MAINLINE MOGUL/MANOR AXLE PROBLEMS

[MANTY1]

Good Afternoon

 

Have moved this enquiry from original posting as I believe it might have been in the wrong place

 

I have Mainline Manor & Mogul loco's that I would like to sort out  but they appear to have the dreaded axle problem.

I see Peters Spares sell the pins and gears PS29

Has anyone on here carried out this repair and what are the complications. Quartering etc.

 

I have taken the Mogul apart and can see what I need to do (they both have the round pin axles) but would like some advice if possible please.

 

Is their an article I am missing somewhere ?.

 

Many Thanks

[DCB]

The Peters Spares axles should restore the locos to as new condition, but you must get the quartering right and get it right first time, twisting a wheel on an axle will inevitably loosen it and accelerate the deterioration.

 

The reason for wheel loosening appears to be the wheels don't make good contact with the chassis due to gunge and oil on the stub axle journal and this sets up arcing which heats the wheel and softens the axle. Adding pickups from the chassis half sides to the wheel backs reduces the arcing considerably, even one per side lets the coupling rods act as a current path and helps reduce the heating.  Conductive oil is a must.for these chassis.

 If you have 2ft radius Peco points and 2ft min radius fitting washers to reduce side play on the driving wheels gives the pick ups an easier time.  Weighting the locos is probably a bad idea for the point of view of axle life.

 

The Bachmann wheels have square peg axles and different stub axle sizes as I found when trying to fit Bachmann wheels to a Mainline GW 57XX

 

Twenty odd years ago I  added pickups from the chassis to the wheel backs on a Mainline 03  0-6-0 D loco chassis.   It was retired in favour of a Bachmann for 12 months or so and returned temporarily when the Bachmann motor burned out and the Mainline chassis is still going.   

 

My son bought "New" Bachmann Mogul and |Manor locos last year. The Mogul did 30 minutes running in before a wheel fell off twisting the coupling and connecting rod and damaging the cylinder so the option of a Bachmann  Chass is not a complete cure.

 

Thirty years ago my father in law took the motors out of Mainline Moguls and a Manor and pushed them with Hornby County 4-4-0 powered tenders.   One had Romford wheels fitted. They still run but we have since banned traction tyres so they are in the display cabinet. 

 

Around the same time I fitted Triang Hall/ B12 chassis to Mainline Manor and 43XX chassis, Both have Romford wheels and loads of lead and are still in regular service, being 2 coaches better up a 1 in 30 than the Bachmann standard chassis locos.

[MANTY1]

The Peters Spares axles should restore the locos to as new condition, but you must get the quartering right and get it right first time, twisting a wheel on an axle will inevitably loosen it and accelerate the deterioration.

 

The reason for wheel loosening appears to be the wheels don't make good contact with the chassis due to gunge and oil on the stub axle journal and this sets up arcing which heats the wheel and softens the axle. Adding pickups from the chassis half sides to the wheel backs reduces the arcing considerably, even one per side lets the coupling rods act as a current path and helps reduce the heating.  Conductive oil is a must.for these chassis.

 If you have 2ft radius Peco points and 2ft min radius fitting washers to reduce side play on the driving wheels gives the pick ups an easier time.  Weighting the locos is probably a bad idea for the point of view of axle life.

 

The Bachmann wheels have square peg axles and different stub axle sizes as I found when trying to fit Bachmann wheels to a Mainline GW 57XX

 

Twenty odd years ago I  added pickups from the chassis to the wheel backs on a Mainline 03  0-6-0 D loco chassis.   It was retired in favour of a Bachmann for 12 months or so and returned temporarily when the Bachmann motor burned out and the Mainline chassis is still going.   

 

My son bought "New" Bachmann Mogul and |Manor locos last year. The Mogul did 30 minutes running in before a wheel fell off twisting the coupling and connecting rod and damaging the cylinder so the option of a Bachmann  Chass is not a complete cure.

