Chris

I am sorry to read that your 2mm efforts have currently hit a brick wall, and that you are taking a break to try elsewhere. Good luck with your endeavours in 4mm, and I hope to see you enjoying them, and perhaps returning to 2mm suitably refreshed at some time in the future.

I had expressed similar concerns that 2mm FS appears to be in danger of serving two different client groups, and falling between the two stools - modern image modellers, who are well-served (their only problem is building of turnouts), and the rest, who need to be micro-engineers. Like you, I far prefer steam, and know that I am not a micro-engineer, so I fear that 2mm may not be for me either - my first two locomotive kits are at a halt waiting for various missing components to arrive in shop 3, so I haven't had chance to test my ability to get a loco running successfully yet...

Looking on the bright side, there are a couple of developments that might suit you (and me too, in one case) if and when they come to fruition in the not-too-distant future:

• David Eveleigh has just announced his intention to prepare etched kits for several Midland locos this year.
  
• There are various projects to produce a 2mm solid brass split chassis design - the first should be available later this year, a conversion kit for the Dapol/Ixion Manor. That prototype isn't of much interest to you, but the process appears to produce a very robust chassis which is easy to put together, and I know others are also interested in doing similar projects (mostly GWR, which suits me though not you).
  

Finally a word of thanks for documenting your trials and tribulations here, which have helped to inspire me to try something similar.

Looking at the coach lining in the photos here, comparing it to mine, and looking at some of your earlier work, I think you are doing yourself a disservice by assuming that getting the locomotives running reliably is beyond your ability. On the other hand, I recall speaking to a prominent member of the 2mm FS community a couple of months ago who had problems with most of their stable of locomotives too, with only one running completely satisfactorily, so perhaps that is a normal state of affairs.

David

Chris,

Sorry to hear that you're having a break from 2mm. I hope you'll come back, fully refreshed, in the future. I have admired your willingness to tackle pre-grouping modelling in 2mm - it's not an easy path to follow in any scale.

The 2mm Scale Association tries to support it's members as much as possible, but inevitably we provide more support where we know it will produce most benefit to our members, so that's why you have seen drop-in wheels for diesel locos, expansion of the range of Easitrac parts and replacement chassis for Farish and Dapol locos recently - that's what most of our members want!

Having said that, I'm pleased to see that, as David mentions in his reply, a number of pre-grouping loco kits (mostly Midland Railway in origin!) are being developed by several members and will hopefully appear in the not too distant future, so I hope to see an increase in 2mm modelling of this period. Couple that with the loco chassis workshops that are being organised at present, I hope we will see continued growth in 2mm modelling.

I don't think it's quite true to say that you need to be a micro-engineer to work in 2mm scale - a lot of the engineering work in items such as gears, wheels, bearings, motors, etc. is done for you, but unfortunately 2mm finescale will never be as easy an option as say EM or P4 - there isn't a lot we can do about the physical size of the parts!

Anyway, I look forward to seeing progress reports on your 4mm project.

Andy

(2mm Scale Association Secretary)

Mikkel - forgive me, because I should have added your name alongside Chris Nevard's for inspiration! I think my Norfolk sojourn is likely to be unprototypical - but hopefully fun!

Pete - sorry mate, I'll still be around to comment on your work

As I said, whether I document any future efforts depends on time ... and whether I get withdrawal symptoms! Anyway, I still have those blue diesels to do something with, so you never know. One thing about this hobby is it can take you to strange places...I look forward to seeing your work develop.

David - I understand what you're saying. I know of one other established 2FS at least who seems to have issues getting reliable running from scratchbuilt stuff. My problem is that to improve significantly I would need to splash out on machinery which i don't really have room for, and in any case I'm not sure that represents the best use of money for me.

If in the future someone produces chassis kits for 2FS, or perhaps a chassis building service, it might make a difference to me - but then the point of 2FS seems to be in doing it yourself, doesn't it?

Andy - I still intend maintaining my membership of the association and keeping abreast of developments and the work of others.

I do have the 2FS community to thank for two things at least - that I can never go back to Peco code 55 even if the quality of N gauge stuff continues to improve!!

