GEM LNWR loco kits

[farren]

The cauliflower chassis by gem is easy to build, and gives little trouble. the body is very good the round bits are round and the flat bits are flat. Once made a little grinding is needed Around the wheel splashers to make sure there’s room for the wheels so there’s no electrical shorts but runs well even with my building abilities what they a

[hayfield]

There is no doubt that the quality of the newer style GEM kits from either the previous owners in Bedford and the new owners is far better. I understand the Bedford operation had new tools built and the quality of both casting techniques have greatly improved over the years, plus the design of some excellent etched chassis. Though I have noticed this statement on Lytchett Manor Models website 

PLEASE NOTE: THESE ITEMS ARE CAST TO ORDER AND USE OLD MOULDS THAT CAN BE PROBLEMATIC TO CAST

 

I have kits for the LNWR 2-4-2T and the GWR 2-4-0T which both are very well cast and chassis well designed, though the latter has a Mainly Trains chassis which is very competitively priced

 

The cost of a complete kit seems to be in line with other manufactures, though strangely the cost of the chassis kits on their own are far more expensive than other similar makes, but this leaves the bodies being very competitively priced.  

 

Certainly the two kits I have stand up well to modern day standards of similar kits

[Penlan]

4 hours ago, hayfield said:

........ though strangely the cost of the chassis kits on their own are far more expensive than other similar makes,

I was looking for a replacement LNWR 4'6" 2-4-2T chassis, the other manufacturer of suitable chassis kits doesn't do the 4'6" version, though the complete loco is in their lists. 

I did email them (twice) re. availability, but to no avail.
As you say, the cost differential is large.
I have a very old (50+ years?) GEM 2-4-2T running with a unknown chassis that needs replacing as the loco waddles along and I can't be faffed to try and rectify/destroy it.  So I've gone mad with the money I've saved (£££'sa) by not visiting the Pub during lockdown and bought the Lychett Manor one.  We will see how good it is, soon.

[hayfield]

2 minutes ago, Penlan said:

I was looking for a replacement LNWR 4'6" 2-4-2T chassis, the other manufacturer of suitable chassis kits doesn't do the 4'6" version, though the complete loco is in their lists. 

I did email them (twice) re. availability, but to no avail.
As you say, the cost differential is large.
I have a very old (50+ years?) GEM 2-4-2T running with a unknown chassis that needs replacing as the loco waddles along and I can't be faffed to try and rectify/destroy it.  So I've gone mad with the money I've saved (£££'sa) by not visiting the Pub during lockdown and bought the Lychett Manor one.  We will see how good it is, soon.

 

 

Its a lovely chassis, you will not be disappointed and when bought with the body it makes for a reasonably priced kit, but its the body's price which is subsidiarizing the kit. Look at the joint cost of the GWR 2-4-0T and Mainly trains chassis, you have a quite inexpensive kit

[Penlan]

9 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

As my layout is a roundy-roundy now, and bar stopping in the platform, nobody really see's details to the n'th degree, I'm happy enough with the 'detailed' GEM's I have, and certainly these days with my failing eyesight, brass  'footplate and above' kits are a nightmare for me.
I'm looking forward to seeing the Lychett Chassis and taking the waddle out of this old loco.
Part of the waddle may be due to the nylon centred first generation Mike Sharman wheels too  
bought in the days of the Bristol Show at White Ladies Road........

[ianLMS]

Sorry to hijack the post but its sort of relevant. I have recently purchase a GEM Midland 4P Compound kit and it has a white metal chassis i believe. I inadvertantly purchased a Comet chassis not realising its for the Hornby model (40mm) wheelbase instead of the correct 38mm wheelbase. Should i go for a set of Alan Gibson mainframes with 7'0 wheels or is there a better etched chassis available?

[Buhar]

The Midland Compounds were a 10' wheelbase (40mm) and 7'0 drivers, the LMS Standard Compounds were 9'6" wheelbase and 6'9" drivers.  There were various other differences, so it's not just the chassis.  IIRC the GEM body kit was aimed at an LMS version.

 

Alan

[hayfield]

22 hours ago, ianLMS said:

Sorry to hijack the post but its sort of relevant. I have recently purchase a GEM Midland 4P Compound kit and it has a white metal chassis i believe. I inadvertantly purchased a Comet chassis not realising its for the Hornby model (40mm) wheelbase instead of the correct 38mm wheelbase. Should i go for a set of Alan Gibson mainframes with 7'0 wheels or is there a better etched chassis available?

