Mousa Models Wagon Kits

[billbedford]

I have been busy over the holidays with some new Highland Railway wagons.  These are essentially one piece 3D prints, with old a few smaller items needing to be glued in place. All have sprung buffers, sprung suspensions and 3-link couplings. 

 

The types produced are:

 

BWK1103 HR Drummond D.15 Open Wagon Type E

BWK1104 HR Jones D.19 Open Wagon Type B  with no doors and 3’7" wheels

BWK1107 HR Jones D1 Open Wagon Type A

BWK1108 HR Jones D1 Open Wagon Type A with sheep flakes

 

All are available in both 4 and 7 mm scales. The 4mm versions are offered in P4/EM and 00 versions. 

 

The price for all the 4mm scale versions is £17.50 each

 

The prices for the 7mm scale version are:

 

BWK1103 ……… £50.00
BWK1104 ……… £50.00

BWK1107 ……… £50.00
BWK1108 ……… £55.00
 

UK Postage for all is £4.70 for up to 15, 4mm items or 10, 7mm ones. 

 

 

BWK1103

 

BWK1104

 

BWK1107

 

BWK1108

 

[billbedford]

I have some new North British Railway wagons.  These are same format as the HR ones, one piece 3D prints, with only a few smaller items needing to be glued in place. All have sprung buffers, sprung suspensions and 3-link couplings. 

 

The types produced are:

 

BWK0700 NBR D77 3 Plank fixed side wagon

BWK0701 NBR D55 4 Plank fixed side wagon

 

 

All are available in both 4 and 7 mm scales. The 4mm versions are offered in P4/EM and 00 versions. 

 

The price for all the 4mm scale versions is £17.50 each

 

The prices for the 7mm scale version are:

 

BWK0700 ……… £47.50
BWK0701 ……… £50.00

 

UK Postage for all is £4.70 for up to 15, 4mm items or 10, 7mm ones. 

 

All these wagons can be ordered from the Mousa Models website. 

 

 

BWK0700

 

 

BWK0701

 

 

Edited January 17, 2020 by billbedford

[Compound2632]

18 minutes ago, billbedford said:

I have some new North British Railway wagons.  These are same format as the HR ones, one piece 3D prints, with only a few smaller items needing to be glued in place. All have sprung buffers, sprung suspensions and 3-link couplings. 

 

The types produced are:

 

BWK0700 NBR D77 3 Plank fixed side wagon

BWK0701 NBR D55 4 Plank fixed side wagon

 

 

Now you're dangling temptation...

 

I knew it was a mistake to buy those HMRS Scottish Pre-Grouping pressfix sheets at Warley. I told myself I only wanted them to borrow the LOCO COAL lettering for some Midland wagons.

[2750Papyrus]

I have a GN van kit whose sides are a little dished.  Would the "flattening" process be helped by prior immersion in hot water?

[Penlan]

On 17/01/2020 at 21:49, Compound2632 said:

 

Now you're dangling temptation...

 

I knew it was a mistake to buy those HMRS Scottish Pre-Grouping pressfix sheets at Warley. I told myself I only wanted them to borrow the LOCO COAL lettering for some Midland wagons.

It doesn't get any better, it can't be said the Highland or NB wagons wouldn't be seen much south of the border.
At a Wagon Count Census at 4pm on Sunday, July 4th, 1920, at Bristol - the only details I have of the origin of the data, though I suspect a RCH exercise - there are 3 HR and 43 NB open wagons........
Happy wagon building 

[Compound2632]

1 minute ago, Penlan said:

4pm on Sunday, July 4th, 1920, at Bristol

 

Post-pooling, so anything goes, in principle, and diffusion theory tells one that the number of wagons of each company present should be in proportion to the size of their fleet, or at least the pooled portion thereof - generally around 70% - 80% except for the North Eastern. In that census, the numbers of wagons from the larger comanies are roughly proportional to the size of their fleets, with the exception of the Great Western, whose yards were the subject of the census - @Nick Holliday posted the numbers for fleet sizes recently:

 

 

@Miss Prism posted the full census (copying it from you, @Penlan...):

 

For the pre-pooling era (roughly speaking, before the Great War) one needs some traffic justification for "foreign" wagons. As my interest is the Midland c. 1902, I can make a reasonable case for North British wagons appearing with traffic from Scotland (or returning there empty) but Caledonian wagons are a no-no - they'd have come south by the LNWR route.

