42xx - shape of the footplate

[SimonMW]

An update...

 

I have a new one coming from AJM Railways, and I have reached an amicable resolution with TMC, whereby I will keep the bent one, fix it, and renumber it (with new numberplates / transfers sent by TMC). This avoids the AU$50 cost of returning it to TMC.

 

So now I need to dig in to it and see if I can make it flat!!

 

Thanks all for the advice and suggestions. I'll update here with progress on flattening it

[The Johnster]

I'd say it's worth the effort, Simon; I am very happy with mine.  It plods just like a 42xx...

[SimonMW]

OK, so 4261 has been pulled apart today.

 

 

Once pulled apart, the running plate was straightened under a bit of steam from the jug. 

 

To get it to sit in straight, I had to file down the boiler saddle fractionally (on the running plate), and the smokebox saddle (on the smokebox), primarily on the vertical locating piece that is supposed to push down INTO the running plate, but which actually seems to just push it down.

 

Progress so far:

 

[SimonMW]

Looking so much better:

 

 

It's not 100%, but a huge improvement.

 

Except I broke the smokebox lamp iron  Oh and I have straightened the slide bars bracket since this photo!

Edited April 2, 2018 by SimonMW

[SimonMW]

I cannot get this engine to run smooth and slow over my electrofrog pointwork and diamond. It keeps stalling, or doing a sudden spurt as the decoder (DCC Concepts with a small stay alive) seems to catch up. The trackwork is within 0.5mm level along a 300mm straight edge, the wheels I have taken out and cleaned, I have ensured pickups are in contact with wheels at all times. It just keeps stalling. On my NCE if I keep throttle at 9 or 10 (28) it runs through fine, assume the small keep alive is helping it there. But running slow it will not run through. My $35 30 year old 14xx runs great through it as do other locomotives that appear more pickup and level tolerant. 

 

At one point it's got one wheel over a gap, one over a plastic insulation piece in the diamond, and a third obviously is sitting a fraction of a mm off the track - and the fourth is not picking up (no idea whay, pickup looks fine), so it stalls. 

[MikeParkin65]

Have you checked the wheel back to backs? Only other ‘help’ I can offer is that I have a Hornby A1 with a Tcs chip and stay alive and that behaves similarly if it hasn’t been run for a while (even though it’s been sat on the layout). After a few minutes running it settles down. No idea why, I’ve put it down to something to do with the chip to stay alive interface.

[SimonMW]

Have you checked the wheel back to backs? Only other ‘help’ I can offer is that I have a Hornby A1 with a Tcs chip and stay alive and that behaves similarly if it hasn’t been run for a while (even though it’s been sat on the layout). After a few minutes running it settles down. No idea why, I’ve put it down to something to do with the chip to stay alive interface.

Back to backs are about 14.15mm to 14.2mm.

[Silver Sidelines]

'By Design' or just a coincidence?
 

In fairness to Hornby they have done.

You may already have noticed that I have written about Honrby's new Llanvern Grange. 

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/880/entry-20701-llanvair-grange-%E2%80%93-new-from-Hornby-2018/

 

The Grange also seems to be afflicted with a warped footplate.  I have been told by a reputable retailer that all his models are affected to various degrees.  Looking back I think the previous model 'Bucklebury Grange' was also affected but that the problems with Llanvern are more noticeable.  Does this mean that it is all to do with design tolerances and wear in the injection moulding tools?

 

Ray

[7007GreatWestern]

'By Design' or just a coincidence?

 

You may already have noticed that I have written about Honrby's new Llanvern Grange. 

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/880/entry-20701-llanvair-grange-%E2%80%93-new-from-Hornby-2018/

 

The Grange also seems to be afflicted with a warped footplate.  I have been told by a reputable retailer that all his models are affected to various degrees.  Looking back I think the previous model 'Bucklebury Grange' was also affected but that the problems with Llanvern are more noticeable.  Does this mean that it is all to do with design tolerances and wear in the injection moulding tools?