 

 

Ian

 

I now cannot find the Comet (rather than Wizard) website to see what's on offer from them.

 

The problem with the GEM kit is that it is designed for the old Triang L1 chassis, was this ever correct ? the body is designed for the chassis so may require altering

 

I have no idea about MR/LMS locos I see Gibson do 6 or 7 4-4-0's, none state designed for either the GEM locos what I have found is 

LM1-24   MR Compound

LM1-20   MR 990

LM1-13   LMS 2P

LM1-20   LMS Compound

 

I think its a case of getting plans out and either seeing what needs doing or which chassis is the best fit

[ianLMS]

Thank you John,

I will give AG a call and see what mainframe they recommend for the GEM kit. I can always trim the ends and move the spacers to fit the body as long as the chassis has the same wheelbase that the kit is designed for. I will check the GEM tonight and see what I find. It could be that the GEM kit also has an incorrect wheelbase of 40mm, in which case the Comet chassis will work.  

 

I said Comet, but yes, it came from Wizard. Unfortunately the website description does not mention its for the Hornby model. You only find that out when you open up the instruction sheet after buying it!

[hayfield]

Ian

 

A silly question and one which you may have answered. Have you checked the kit against a plan ?

 

From the little I know of the Alan Gibson mainframes is that many where they are designed to fit a RTR body have the correct wheelbase, plus you can order the frames either with hornblock cutouts or axle holes

 

In a plan book I have (Roche drawings) Midland 3 cylinder compound 7' wheels 9'6" wheelbase

 

 

[D51]

To be fair, Wizard Models does say on the website for the Midland Compound chassis kit LCP9,

"The Hornby model has a 40mm wheelbase, and this chassis has been designed to match. It is not suitable for scale models with a 38mm wheelbase".

Surely the GEM kit will also have the incorrect 40mm wheelbase?

Edited September 17, 2020 by D51

[Steamport Southport]

21 hours ago, D51 said:

To be fair, Wizard Models does say on the website for the Midland Compound chassis kit LCP9,

"The Hornby model has a 40mm wheelbase, and this chassis has been designed to match. It is not suitable for scale models with a 38mm wheelbase".

Surely the GEM kit will also have the incorrect 40mm wheelbase?

 

Easy to change on the GEM model if it's unbuilt.

 

You just have to move the splasher slightly. ISTR it was a little bit too far forward. But only by about a millimetre or so. Obviously that only applies if you are using a scale chassis.

 

It's also better if you build around the chassis rather than trying to fit the chassis to a built body. I know that's the norm, but in this case it does help a lot.

 

 

 

Jason

[Steamport Southport]

On 17/09/2020 at 09:21, hayfield said:

 

 

Ian

 

I now cannot find the Comet (rather than Wizard) website to see what's on offer from them.

 

The problem with the GEM kit is that it is designed for the old Triang L1 chassis, was this ever correct ? the body is designed for the chassis so may require altering

 

I have no idea about MR/LMS locos I see Gibson do 6 or 7 4-4-0's, none state designed for either the GEM locos what I have found is 

LM1-24   MR Compound

LM1-20   MR 990

LM1-13   LMS 2P

LM1-20   LMS Compound

 

I think its a case of getting plans out and either seeing what needs doing or which chassis is the best fit

 

Out of those the LM1-24 MR Compound is designed for the GEM model as is the MR 990 which is for the MR 3P kit. But they have scale wheelbases rather than Triang L1.

 

The LMS Compound is for the Nucast kit.

 

The Comet website is slowly being transferred to the Wizard site. The loco chassis has now moved.

Quote

 

Locomotive Chassis Packs and Components

 

All Comet loco chassis packs, frame sets and motion sets are now fully covered on the Wizard Models website. Please look there instead. For some unknown reason, LF51 and LM51 won't delete!

 

 

Bulleids are being awkward as usual.   

 

http://www.cometmodels.co.uk/

 

 

Jason

[Penlan]

On 15/09/2020 at 13:26, hayfield said:

Its a lovely chassis, you will not be disappointed .....

