OO gauge GWR Mogul and Prairie

[melmerby]

3 hours ago, gwrrob said:

The green looks promising.

The green looks green and that's about all you can say for a scan of a photograph on a computer screen.

 

As with the recent EFE version of the O2 there is more than one shade of olive green on the loco and it shows up variously in different lights and is different to what it looks like in publicity pictures.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, melmerby said:

.... anything else is IMHO asking for trouble.

Dave Jones seem to think gear drive to all wheels and cosmetic coupling rods was the way to go. Not many agreed with that idea.

And I didn't agree.

[Miss Prism]

Dapol's conn rod is still overlong.

 

[Miss Prism]

The pics are admittedly taken at a different angle, but Dapol's chimney looks too narrow to me. Compare with Hornby's:

 

 

(Here's the drawing.)

 

[boxbrownie]

3 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

The pics are admittedly taken at a different angle, but Dapol's chimney looks too narrow to me. Compare with Hornby's:

 

 

(Here's the drawing.)

 

It might be the lighting, they are not quite the same finish (gloss/Matt/semi Matt) which doesn’t help the comparison.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

Dapol's conn rod is still overlong.

 

I don't care, when playing trains at 8"+ viewing distance, one cannot tell the difference with normal vision.

[Ben Alder]

9 hours ago, confused said:

I wonder if that's going to be the same as the Kernow/DJM Adams O2's, I have two on my BR SR/WR 'withered arm' branch and both O2's have very sloppy gearing with one wheel moving before the other, OK once they get going.  Hope Dapol's will be a tighter mesh if they use this system. Not that technical so not sure what other DD systems might be available.

I removed one gear from the drive and it made a big difference to its performance and the rods started doing their job as well.

[Ian Hargrave]

17 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

The pics are admittedly taken at a different angle, but Dapol's chimney looks too narrow to me. Compare with Hornby's:

 

 

(Here's the drawing.)

 

Thanks for articulating the qualm I have with it. It just doesn’t look right.

[Siberian Snooper]

On 08/10/2021 at 00:15, No Decorum said:

“All wheel drive.” That’s a good un! 

 

The gearing for the pony wheels, will be interesting to see.

 

 

[Guest]

11 hours ago, Ben Alder said:

I removed one gear from the drive and it made a big difference to its performance and the rods started doing their job as well.

Will look into cheers.

[Guest]

20 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

The pics are admittedly taken at a different angle, but Dapol's chimney looks too narrow to me. Compare with Hornby's:

 

 

(Here's the drawing.)

 

Think we'll have to wait for them in the flesh. Looked at my Baccy 94xx against a white back ground at 1ft distance today and from one angle looks narrow and move a few degrees and looks fatter!  Really need a head-on shot.

[The Stationmaster]

20 hours ago, melmerby said:

It's a steam engine. Steam engines should drive on one axle and couple the drive to the others, anything else is IMHO asking for trouble.

Dave Jones seem to think gear drive to all wheels and cosmetic coupling rods was the way to go. Not many agreed with that idea.

Not so much a Dave Jones' idea but the Chinese factories' usual approach to connecting driving wheels on steam (and diesel etc) outline models hence it has appeared elsewhere over the years unless the client has specified otherwise.  The problem with it is getting it down to the tolerances needed to make it work reliably and consistently hence some people still steer very clear of it for the Western markets.  From example it is obvious that Chinese factories can use a worm drive (or spur?) drive to one axle and use the coupling rods to do what they were meant todo so it really is down to client specification and careful assessment of EPs etc..

[Mallard60022]

4 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Thanks for articulating the qualm I have with it. It just doesn’t look right.

Agreed. Left is the best looker.

P

[Coach bogie]

22 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

The pics are admittedly taken at a different angle, but Dapol's chimney looks too narrow to me. Compare with Hornby's:

 

 

(Here's the drawing.)

