Martin Finney LSWR T3

[Guest Lyonesse]

I've started building a Martin Finney T3 4-4-0, bought for no particular reason, other than the fact that the Adams classes are stunningly beautiful.  Following my usual practice, I've started with the body (picture tomorrow) and I have to say that this is easily the most difficult kit I've built.  It's clearly well thought out, but it's a frighteningly difficult piece of origami.  I wasn't sure I could get there, but I have now managed to build most of the footplate/cab/splasher assembly and am feeling quite proud of myself.  Maybe the difficulty is more the fault of William Adams than Martin Finney.  There is a picture of a completed T3 on Southwark Bridge, so it is possible to finish the kit, though it does have the usual Finney faults, namely:

1. Some parts have to be assembled from impossibly small, thin etchings --- like the slidebar access hatches on the T3.
2. There are an awful lot of rivets to be pressed out, many of them very close together (<0.3mm) or right on the edge of parts, which results in a lot of distortion, even with a good rivet press.
3. Where tab and slot is used, the slots are usually etched undersized, making for a lot of frustration and cursing.
4. Some parts come in handed pairs, with no clear indication as to which part goes on the left and which the right.
5. Parts seem to be randomly distributed over the frets, and a lot of time is wasted searching for them.
6. The instructions are rather terse (although full marks for the diagrams with the T3).  There is quite a lot of "Carefully curve the cab front/splasher top the shape." (How?)  or "Using photographs of your chosen prototype, fit the remaining parts."  (Good luck finding those 100-year old detail photos).

Despite all that, I like Martin's kits and their reputation is pretty well deserved.

But I'm puzzled.  With the T3 there are two alternative boilers, one with boiler bands and one without, and as far as I can see, no indication as to which should be used.  Is Martin just giving builders the chance to fit their own boiler bands or is there something I'm missing?

[DLT]

I've started building a Martin Finney T3 4-4-0, bought for no particular reason, other than the fact that the Adams classes are stunningly beautiful.

 

Can't argue with that!  Probably some of the most graceful designs ever to run.

 

 

But I'm puzzled. With the T3 there are two alternative boilers, one with boiler bands and one without, and as far as I can see, no indication as to which should be used. Is Martin just giving builders the chance to fit their own boiler bands or is there something I'm missing?

Hmmm...  Consulting my copy of Bradley, it states that boilers were freely exchanged between the T3, T6 and X6 classes.  Looking at the various photos (official and otherwise) some have more prominent boiler bands than others; in some of them the reflections off the (fairly shiny) boiler show no shadows or relief anywhere on the boiler cladding.  So maybe some didn't have raised banding?  And if so, how was the cladding secured?

 

Drummond built two extra boilers for the classes; T3 no.568 carried one from 1907 to 1925, (and very odd it looks with the Drummond dome) the other went to an X6 class.

 

A Google search brings up lots of photos of the preserved No. 563 in the National Collection, as well as a few more historic photos.  I wouldn't like to comment on how "original" 563 is though.

 

Not sure if this helps!

Cheers, Dave.T

 

PS  The book I referred to is "LSWR locomotives - The Adams Classes" , DLBradley, Wild Swan.  ISBN 0 906867 38 X

Not easy to get hold of, usually seen secondhand at inflated prices.  Can be found if you are patient (and determined!)

[N15class]

Some people like myself prefer to use tape boiler bands after painting.

 

As for fiding photos it is a pain with older classes but you can normally find period corect pictures if not of the one you want. I will use the history of the loco I want along with pictures and make an educated guess with the bits you can't see.

 

I too like Adams locos, all seem to be most elegant.

 

The Bradley book is very good

[Guest Lyonesse]

Thanks for the replies.  I have the four volumes of the Bradley book from Wild Swan, and very good it is too.  I think I'll probably use the boiler without bands and add my own from 0.002in shim.  I've been known to scratchbuild boiler and firebox for Finney kits just to be able to fit thinner boiler bands.  Looking at the photo of the Bulldog built by Tom Mallard, shown on the Brassmasters web site, I see I'm not the only one to do this.