 

Thirty years ago my father in law took the motors out of Mainline Moguls and a Manor and pushed them with Hornby County 4-4-0 powered tenders.   One had Romford wheels fitted. They still run but we have since banned traction tyres so they are in the display cabinet. 

 

Around the same time I fitted Triang Hall/ B12 chassis to Mainline Manor and 43XX chassis, Both have Romford wheels and loads of lead and are still in regular service, being 2 coaches better up a 1 in 30 than the Bachmann standard chassis locos.

Thanks for the reply David.

Think it might be worth a try, nothing ventured !!!

If it doesn't work can always stand in the dead road.

Regards

[The Johnster]

I had another problem that killed off my Mainline locos, having always treated them with some care as I was aware of the axle problem and quartering being lost.  2 panniers died on me a while back from wear in the axle guides in the chassis half-blocks; the axles had worn the channels through to the top (front axle in both cases) and the locos simply jammed and would no longer run.  A 56xx chassis still runs but is well on the way to suffering the same fate, so is out of service; I was able to source a modern 56xx chassis to replace it, and one of the panniers has been resurrected by an eBay donor, but the other had to be replaced.

 

I am a big fan of the idea of split chassis, which should in theory provide perfect pickup and slow running as there is no pickup wiper friction to act as a brake, but the practice, as applied by Palitoy Mainline, was deeply flawed by poor material choices and construction that was not really robust enough, especially the quartering.  Modern wiper pickup RTR chassis run very well indeed, and the advantages of split have been, if not totally lost, largely negated.  It would be a very brave manufacturer that would introduce a split chassis model in the current UK market, and it would have to perform faultlessly from the off to make any impact.  

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...If it doesn't work can always stand in the dead road.

 I'd suggest proceeding directly to this option. Steel axle wiper pick up steamers are infinitely preferable to the many weaknesses inherent to the short life compromised construction of Kader rod coupled split chassis mechanisms.

 

...I am a big fan of the idea of split chassis, which should in theory provide perfect pickup and slow running as there is no pickup wiper friction to act as a brake, but the practice, as applied by Palitoy Mainline, was deeply flawed by poor material choices and construction that was not really robust enough, especially the quartering.  Modern wiper pickup RTR chassis run very well indeed, and the advantages of split have been, if not totally lost, largely negated.  It would be a very brave manufacturer that would introduce a split chassis model in the current UK market, and it would have to perform faultlessly from the off to make any impact.  

  

Well - koff - I disagree about split chassis on current models, both Bachmann and Hornby have some excellent current mechanisms based on this principle and problems are negligible in my experience. But that is because these are on diesel and electric items which are significantly different in one key respect: no connecting rods doing mechanical work and thus producing cyclically varying shear forces on the plastic muff assemblies. (The - sole? - current exponent of split chassis steam is Dave Jones, and his method is to gear couple the axles just as on the post steam models, leaving the slackly toleranced connecting rods floating rather than working, which eliminates the cyclic shear forces.)

 

As for wiper pick ups as brakes, test it. Remove the keeper plate with the wipers on from the model temporarily. and run the model on flying leads. Any significant gain in runnig refinement? Didn't think so. A good DCC decoder or DC feedback controller will completely mask any effect. (Way away the draggiest component in typical model drivelines is the worm gear, dwarfs all other sources of drag.)

[cypherman]

hi all.

I had a similar problem with 2 Mainline Standard class 4 4-6-0 engines and 2 LNER J72's. I fixed them by using Hafix glue. It is an industrial strength superglue that if kept cold in the fridge does not start to set for about 2-3 minutes, This gives you some wiggle room to align the quartering. Both engines are now fine

[melmerby]

I never had any axle problems with mine as the chassis of them disintegrated into mazak crystals long before that could happen!

 

Keith

[DCB]

hi all.

I had a similar problem with 2 Mainline Standard class 4 4-6-0 engines and 2 LNER J72's. I fixed them by using Hafix glue. It is an industrial strength superglue that if kept cold in the fridge does not start to set for about 2-3 minutes, This gives you some wiggle room to align the quartering. Both engines are now fine

Where can we get Hafix from please?