 

Accident reports bear this out. In an accident at Gretna in 1901, the damaged wagons in the GSWR Glasgow-Carlisle goods train where exclusively GSWR and Midland, whilst those in the northbound Caledonian goods train were Caledonian (10), LNWR (6), LYR (5), NER (5), NSR (1), GWR (1). (At this period the Caledonian and North Eastern were cooperating on Newcastle-Glasgow traffic, both passenger (by way of through booking) and goods, outflanking the North Eastern's supposed East Coast partner, the North British.)

 

 

 

[billbedford]

17 hours ago, 2750Papyrus said:

I have a GN van kit whose sides are a little dished.  Would the "flattening" process be helped by prior immersion in hot water?

 

Heat will definitely soften the plastic. 

[billbedford]

I'm bored today, so I thought I would post some work in progress:

[billbedford]

OK then, these work and  are nice and softly sprung:

 

Though there are still too many assembly failures...

 

[Gordon A]

The Lowmac and buffers look interesting Bill.

Is there any space under the floor to add some weight?

 

Gordon A

[PenrithBeacon]

Which variety of Lowmac is that?

[Buhar]

That is very ingenious, Bill.  Congratulations.

 

Alan

[billbedford]

I've transferred this from another thread:

 

Since September I've offered all the printed wagons with the option of an either P4/EM or OO version. Both versions have a sprung suspension. Given that the wagons are all pre-grouping I've been a bit surprised by just how few customers have opted for the P4/EM version. 

 

I've no way of knowing how many of the OO are actually built as sprung, but it occurs to me that maybe there should be an 'easy option' of building these wagons unsprung. 

 

Some feedback on this would be appreciated. 

[PMP]

20 minutes ago, billbedford said:

 

 

I've no way of knowing how many of the OO are actually built as sprung, but it occurs to me that maybe there should be an 'easy option' of building these wagons unsprung. 

 

Some feedback on this would be appreciated. 

I would think if you can arrange the print to ensure a level chassis, using 26mm axles and brass top hat bearings, that would work for OO gauge builders, and possibly for many EM modellers too. Obviously a wheel can be out of true relegating that ‘levelling’ work, but easy an completion rigid chassis for OO seems a good option.

With pre-group livery RTR locomotives becoming more widely available I’d think it worth trying.

 

edit: Another option would be a 3D printed rocking W iron axle box set or a design that easily accommodated an etched rocking w iron axle with a single rigid axle. Keep it simple, in terms of assembly and components, will also help increase the sales potential into the OO market.

Edited December 27, 2020 by PMP

[Andy Hayter]

Answered from a position of partial knowledge (I have painted the bodies, read the instructions for the sprung chassis but not yet started the actual construction - planned for last week but things got in the way), I would say that springing may well be an unnecessary complication for many 00 modellers and possibly some of the EM ones as well.

[MR Chuffer]

29 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

an unnecessary complication for many 00 modellers

Agree, just completed the MR D.370 Meat Van, its sits square on all 4 wheels without the springing, but Romford wheels and top hat bearings are not entirely free running, might have been even tighter with the springing arrangements?

[jwealleans]

I don't think the sprung arrangement is necessary in OO, but the wagons run so beautifully with it and it's so simple to assemble and set up, I'd be slightly disappointed to see it go.