[EKR]

First congratulations both on your good taste and also your luck in getting the kit.

It's one I'm hoping Finney7 will be re releasing.

 

Could I also recommend Barry Curl's book "The LSWR at Nine Elms".

Expensive but well worth the money.

 

There are a number of shots of T3's in the works stripped down, including one of the full cab.

 

Do keep us posted as to your progress.

[Guest Lyonesse]

First congratulations both on your good taste and also your luck in getting the kit.

It's one I'm hoping Finney7 will be re releasing.

 

Could I also recommend Barry Curl's book "The LSWR at Nine Elms".

Expensive but well worth the money.

 

There are a number of shots of T3's in the works stripped down, including one of the full cab.

 

Do keep us posted as to your progress.

Thanks for the tip.  I've just now bought the Barry Curl book, for about a tenner, although prices seem to vary from that to north of £40.

[Guest Lyonesse]

Progress so far.

[Guest Lyonesse]

I started on the frames and bogie this week.  Delivery of the loco wheels from GSL is still six months away, so the loco is not going to be finished anytime soon.  Anyway, main frames and hornblocks proved to be fairly straightforward.  The instructions for the bogie were incomprehensible, and I haven't begun to understand the bogie springing arrangement.  But if you are familiar with how an Adams bogie from the period was constructed then assembly is fairly straightforward.  The brass castings for the bogie axleboxes are excellent and well done to Martin for resisting the temptation to assemble them from several hundred tiny etchings.

[Horsetan]

...The instructions for the bogie were incomprehensible, and I haven't begun to understand the bogie springing arrangement.  But if you are familiar with how an Adams bogie from the period was constructed then assembly is fairly straightforward.  The brass castings for the bogie axleboxes are excellent and well done to Martin for resisting the temptation to assemble them from several hundred tiny etchings.

I note that Martin also designed the bogie axles to be rigid on a number of other kits: Adams Radial, A3 and A4. The Hall appears the same. Presumably this doesn't affect roadholding to any great degree.

 

I thought it was the bogie frames which did not go up and down, whereas the axles did, but models seem to work the other way around.

[Guest Lyonesse]

I note that Martin also designed the bogie axles to be rigid on a number of other kits: Adams Radial, A3 and A4. The Hall appears the same. Presumably this doesn't affect roadholding to any great degree.

 

I thought it was the bogie frames which did not go up and down, whereas the axles did, but models seem to work the other way around.

You're right.  IIRC, the Hall bogie is designed to be compensated but I build mine rigid.  I don't consider compensation or springing necessary in such a short wheelbase bogie.  Spring the whole bogie, but not the axleboxes within it.

[Guest Lyonesse]

Rolling the boiler and smokebox wasn't too bad.  I elected to roll the boiler without etched boiler bands, then add my own from 0.002in brass shim (cut with a scalpel, using a piece of tinplate as a cutting board.) The boiler doesn't quite roll cleanly --- it kinks where the spasher cutouts come --- but the overall effect is good.  I wasn't sure whether which edge overlapped which where the boiler joins the splashers, but with the boiler rolled, it looks as if the boiler/firebox edge tucks in between the splasher sides.

I've also added the compensation beams, brake pivots and the rear bogie splasher.  Thankfully, Dugald Drummond removed the front bogie splasher.

The rear bogie splasher was a major pain to build.  Each one comes in three tiny parts, half etched over most of their surface to leave 0.005in thickness.  The front and rear splasher tops must be formed into reverse curves.  The sides are symmetrical, and as there is a ridge and groove on one side, I think it's fairly clear that that faces the frames.  The two rear tops are identical, left and right.  But there is a cutout in one corner of the rectangle, so on each side there are four possible ways it can be asssembled.  The instructions give no hint as to which is right.  I think I finally deduced which way round they should go, although I'm not 100% sure.