 

I never had any axle problems with mine as the chassis of them disintegrated into mazak crystals long before that could happen!

 

Keith

I thought only pre war Hornby Dublo, Airfix , Bachmann, and Chinese Hornby had Mazak rot.  My Mainline 4MT chassis are fine, its just everything else disintegrated.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

There was mazak rot in Mainline, most notably the wheelsets of the J72s would crumble. You can add Heljan to the makers as well, early 47s have swole up and died.

 

It's everywhere because of the risk of a little lead getting into the melt if the process is not sufficiently closely controlled. I have an inherited 1930s Admiralty pattern dirk with the grip failing from this problem, seen numerous classic car instruments and the like with bezels and housings made in mazak crumbling (also affects aviation controls, same manufacturing sources), and the most recent on a friend's double glazing, the handles failing. He though they were just too weak for the job, but a close inspection of some as yet unfailed specimens revealed the characteristic paint cracking. (With these latter, at least spares are readily available at low cost, scarcely £100 to replace the lot.)

[melmerby]

 

 

I thought only pre war Hornby Dublo, Airfix , Bachmann, and Chinese Hornby had Mazak rot.  My Mainline 4MT chassis are fine, its just everything else disintegrated.

Mainline were badly affected

 

I bought four new Mainline locos: 57XX, Manor, 43XX & Collett Goods.

I sold the Collett early on but of the other three the 57XX literally fell apart through Mazak rot in the chassis, the 43XX was so distorted it would not run at all. I still have the Manor which does run in a fashion.

All were bought new at the time of their release.

I  am building a Comet chassis for the 43XX, the 57XX now has a modern Bachmann chassis.

 

Keith

Edited July 19, 2018 by melmerby

[jcm@gwr]

Where can we get Hafix from please?

 

 

I've seen him at various large shows, normally Ally Pally.

[Gordon A]

Where can we get Hafix from please?

 

 

 

Search the internet. https://www.hafixs.co.uk/products/profglue/index.html

 

You will also find it available from other outlets via mail order.

 

Gordon A

[MANTY1]

Has anyone used the parts from Peters Spares (PS29)

Thought I would give it a go just to see if I can make them work.

 

What issues did you have ?

[cypherman]

Has anyone used the parts from Peters Spares (PS29)

Thought I would give it a go just to see if I can make them work.

 

What issues did you have ?

Hi Manty1,

I can confirm that Peters Spares are excellent. Their turn around to get spare out in a timely fashion is second to none. Plus they have a huge amount of spares that most people would have thought impossible to get.

Edited July 20, 2018 by cypherman

[The Johnster]

 I'd suggest proceeding directly to this option. Steel axle wiper pick up steamers are infinitely preferable to the many weaknesses inherent to the short life compromised construction of Kader rod coupled split chassis mechanisms.

 

  

Well - koff - I disagree about split chassis on current models, both Bachmann and Hornby have some excellent current mechanisms based on this principle and problems are negligible in my experience. But that is because these are on diesel and electric items which are significantly different in one key respect: no connecting rods doing mechanical work and thus producing cyclically varying shear forces on the plastic muff assemblies. (The - sole? - current exponent of split chassis steam is Dave Jones, and his method is to gear couple the axles just as on the post steam models, leaving the slackly toleranced connecting rods floating rather than working, which eliminates the cyclic shear forces.)

 

As for wiper pick ups as brakes, test it. Remove the keeper plate with the wipers on from the model temporarily. and run the model on flying leads. Any significant gain in runnig refinement? Didn't think so. A good DCC decoder or DC feedback controller will completely mask any effect. (Way away the draggiest component in typical model drivelines is the worm gear, dwarfs all other sources of drag.)