 

Depends on what Dapol modelled it on. There were some very thin chimneys on some of the 51xx in GWR days. Agree the 61xx should be fatter.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[Butler Henderson]

2 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Not so much a Dave Jones' idea but the Chinese factories' usual approach to connecting driving wheels on steam (and diesel etc) outline models hence it has appeared elsewhere over the years unless the client has specified otherwise.  The problem with it is getting it down to the tolerances needed to make it work reliably and consistently hence some people still steer very clear of it for the Western markets.  From example it is obvious that Chinese factories can use a worm drive (or spur?) drive to one axle and use the coupling rods to do what they were meant todo so it really is down to client specification and careful assessment of EPs etc..

IIRC DJ was full of himself (as usual) on the drive arrangement being the bees knees - it works better in N .

 

13 hours ago, Ben Alder said:

I removed one gear from the drive and it made a big difference to its performance and the rods started doing their job as well.

I would be concerned over the long term life of the rods doing what they were not designed for and look for a proper replacement.

[Miss Prism]

23 minutes ago, Coach bogie said:

There were some very thin chimneys on some of the 51xx in GWR days.

 

There were some parallel chimney variants on some of the 5100 class locos, and the ones with capuchons seem to have come from old Bulldogs, or even Stars and Saints. This one, without a capuchon, probably came from a small prairie.

 

 

All the Dapols are vanilla 5101/61xx class locos, so should be standard large prairie fat chimney. That said, Bulldog chimneys did get onto some 5101s.

 

[Ian Hargrave]

19 hours ago, boxbrownie said:

It might be the lighting, they are not quite the same finish (gloss/Matt/semi Matt) which doesn’t help the comparison.

 
TBH,the examples on Dapol’s website have it seems identical chimneys. I would like to be convinced otherwise but I think this is what will appear out of the box.

[Harlequin]

If the chimney is the rarer (on this class), earlier, thin type, should it have a copper cap, as Dapol have modelled it?

 

Edited October 9, 2021 by Harlequin

[Ian Hargrave]

They are now up on Rails website. I see no difference between any of the chimneys .See what you think 

[Ben Alder]

5 hours ago, Butler Henderson said:

IIRC DJ was full of himself (as usual) on the drive arrangement being the bees knees - it works better in N .

 

I would be concerned over the long term life of the rods doing what they were not designed for and look for a proper replacement.

 

Well, they are metal so I presume will stand up as much as any other, but its not a problem to do if necessary.

[melmerby]

Polished safety valve cover on pre 1934 livery?

 

 

[Guest]

28 minutes ago, Ben Alder said:

 

Well, they are metal so I presume will stand up as much as any other, but its not a problem to do if necessary.

off topic, but mine are plastic.

[Miss Prism]

5 hours ago, Harlequin said:

If the chimney is the rarer (on this class), earlier, thin type, should it have a copper cap, as Dapol have modelled it?

 

On the 5100s, even for the chimneys with copper tops (e.g. ex-Bulldog ones), they were painted over copper tops as far as I can tell.

 

The 5101s/61xxs had copper tops but not painted over.

 

In other words, Dapol has got correct cosmetics but incorrect dimensions.
 

[Miss Prism]

1 hour ago, melmerby said:

Polished safety valve cover on pre 1934 livery?

 

Whad'ja reckun?

 

 

[Andy Kirkham]

44 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

 

On the 5100s, even for the chimneys with copper tops (e.g. ex-Bulldog ones), they were painted over copper tops as far as I can tell.

 

The 5101s/61xxs had copper tops but not painted over.

 

In other words, Dapol has got correct cosmetics but incorrect dimensions.
 

 

The mention of painting over copper tops raises a question in my mind: if it was desired to "de-copper" a chimney, would it have been possible simply to strip the copper off?  I'm assuming that the copper was a relatively thin veneer over an iron cap, but would removing it have significantly changed the shape of the thing?

Edited October 9, 2021 by Andy Kirkham