral is a South Wales wagon (handrails on the end doors), but it's major fault is not having curb rails. I did modify one to make a six plank wagon using the bottom plank as the curb rail and lettered it 'PRIMROSE' (from one of the books). I'll try and post a picture, if 1. I can find it - it's in one of the boxes (of which I have dozens*) and 2. I remember to do so. The advent of kits from Slaters and Cambrian made the work needed no longer worthwhile. They do pass muster in a train even today - they were the best available in their day, followed by Tri-ang's (ex Trackmaster) wagon. (Conveniently one is end-door and the other side-door.) The original Trackmaster underframe is not bad, though it is 16 foot (OK as it has crown plates and is therefore to 1907 spec. but again curb rails are conspicuous by their abscence.

 

* I did start to catalogue them....