 

As I said, I like the idea, not the implementation in practice, but remember I was speaking about Palitoy Mainline's execution of it as an example of bad practice.  I am of a generation influenced by Chris Petherton's split chassis masterpieces, which ran like sewing machines.  Wiper pickups in those days tended to bear harder on the wheels; Lima's especially prevented slow running as the flying lead experiment will show, if you have an old Lima 0-6-0 chassis anywhere.  Mainline, Airfix, and Lima also used what we now call pancake motors but which were known as ringfields at the time, presumably in order for marketing to invoke the perception of quality associated with the massive, cab filling, Hornby Dublo motors which had a very good reputation.

 

But Hornby Dublo's chassis, toylike though they were in terms of scale appearance, were proper, British, dammit Carruthers, high quality engineering, and ultimately could not be produced down to a competitive price.  The plastic bodied pancakes were actually not too bad considering, but you had to remove them from the loco to see how well they could really run; the drag of those plastic spur gears on top of that from the wipers spoiled any chance of really good slow running.  The motors were much less powerful in terms of torque than HD's brutal lumps, and had to run fast to develop sufficient power; this needed a lot of reduction in the gearing to achieve any realistic speed at all, with Lima being easily the worst in this regard.  I had an 4575 that could not run below about a scale 30, but was easily capable of 10 times that speed if you opened the taps...

 

The early 80s were a pivotal time in the development of good quality RTR of the sort we now demand as a god given right, but the mechs were not really up to the standards being set by the appearance and finish of the 'new wave' models.  Locos like Mainline's J72 and Airfix's 31 were game changers in their day, but have been surpassed by better mechs.  Motors that had to run fast to develop power while being small enough to hide in the locos needed reduction gearing and in some cases traction tyres to be able to pull even medium loads; traction tyres also increase drag and compromise pickup, as well as being prone to wear and breakage.  

 

As I say, I was and still am to an extent influenced by Chris Petherton, the Tony Wright of his day, and his building philosophy was based around split chassis, compensation, and coreless motors, theoretically completely free of drag except for a small amount of friction from the gearbox.  This cost money; the standard was the Portescap and RG4 gearbox.  This required specific control elements to circumvent it's weakness, fuse like rapidity of burning out at the slightest overload.  Coreless motors still have a part to play, but are not in general compatible with modern electronic control methods

 

Triang Hornby, considered the most toylike and trainsetty at the time, were in fact showing the way forward with their retention of wipers, open frame motors, and solid chassis blocks; most 0-6-0 chassis on modern models are of this type, a can motor being simply an enclosed type of open frame.  Success has come about from very small motors that satisfy the modern requirement  for motor free cabs and daylight under boilers, yet are powerful enough to drive through single reduction worm and cog drives or spurs with much less reduction in them; the very high speeds are no longer required, and motors of very good engineering quality and performance are available so cheaply as to be replacement items when the brushes wear out.

 

It would be interesting to compare the performance of a modern produced Pendleton type RTR 0-6-0 chassis with the better wiper pickup/cog and gear types, or the Baccy pannier chassis, but I can't imagine any British manufacture taking up the baton after the mess Palitoy made of their split chassis; it would be marketing suicide!  And there is no need, modern conventional chassis are good enough for slow performance on clean, well laid, track.  I have 4 Baccy pannier chassis, all of which have their own individual characteristics and some of which run better very slowly than others, but they all perform to a satisfactory minimum requirement.  But these 4 cover 3 slightly differing versions of the chassis, presumably different production runs, and seem to represent an advance in quality over time; they are not all interchangeable between all the bodies!

[Il Grifone]

Where can we get Hafix from please?

 

I thought only pre war Hornby Dublo, Airfix , Bachmann, and Chinese Hornby had Mazak rot.  My Mainline 4MT chassis are fine, its just everything else disintegrated.

 

Add Trix Twin and Farish 00 to the list. By the mid-sixties, the problem seemed to have been solved, only to reappear with the shift in manufacturing to China.

 

I have a Mainline Pannier and a Mogul disabled by the pest. I managed to catch the bunker ballast weight in a Lima Prairie just in time.

