SCC - Sparkshot Custom Creations - 3D Printed Loco Kits etc Various Scales

[Knuckles]

I think you will find that Minerva Models intends to produce a Cambrian 4-4-0 but in 7mm. And there is a book on the way on them, but I don't know when  it will be published (by the Welsh Railways Research Circle).though hopefully in 2016.

 

Jonathan David

 

That's cool, I know Dragon models do or are doing some Cambrian / Furness stuff. For several years I was talking to them in email regarding the K2 and even sent them some photo's. They pushed the project back a year, then a 2nd, then I got a reply saying they decided not to do the K2.......so I done one! I don't know if they are going to change their mind or indeed downsize their Cambrian class 61 into 4mm but time will tell I guess.

 

This is my 7mm Small Sharpie

 

 

would this be the same as you want in 4mm. Mine is from the Dragon Models kit.

Don

Looks like a K1, but as it's Cambrian livery I guess it isn't a K1? All I can say is it is a beautiful model and I'd love to have one myself.

 

 

 

To 58Herbie: That's good to know. There should be more pre grouping layouts about. Most stick with BR. BR is good but we need more earlier stuff!

To both of the posters above and everyone reading: I don't know what will be made next (Bar the Cambrian) but by all means keep posting your interests or PM them. It helps build a collective opinion of wants.

I agree; there's a lot of interesting pre-group stuff just waiting to be tapped and I'd echo 58Herbie's plea for M&C items. Likewise the Glasgow and South Western is woefully under-represented outside of the 7mm world too. As a Modeller of Western Scotland, any assistance would be gleefully accepted.

 

K2 is bonny though; I'll have one in due course!

 

Dave.

 

 

 I mended your broken quote! I think the reason most do BR is because most people that are alive today still remember BR. My Grandma remembers the big 4 and my recently Late Great Grandma was born in 1919 so she may well have seen pre grouping liveries still. Part of me is envious of those living in the most (in my opinion) interesting steam times. If you do get a K2 I'd love to see how you turn it out.

 

 

Cambrian Small Bogie = Furness K1 (designed for Furness originally)

Cambrian Large Bogie = Furness K2 (designed for Cambrian originally)

 

the FR and Cambrian variants of K1s all have 3'0" bogie wheels, which may be where the confusion comes from. Rush's Furness Locomotives book lists 3'0" for both and the drawings show this accordingly. There are lots of drawings from Stephenson's pertaining to the 1897 cambrian batch in the NRM, don't know if they would settle anything (the GA is not there).

Thanks for the info. My issue is for the Cambrian and K2 though because if the wheels on the Cambrian indeed are 6" bigger I need to tweak the chassis. This isn't too much of a bother but those bogey splashers might have a problem. Will keep you updated though.

 

 

Knuckles,

 

I see your range of Coupling Rods. Have you managed to

get a design accepted for a OO Crosshead in brass by

Shapeways?

 

Noel

 

Hi Noel, I haven't made any crossheads yet so I cannot say. There are a few engines swirling around my smoke-box that require them though so I'll find out at some point I guess.

 

At present, there is certainly a shortage of pre-group layouts and that is a shame as both locos and rolling stock were at their most elegant. But I think it is just a factor of there not being much available ready-to-run to get people started. That is changing a bit now.

 

And of course many of us model what we knew as children. Not many modellers about who were alive before 1923. But even when I first got interested in model railways, in the 1960s, pre-group layouts were rare.

 

Yeah, I think I just basically typed what you said, never mind. But indeed I think it is largely a matter of age demographics and what one remembers. All the more reason to model pre grouping times to not loose our history as badly.

 

These days, it should not be a problem to find a small motor that is powerful enough. More a matter of a suitable gearbox as the small motors turn too fast.

 

I actually like the fact they spin fast. I like slow running so reduction gearboxes are needed but with a faster spinning motor I find a fly wheel can still work nicely at slower speeds.

 

For me that is the attraction. There won't be to much duplication of the models I build.

Rare bird. It's nice to have a unique look and feel to your models. After a while you seem the same RTR models of a particular class and after a while you see the same Superquick/Metcalf etc buildings and it just ruines the illusion of reality after a while.

Edited December 24, 2015 by Knuckles

[81A Oldoak]

I think you will find that Minerva Models intends to produce a Cambrian 4-4-0 but in 7mm. And there is a book on the way on them, but I don't know when  it will be published (by the Welsh Railways Research Circle).though hopefully in 2016.

 

Jonathan David

Chris Basten and I have commissioned the second RTR 0 gauge locomotive to be produced by Minerva Model Railways. It most assuredly is not a Cambrian 4-4-0.

[Knuckles]

Information regarding the delay can be found here

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/106162-scc-sparkshot-custom-creations/page-3

 

 

 

 

 

Ok it's ready, Cambrian Class 61 Locomotive and the chassis kits for sale.

[rue_d_etropal]

I think of the reasons for fewer pre-grouping layouts , is more to do with shortage of suitable rolling stock, in particular coaches. There are now quite a few pre-grouping locos available. Still plenty of models for 3D printing.