[Compound2632]

I model in 00; I've not found compensation or springing to be necessary on short-wheelbase wagons. As others have said, if the wagon is square there should be no need. However, I have always dutifully included the springing on Mousa wagons. With the 3D printed bodies there can occasionally be some warping - on some of the earlier bodies, not so recently; I have the impression that Bill has been experimenting and improved his materials. The worst offender was a LNWR D1 1-plank wagon, the slight twist in which was cured by the hot water treatment. The one snag I've hit is that once the axleguard units are glued in place, it's very difficult to fit the sprung buffers, owing to lack of space to fold over the tail of the buffer. Consequently, my build procedure has been to prepare and paint the body, fit the buffers, then add the axleguards, springs, and brakes - chemically blackening the brass parts first. I can't see that that would be any different with unsprung axleguards.

 

I should say that the first Mousa kit I built - the LNWR D32 van - I ran into trouble using Alan Gibson waisted bearings in the sprung axle-bearer, which led to splaying of the axleguards, since the bearing cone wasn't deep enough. With the advice of several RMWebbers, I switched to using MJT waisted bearings which have a deeper bearing cone. 

 

I'm inclined to prefer an arrangement that allows for the possibility of conversion to EM or P4 by simple exchange of wheelsets (and maybe some tweaking of brake block positions). On the other hand, the springing arrangement is the only feature that really stands in the way of these kits being the simplest possible for the beginner.

 

Sorry, that's a lot of rambling and not really answering the question.

[Mark Forrest]

I presume that the difference between the current 00 and EM/P4 kits is in the positioning of the brakes?

 

Would it be possible to design them in such a way that two variants are offered those being sprung or rigid rather than gauge specific, but that the brakes can be fitted in a different position to suit the gauge? Having the brakes separate might also make it easier if the builder wants to represent a different type of brake.

[billbedford]

Recent production has had the w-irons printed in place, mainly because I was loosing too many prints with the axlebox/springs breaking off. However the brakes are also printed in place hence the P4/EM and OO variations. What I've done for a long time is assemble the buffers before fitting them to the wagon, ensuring, of course, that the 'tail' is trimmed with a wire cutter so that it fits into the headstock. 

 

Pin-point bearings have always been a pain... Whenever watchmakers or scientific instrument makers use them that use axial adjusting screws, but railway modellers never seem to bother with them. 

[2750Papyrus]

I have assembled 4 of the GN printed wagons in 00 to date and am very pleased with their appearance. 

 

I did find the springing arrangement fiddly and a challenge to my eyesight, and experienced some axlebox splaying through using top-hat bearings.  I'm afraid I chose not to spring the buffers. 

 

Some simplification would probably suit me but I received another kit as a Christmas present and will procure more if suitable prototypes become available, whether to the current or a simplified design.

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, billbedford said:

What I've done for a long time is assemble the buffers before fitting them to the wagon, ensuring, of course, that the 'tail' is trimmed with a wire cutter so that it fits into the headstock. 

 

What holds me back from doing that is the fear that, having successfully assembled a working sprung buffer, I'd gum it up with paint...

[billbedford]

12 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

What holds me back from doing that is the fear that, having successfully assembled a working sprung buffer, I'd gum it up with paint...

It's a lot easier if you model railways that printed their buffer housings black, then you would want to paint the buffers before they were fitted to the wagon. 

[McW]

I have several of the Highland wagons which are very nice. Used Gibson waisted bearings  and P4 wheels which made the W-irons and axle boxes splay out which meant the springing system for me was a fail. In the end I built them rigid and being short wheel base and with a bit of weight they work fine. Might be something to consider though Bill.

[Compound2632]

14 minutes ago, McW said:

Used Gibson waisted bearings  and P4 wheels which made the W-irons and axle boxes splay out which meant the springing system for me was a fail. 

 

On 27/12/2020 at 18:29, Compound2632 said:

I should say that the first Mousa kit I built - the LNWR D32 van - I ran into trouble using Alan Gibson waisted bearings in the sprung axle-bearer, which led to splaying of the axleguards, since the bearing cone wasn't deep enough. With the advice of several RMWebbers, I switched to using MJT waisted bearings which have a deeper bearing cone. 

 

MJT is your friend.