And that I have a 19th century Midland Railway layout with some accurate rolling stock.

Chris

I've often wondered similar things. I am sure the ease of rewheeling diesels compared with kettles is why that has been explored to the point of product. Steam has been considered, but every product is a different kit - and they are each more complex - so like the buffer project they are possibly going nowhere. Doing it yourself is one option, which is why I now have a lathe and milling machine. I could live without them. The only tool I really needed for making a chassis was a drill press. I have a spare now if you would like it? Being connected well enough to have people to work with you on things is part of what the association is about, but it seems that others have more luck (if that is the right word?) with this. The timesuck for the improvement is the biggest PITA for me. Re-wheeling locomotives is okay but then maybe we should all be working to a different scale?

Don. I am concluding that the trueness and accuracy afforded by simple machinery is actually fairly vital in such small mechanisms. I think the weight issue is less of a problem as it can be more easily resolved, except in the very smallest of tank engines.

Some kind of universal gearboxes might be a possible solution. For me, I don't think building a 4F kit would be of particular interest or value.

Rich, I don't think replacement wheels can be the answer for 2mm kettles for as you say, the varieties are endless. While loco body construction is not too formidable in my experience - after all, it is largely a matter of how accurate you want to be - square and accurate chassis are a completely different matter.

Please PM me details and photos if possible about the drill press - I might be interested.

Regards,

Chris

Chris,

I for one am really sorry that you have decided to have a break from 2mmFS.

I have to say that one of the reasons that I have been tempted back into 2mmFS are the entries you've made here on RMweb!

I was a member of the SmmSA for many years but found the lack of small motors stopped me actually building anything (I found I was unable to build my own motors a 'la Stewart Hine, etc), and most rolling stock had to be scratch-built too. However, with the Nigel Lawton motors (and similar) now being available I have been tempted to try once more. I am now trying to scratch-build my first ever 2mmFS loco (I have chosen a particularly small GWR Metro 2-4-0T - I have a soft-spot for small GWR tank engines :-)). The idea behind this being that if I can get something like that to work then I will have the confidence to try one or two of my other favourite prototypes. At the moment, the un-powered chassis rolls happily down a length of track (most of the time).

Being a real glutton for punishment, I am also going to try to build some Brunel Broad Gauge trackwork, so far I have a couple of point switches built, and have been waiting for the 2mmSA shop to get some more copperclad point sleepering in stock so that I can continue with the project.

Good luck in anything else you try.

Ian

Ian, glad to see you are trying to do something different in 2FS. I really enjoyed building the locos and as I said learned a lot, and I do hope you will achieve success.

I would be interested to see how you designed your chassis for the 2-4-0T by the way - are you posting your work anywhere? Wouldn't mind seeing a photo or two!

Incidentally, I never said I am giving up2FS completely. I have too big an investment - I just need a break trying something different for a while.

If and when the novelty of having real shunting sounds wears thin - who knows?!

In the meantime, I am enjoying weathering a few RTR 4mm wagons and building a little C&L track, painting some characterful figures and not having to scratch build most things!

I still think 2mm is perfect for anyone who likes landscaping; and layouts like CF on the grand scale; and Highbury on a more modest scale, demonstrate the power 2mm has. Who could tell that those two Stirling singles on the cover of RM were 2mm?

Regards,

Chris

Chris,

I am trying to document my trials and tribulations in 2mm in my blog below :

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1009-ian-smiths-2mm-finescale-ramblings/

The 2-4-0 chassis is built using traditional methods using parts that I acquired from the 2mmSA many years ago (I was a member from the late 70's to the mid-90's) but I never built more than a few bits of track and a couple of wagons.

As a result of a period of illness last year, I found therapy in resurrecting my P4 layout that hadn't been touched in over 10 years. I also discovered RMweb, and some of the 2mm FS items I found have re-lit the fire in my belly as it were. Where I failed in my first sojourn in 2mm was loco building so until I actually manage build something can move then I can't commit to building a layout. However, I am confident that I can build a loco, and if successful I intend to build a small layout (of similar size to Glenfield) but also intend to build something a little different, hence the Brunel Baulk Road trackwork.

Ian