[BG John]

I started pre-grouping modelling 44 years ago, and even though I was modelling the ever popular GWR, ended up with much of my stock being 1930s/40s Airfix RTR locos and coaches, until I could build something more suitable. Nothing much has changed!

Edited January 1, 2016 by BG John

[Knuckles]

Nothing stopping the creation of some rolling stock. But what I will say is, due to how most 3D printing outlets work it means a full size coach will cost double or tripple the price of a loco body - which is retarded.

 

Also a simple 5 plank wagon or horsebox, although cheaper than a loco body won't usually be that much cheaper. This is much of the problem it seems.

 

A lot of printers work out their costs by material volume, how many parts to one item (sprueing up cuts costs) and the amount of space and time it takes up to produce - the latter being the chief culprit.

Edited January 1, 2016 by Knuckles

[BG John]

Maybe 3D printing isn't the way to go for rolling stock, except for some of the more complex shaped components. As I'm intending to do a lot with with my Silhouette Portrait, I wonder if there's a market for producing downloadable cutting files, in a similar way to how Scalescenes and others produce card building kits. 3D printed components could then be produced for the small complicated bits.

[Knuckles]

Maybe 3D printing isn't the way to go for rolling stock, except for some of the more complex shaped components. As I'm intending to do a lot with with my Silhouette Portrait, I wonder if there's a market for producing downloadable cutting files, in a similar way to how Scalescenes and others produce card building kits. 3D printed components could then be produced for the small complicated bits.

Sounds good to me, and I think you are right about rolling stock. This isn't to say they can't be made but currently doing so at a realistic price is hard enough for locomotives so....yeah maybe.

 

I am interested in building some cranes...but the prices. I don't even want to imagine.

[Knuckles]

IMPORTANT!

 

Thanks to Grovenor and Mike ..? Who gets the credit.

 

 

 

If what Mike is saying is true then I'm guessing we can account this as documented evidence of variation. Something that seemed to only be speculation.

 

As a result I'm not going to throw out the Cambrian 61 I just said is for sale, instead it is on hold again and I can now grab that version I did the alternate wheelbase for and finish it off.

 

I could also release this one and release another with the alternate wheelbase as a choice I guess.

 

 

Thoughts please. I'm trying to get this right and you are all collectively a great help.

 

 

If the much shorter wheelbase is the truth on the Cambrian then how does it fair with the pic edits that seem to not be?

 

I'll keep you all updated.

[Knuckles]

 

 

Important. Could everyone please look here

 

http://www.scalefour...&p=42396#p42396

 

Regarding the Class 61 as it is on hold...but for good reason.

 

On phone so pasting isnt as easy.

[Knuckles]

Quick update.

 

The Cambrian Class 61 body is now ready to order with a wheelbase of

5’ 6” + 6’ 6½” + 8’ 3”

designed for 3'6" bogies.

 

If you would like one with a wheelbase of

5’ 9” + 6’ 8” + 8’ 6”

to fit the K2 chassis contact me and I'll sort it for you.

 

Coupling rods and chassis (00, EM, P4 - Fixed) ready too.

 

Now sorting the EM chassis out for the Class 28...

[PaulR]

 

This is my 7mm Small Sharpie

 

 

would this be the same as you want in 4mm. Mine is from the Dragon Models kit.

Don

 

Known by Furnes fans as a K1. I have the Dragon Models' version in 4mm scale 

 

This is my 7mm Small Sharpie

 

 

would this be the same as you want in 4mm. Mine is from the Dragon Models kit.

Don

 

Known by Furness fans as a K1. I have the Dragon Models' version in 4mm scale 

[Knuckles]

You replying to Donw ?

 

K1's are cool too.

 

 

 

 

 

EM chassis for the L&YR Class 28 is up.

[58herbie]

Lanky class 28 loco chassis and rods ordered.

[Knuckles]

Sweet. Many thanks.

 

Looking forward to following the build.

(For others -mentioned in other thread)

[58herbie]

Sweet. Many thanks.

 

Looking forward to following the build.

(For others -mentioned in other thread)

No problem buddy.

 

This is where its destined to run.

 

 

 

[Knuckles]

!

 

That's a really attractive set up I must say.

I love pre groupies, and the modelling quality to my eye looks second to none.

 

Is that a L&YR Class 27 or is it an engine that looks similar? Something looks different to me but I can't quite work it out.

 

The sheen is nice too. Many loco's are dull so it's nice to see a sheen that isn't OTT. But has that oily rag cleaned look.

Edited January 5, 2016 by Knuckles

[58herbie]

Thank you.

 

You guessed right.

 

Its an old MPD kit of ASPINALs class 27. There where bits missing or trashed beyond belief when I purchased it. So a fair bit has been scratch built. I now have a second one to build which is unstarted.

 

Shes not finished yet. Need to do.more lining then fit buffers. Fix the two halves together properly.

 

Also have a second Bachmann Radial tank to convert to em.

 

Hope to have a selection of locos that ran the holmfirth branch to give variety at exhibitions.

 

The layout is getting a bit of a make over to back date it into correct pre grouping era. The canopy will be lengthened right upto the tranship shed. A 45' turntable fitted. Im currently constructing a low relief hotel which sat over looking the turntable at the end of the line.