The kit has arrived -   4' 6" LNWR 2-4-2T chassis.
Hayfield, have you built this chassis, and if so, how have you configured the wheel arrangement?
E.g. with no side play in any of the wheels (ignoring coupling rods)  0-8-0, or front pony 2-6-0 , rear pony 0-6-2 or as the prototype 2-4-2, as there appears to be no facility for either end to have a horizontal rotating pony wheel - thus 0-8-0.

[LNWR18901910]

Well, my LNWR George the Fifth model in Triang-Hornby style is doing fine though it is still yet to be built. A lot of flash has had to be cleaned off and what-not to go. However, I was thinking of using a Triang-Hornby L1 from the early 1970s to make it work better as the chassis I have would require constant cleaning, lubrication and such after a number of uses.

[hayfield]

5 hours ago, Penlan said:

The kit has arrived -   4' 6" LNWR 2-4-2T chassis.
Hayfield, have you built this chassis, and if so, how have you configured the wheel arrangement?
E.g. with no side play in any of the wheels (ignoring coupling rods)  0-8-0, or front pony 2-6-0 , rear pony 0-6-2 or as the prototype 2-4-2, as there appears to be no facility for either end to have a horizontal rotating pony wheel - thus 0-8-0.

 

 

I must have started to build it 8 odd years ago for a layout the club was building in 00 gauge, if I was building it today I would build it differently

 

I built the two drivers rigid with little side play. If I were building it today I would fit hornblocks to the non driven driver and fit a central rocking bar

 

The fixing for the front and rear wheels is very crude, in hind sight I would probably fit hornblocks and have some form of light spring bearing down on the axles. These wheels also should have washers to limit side play, how much depend on what radii are on your layout.

 

As I said the quality of the modern whitemetal castings are excellent, as if the etched chassis if as I said before a tad expensive. Its a great kit of a lovely prototype. The cost of the body and chassis together is reasonably priced, another quandary is whether to have a flywheel in the cab, or shorten the rear motor shaft and fit a firebox backhead and cab derail, I do prefer whitemetal kits simply due to their mass, might be worth fitting a London Road Models chassis !!

 

[Penlan]

18 hours ago, hayfield said:

I built the two drivers rigid with little side play. If I were building it today I would fit hornblocks to the non driven driver and fit a central rocking bar

The fixing for the front and rear wheels is very crude, in hind sight I would probably fit hornblocks and have some form of light spring bearing down on the axles. These wheels also should have washers to limit side play, how much depend on what radii are on your layout.

Thankyou.
Minimum radius is 42", most is >48".
I have one of the early Gem kit's body, the current loco is waddling along, 
Thus the purchase of the chassis kit - I think the current chassis is an early Gibson side plates, the wheels are definitely early Sharman.
Most of my (18) loco's have rocking bars and sprung pony/bogies.

[hayfield]

Strange, with the Gibson mainframes and decent wheels you would have thought the builder knew what they were doing. Could it be badly fitting wheels which are twisted?

[Penlan]

On 01/10/2020 at 15:23, hayfield said:

Strange, with the Gibson mainframes and decent wheels you would have thought the builder knew what they were doing. Could it be badly fitting wheels which are twisted?

One of the wheels is about 0.5mm out across the width of the wheel.
The sliding hornblocks are definately worn.
Both pony wheels are almost free agents (lightly sprung down) in their desire, or not, to follow the rails, which just leaves the two coupled axles to keep the loco on a straight path.   It's annoying seeing it waddling along compared to the rest of the fleet, so it was bite the bullet and give it a new undercarriage, I'm sure even Crewe had to do this some times 
.... and I just can't be bothered to try and cobble a repair, my declining eyesight, plus at present with having a long period unable to socialise (go to the pub), there's one or three pennies in the kitty to spend.
The loco has done about 60 exhibitions (on various layouts) over 35 - 40 years,

plus a lot of running on the layout(s) at home.

Edited October 7, 2020 by Penlan

[LNWR18901910]

Can somebody please help me find a new running board for my LNWR George the Fifth 4-4-0 kit? Mine has broke unrepairable damage to it.

[hayfield]

If all is lost (though a call to the new owners might be worthwhile) I have seen super results using a piece of PCB sheet topped by a sheet of brass. Finally you may have to rely on eBay and but one of the older GEM body kits which come up quite often