 

Ray

 

 

Hi Ray,

 

Along with George Dent you were there 'pioneer' when it came to giving concise instructions as to how to correct the warped running plate on early releases of the Hornby Eight Coupled tanks. As you will recall a significant amount of material had to be removed from various parts of those models to get everything to lie straight, including the smokebox saddle, motion bracket radius plate and outside steam pipes. Those models could not possibly be built correctly without a significant amount of fettling by hand. The most recent releases of the model don't exhibit the deformation to anything like the same degree and one has to wonder whether Hornby have altered the tooling or they are getting the production line operatives to adjust them by hand. Both sound horribly expensive! However, as well as correcting the running plate issue Hornby also improved some of the detailing (eg separately fitted smokebox dart) and upped the spec of the chassis (brass axle bearings).

 

For all the above reasons I stand by my point: in fairness to Hornby they HAVE done something about the quality of this model to the point where it is now rather good. However, it took them several years and multiple release cycles to get there and that's not much consolations to someone who bought one of the early ones and wishes he hadn't!

 

Regarding the Grange, it seems to be going in the opposite direction to the Eight-Coupled tanks. The early ones built by Sander Kan were invariably beautifully built and ran like Swiss watches. I really can't account for the deteriorating quality of assembly of those models but wear in the injection moulding tooling doesn't sound plausible to me.

 

Andy.

[tomparryharry]

There is a significant co-relation between how a moulding gets ejected from the tool, the cooling cycle, the temperature, and the chemical makeup of the plastic itself. On certain products, we used to use a template to allow the cooling  plastic in an controlled manner, to keep product from warping. Different sectional size of pretty much anything solid will exhibit stress & strain, once it gets heated, and conversely, cooled down.

 

At least, it used to!

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[Silver Sidelines]

Thanks Andy

 

I stand by my point: in fairness to Hornby they HAVE done something about the quality of this model to the point where it is now rather good. .

 

Time goes by and I had forgotten the added smokebox dart and the brass bearings. Hornby may have had a window of opportunity to revisit the body shell.  However I have in my mind that the first models with moulded darts were introduced in 2013 and that it was one of the later 2016 models with detailed smoke box dart and brass bearings that had a warped footplate in need of fettling.  I do believe that the second issue was rapidly followed in early 2017 by a third tranche which I let pass.

 

Regards

 

Ray

[SimonMW]

Time goes by and I had forgotten the added smokebox dart and the brass bearings. Hornby may have had a window of opportunity to revisit the body shell.  However I have in my mind that the first models with moulded darts were introduced in 2013 and that it was one of the later 2016 models with detailed smoke box dart and brass bearings that had a warped footplate in need of fettling.  I do believe that the second issue was rapidly followed in early 2017 by a third tranche which I let pass.

Neither of my two R3222 42xx have brass bearings, both are just axles running in the chassis.

 

As I have posted above the rigidity of the chassis is causing me issues on track that is less than 0.5mm out of level in 300mm when combined with the (electro-)frog gap and plastic insulator on a diamond, which results in 3 axles being non-conductive, and presumably the fourth not bearing on track due to sideplay. 

 

I found the footplate relatively easy to straighten, a lot simpler than I was worried it was going to be, so if anyone else has one don't be too afraid to pull it apart. A lot harder though is getting the thing to run over my diamond at slow speed...

[SimonMW]

Neither of my two R3222 42xx have brass bearings, both are just axles running in the chassis.

 

As I have posted above the rigidity of the chassis is causing me issues on track that is less than 0.5mm out of level in 300mm when combined with the (electro-)frog gap and plastic insulator on a diamond, which results in 3 axles being non-conductive, and presumably the fourth not bearing on track due to sideplay. 

 

I found the footplate relatively easy to straighten, a lot simpler than I was worried it was going to be, so if anyone else has one don't be too afraid to pull it apart. A lot harder though is getting the thing to run over my diamond at slow speed...

42xx x 2 now running beautifully, but it took some work. 

 

Pulled apart, fixed up wipers, cleaned wheels. DCC Concepts ZH8H (8-pin with harness), with the decoder taped to a DCC Concepts ZSSA very large stay alive, fit perfectly into the smokebox, with the plug being inserted into socket as it comes back together. The 8-wheel rigid chassis just aligns really badly with dead spots on the electrofrog diamond crossing, this has fixed it. So I now have 2 x straight 42xx, with one to now be renumbered to 4254.