Edited January 5, 2016 by 58herbie

[Knuckles]

That's good to know. I didn't know if your 27 was something similar such as this...

 

http://pre14.deviantart.net/9c18/th/pre/i/2009/336/9/7/lyr_class_twenty_five_by_robertbeardwell.jpg

 

Which I do not know its type.

 

If you have a thread on the layout I'd be happy to have a goosy.

 

I'd like the Bachmann tank but I got the same sort of problem in that it'd need converting. As well as 00 I model in P4 from time to time.

 

It changes ones attitude to impulse buying I can tell you that.

 

"Do I want to buy new wheels, make a new chassis, can I afford to, do I have the skill, can I be arsed?" are questions that often curb purchases.

 

As a result you in the long run can save money.

 

I have heard converting to Em can be easier but I also heard for some locomotives harder due to thicker wheels. What's your view?

[58herbie]

I have managed to convert mine by bringing the wheels out on the axles. I have a smp back to back which I took. 8mm off which took into account the Bachmann wheels. Its actually the shape and thickness of the flanges which cause the problem. I have an article somewhere where a chap converted one but used new wheels and axles. The only draw back there he wanted use Gibson wheels and they dont actually have the correct size and spoke pattern so he had to compromise. Thats why I chose my route for now until I can come up with a better solution that suits my needs.

 

I must sit down and start a thread the layout.

[58herbie]

 

That's good to know. I didn't know if your 27 was something similar such as this...

 

 

 

http://pre14.deviantart.net/9c18/th/pre/i/2009/336/9/7/lyr_class_twenty_five_by_robertbeardwell.jpg

 

Which I do not know its type.

 

Knuckles. That loco is a Barton Wright class 25 otherwise known as the Ironclad.

[Knuckles]

Ahh, Barton Wright. Thanks for saying. I've been looking a few times for the answer on and off and never been able, always struggling to find what it is.

 

I find it funny how nearly all the pre grouping locomotive designs seem to just rip each other off. I could be wrong but it certainly looks like it a lot of the time.

 

Cambrian Class 61, Furness K2, Barton Wright (Unsure the class but I'm sure you know the one - London Road Models make one)

They all look very similar.

 

Then you have the GNR C1 that the SR seem to have turned into a H1.

 

Too many examples to note. It is true that sometimes the same firms made them which would account for some of the similarities but other times I doubt it. Quite funny really.

 

Would it be possible to use P4 profile wheels as they have a thinner wheel, or would I be right in guessing they would fall off the nearest point? I know some P4 modellers use EM wheels - much to the distaste of purists!

[58herbie]

P4 wheels do like to fall off the rails.

 

I think the reason for alot of pre grouping locos looking the same is that most where built at the same factories but maybe had slight changes for the ordering company.

Take the K2 and Barton Wrights 4-4-0 both where built by sharp Stewart. It wasnt until 1889 when Horwich works were completed and the Lanky built their own locomotives.

[Nick Holliday]

Then you have the GNR C1 that the SR seem to have turned into a H1.

 

Too many examples to note. It is true that sometimes the same firms made them which would account for some of the similarities but other times I doubt it. Quite funny really.

 

 Marsh, the locomotive engineer on the LBSCR (not Southern just yet) had just arrived from the GNR where he had been assistant to Ivatt, the designer of the original Atlantics.  Marsh was under some pressure to revitalise the Brighton's mainline services, and he probably obtained drawings from Doncaster and tweaked them a bit before sending them off to Kitsons (OTTOMH) to plug the gap. His suburban Atlantic tanks were also a bit of homage to Ivatt's design, but in this case his tweaks did not improve the loco at all, resulting in a disappointing series of classes, redeemed by the I3 class for express use, which were heavily based on his predecessor, Billinton's tender locos.

[Knuckles]

P4 wheels do like to fall off the rails.

 

I think the reason for a lot of pre grouping locos looking the same is that most where built at the same factories but maybe had slight changes for the ordering company.

Take the K2 and Barton Wrights 4-4-0 both where built by sharp Stewart. It wasn't until 1889 when Horwich works were completed and the Lanky built their own locomotives.

Yeah this is partly what I thought. I know they are often made at the same places and by the same designers sometimes. I thought the P4 wheels would fall off as they aren't designed for EM flangeways etc, but apparently EM wheels are good for P4 some say.

 

 

Marsh, the locomotive engineer on the LBSCR (not Southern just yet) had just arrived from the GNR where he had been assistant to Ivatt, the designer of the original Atlantics.  Marsh was under some pressure to revitalise the Brighton's mainline services, and he probably obtained drawings from Doncaster and tweaked them a bit before sending them off to Kitsons (OTTOMH) to plug the gap. His suburban Atlantic tanks were also a bit of homage to Ivatt's design, but in this case his tweaks did not improve the loco at all, resulting in a disappointing series of classes, redeemed by the I3 class for express use, which were heavily based on his predecessor, Billinton's tender locos.

My bad on the chronology. That's a good history lesson, thanks.

I find it all rather odd how they didn't all sue each other back in the day. Maybe they were selling the designs.

 

I