The front splasher tops are handed, so there are eight possible ways they can be assembled.  Inevitably I got it wrong the first time and had to unsolder, clean up and bend the other way.  The whole thing was a nightmare to fit together.

Slidebars and crossheads are very nice lost wax castings.  There is quite a bit of work involved in polishing up the slidebar and surfaces, so they look like the planed forgings on the prototype, and there really isn't much clearance anywhere once they're assembled.

So next stage is probably some boiler fittings.  Wheels won't arrive before about November, so this loco isn't going to be finished any time soon.

[Horsetan]

...Wheels won't arrive before about November, so this loco isn't going to be finished any time soon.

I know the feeling.

 

*sits back and waits*

[Guest Lyonesse]

The kit comes with two sizes of handrail knob.  The large ones stand the handrail about 2.5mm off the boiler; the small ones about 0.8mm off.  As the radius of the smokebox is 1mm larger than the boiler, the handrail standing 2.5mm off the boiler is 1.5mm off the smokebox, and doesn't meet the 0.8mm smokebox knobs.

I think the handrail should be 3" off the smokebox, from what I can make out from the drawings in the back of the Bradley book.  The blower valve casting, which acts as a handrail knob on the right hand side of the smokebox, is 1mm from base to handrail, which rather confirms the 3" figure.  So neither the long nor the short handrail knobs are the right size.  I might be able to use the long handrail knobs by fitting them from the inside of the boiler, and then shim out the short ones?  Hmm, I need to think about this.

Getting the handrail straight, of the right diameter, and the right distance from the boiler (so it casts a shadow in the right place) adds to the character of a loco, I think.  On my scratchbuilts I always take a lot of care over handrails, latterly using Alan Gibson shoulderless handrail knobs to get the length right.

[Guest Lyonesse]

I found that by opening up the handrail holes in the boiler and inserting the long handrail knobs from the inside, I could get the handrail to stand the correct 2mm off the boiler cladding.  On the right hand side of the smokebox, the handrail is carried by the blower valve casting, and is the correct 1mm off.  For the left hand side of the smokebox I found a medium Markits handrail knob which when inserted from the inside gave the correct 1mm standoff.  Once the handrail is in place there should be a little wriggle room available with the soldering iron to get everything absolutely straight.  For the two knobs on the front of the smokebox I think I will use Alan Gibson shoulderless knobs.  I may have to wind some fine copper wire around the shanks as these are fairly thin (about 0.3mm).  Anyway, project back on track.

[Guest Lyonesse]

I now have something that looks like a locomotive, having attached the boiler to the footplate/cab assembly and cut off the strengthening parts that hold the footplate etchings together.  This is still the most challenging kit I've ever built and Martin warns in the instructions of some tricky steps yet to come.  We'll see.  I should probably be working on drive arrangements at this point.

 

Note that the lamp irons are a little vulnerable without the chimney to protect them.

[Guest Lyonesse]

The loco is now more or less complete, or at least as complete as I can make it until the wheels arrive.  The tender goes together more or less straightforwardly.  The top has an unfeasible number of rivets which need to be pressed out.  This I declined to do, given that rivets disappear on a matt black painted surface, and anyway, the tender top is mostly covered with coal.  The main tender structure, and the large toolbox, use tab and slot construction.  Unfortunately, Martin's slots are etched slightly undersize which means there is a lot of additional work to get the parts to go together.  When you find you've spent an entire evening just assembling the four sides of a toolbox you might as well give up kits and scratch build instead.  Anyway, here it is, mostly over bar the final details.

[Horsetan]

....The top has an unfeasible number of rivets which need to be pressed out.  ....

 

....at least you don't get charged extra for having them there!

[Guest Lyonesse]

....at least you don't get charged extra for having them there!

I must admit to feeling slightly cheated with the rivets.  OK, we're all used to pressing a few out in etched kits but when there's hundreds of closely spaced rivets then isn't that the sort of detail that should be supplied etched in place?

 

Actually, I'm a bit schitzophrenic about it as I don't much like large half etched areas, of which the Finney kits have rather too much.  Half-etched brass is too thin to be robust and etching halfway through a large area releases internal stresses in the brass sheet, meaning the part is no longer flat.

[Horsetan]

I must admit to feeling slightly cheated with the rivets.  OK, we're all used to pressing a few out in etched kits but when there's hundreds of closely spaced rivets then isn't that the sort of detail that should be supplied etched in place?.....

That really depends on the quality of the etching. I've seen Crownline and ProScale efforts at multiple etched rivets and they struggle to stand out in the raw. Add primer and paint, and they're lost.

[Ohmisterporter]

Here is a link to the Kohs Models website with a section on etched and punched rivets. The difference between the two is very apparent. 

 

http://www.kohs.com/Technical_Pages/Rivet.html

[Guest Lyonesse]

Here is a link to the Kohs Models website with a section on etched and punched rivets. The difference between the two is very apparent. 

 

http://www.kohs.com/Technical_Pages/Rivet.html

That's very interesting, thanks.  Lots of good stuff on their other pages too.

 

Etched rivets can look pretty terrible.  But the whole point of a kit is to save you time.  It's possible to punch out all the rivets in the side of a Churchward 3500 gal tender, but in 4mm scale I can live with an etched version.  The fact the the rivets are not so well shaped is compensated by the fact that they are in exact straight lines and protypically close together.

[Guest Lyonesse]

Time to get back to the T3 as the wheels should be delivered soon.  I think I've really only got the cab detail left to do but one think I had been putting off is the motor and gearbox.  That's now finished and it the trial fit shows it should go in with no problems.  The photos show the general layout.  The Mitsumi motor, bought on ebay direct from Hong Kong, came with a nice two-start worm which mates nicely with the wormwheel from the Ultrascale 13:1 set.  The spur the gears are Ultrascale, with the final gearwheel held on the driven axle by a grubscrew, which allows the mechanism to be conveniently declutched.

[chris25]

Hello lyonesse,

 

Excellent work on the T3, could you please advise me on the exact gears you bought from Ultrascale?

I am looking forward to getting my T3 to get done at some point.

 

Regards

 

Chris White

[Guest Lyonesse]

Hello lyonesse,

 

Excellent work on the T3, could you please advise me on the exact gears you bought from Ultrascale?

I am looking forward to getting my T3 to get done at some point.

 

Regards

 

Chris White

Happy to oblige.

 

The worm and wheel is the 0.4 mod 13:1 set, using a two-start worm (type 1 without boss).  Most of the friction loss in a gear set is between the worm and wheel, a two-start worm has much lower friction.   Usually I use the Ultrascale plastic worm that comes with the set, but the Mitsumi motor happened to come with a 0.4 mod 2-start brass worm that mates nicely with the Ultrascale wormwheel.  These wormwheels come with an 1/8in or 9/64in bore, so need a turned bush to sit on a 2mm layshaft.

 

Next to the wormwheel is an 100DP 18 tooth brass pinion (type 1 without boss).  The brass pinions are soldered to the 2mm steel layshafts.

 

Next layshaft has a 100DP 37 tooth gear wheel and another 18 tooth pinion.

 

The axle has a 100DP type 2 37 tooth gear wheel, held onto the driven axle by the grubscrew.

 

Total ratio is 13 * (37/18) * (37/18) or about 55:1.

 

For the T3, the first layshaft is directly below the worm, the second is 45deg offset and the drive axle is horizontally offset, i.e. offset parallel to the motor shaft.

[chris25]

Thank you for the reply. Most imformitive and I can now get those ordered tomorrow.

 

May I ask on your planned livery the T3 will be in? I have seen one of these in lined Southern Olive Green and it seems to suit the class very nicely.

Although its out of my normal period of modelling, I just don't think I can bring myself to paint one in dilapidated plain black prior to the last of the classes withdrawal.

 

Regards

 

Chris White