 

Post-war Dublo (and Dinky Toys) and Tri-ang seem immune.

[The Johnster]

I've been lucky so far, and have been in the game for many years; I'm almost afraid to write this for fear of tempting fate.  It may or may not be significant that I have, since the teenage horror of an attic layout that tore itself apart with expansion and contraction because of the temperature range, had layouts inside the living area of the home, where temperature range is moderate, ventilation is adequate, and humidity controlled.  It is my opinion, not backed by any objective knowledge, that mazak rot is, if not actually caused at least worsened, by extreme temperature ranges.

 

Some manufacturers at some periods may be more prone to the beast than others, but the use of mazak always carries this inherent risk.  Swings and roundabouts, perhaps, ferrous metals and alloys rust or oxidise, brass is probably too expensive to work to be practical, and plastic did not achieve glory when Lima employed it...

[cypherman]

Hi all,

The Johnster the worst case of mazac rot for me is a very expensive Riverossi Bigboy. The whole chassis has been basically destroyed with it. It is only still in one piece because I stripped it and gave it a bath of superglue(Hafix). That has managed to stop it falling apart. But for how long I do not know. I did it about 4 years ago and it is still in one piece. I rebuilt it. But it has never run properly since. Also had to make a new drive shaft between the 2 sets of wheels as the plastic one had shrunk and fell off. So in reality it really has just become a static model I keep in it's box. One day if I can I will see if you can get a replacement chassis. Odd thing though is that I have Cabforward and  Mallet bought at the same time and their chassis are fine.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...the worst case of mazac rot for me is a very expensive Riverossi Bigboy. The whole chassis has been basically destroyed with it. It is only still in one piece because I stripped it and gave it a bath of superglue(Hafix). That has managed to stop it falling apart. But for how long I do not know. I did it about 4 years ago and it is still in one piece. I rebuilt it. But it has never run properly since. Also had to make a new drive shaft between the 2 sets of wheels as the plastic one had shrunk and fell off. ...

 Because the failure mechanism causes expansion of the casting, which the use of adhesive cannot counteract, the mechanism jams up. It's a fair bet that if you measured the 'shrunk' driveshaft against a new replacement you would find it hasn't shrunk at all. It is now too short because the mazak frame has expanded and increased the distance between the two subchassis.

 

...Odd thing though is that I have Cabforward and  Mallet bought at the same time and their chassis are fine...

 It bears repetition that this is no surprise at all. The parts are typically batch cast. Get parts from an accidentally contaminated melt you get the failure. Parts cast from the melt batches befire and after that are uncontaminated, no problems.

[melmerby]

These comments about split chassis and coreless motors not being suitable for the modern era?

 

Coreless motors are appearing in RTR nowadays because they are now a) cheap and b) small.

Coreless motors were originally designed as a precision low mass item, quite the opposite of the requirements for model railways.

I used to work with coreless motors (Swiss made & expensive, always) as part of my job and IMHO they had no properties useful for model railways, unless paying lots of money for them  (as in Portescap) was one of them.

 

The DJM/Hattons 48XX is split chassis.

 

Keith

[The Johnster]

I'd forgotten that the DJH 14xx was split chassis, and was incorrectly assuming that modern splits were restricted to non-steam.  Coreless motors are used in N gauge.  The DJH 14xx has not covered itself in glory as regards reliable running, though, quality control being apparently the issue.  I seems that it might be easier to achieve an acceptable level of QC with a 'traditional' type of mech with wipers, but I am not qualified to state that as a proven fact!

 

The only item I have at present that has any sort of split chassis is a Lima 117 based 116 3 car set, which has split pickup of a sort. in that the power car picks up on one bogie and returns on the other.  This gets a very occasional run on an excursion, and I have fettled it to run about as well as a Lima mech can; when it is running very slowly the motor cogs and the vibrations are most realistic...  It requires thorough cleaning after each out and back trip, those wheels being apparently specifically designed to pick up as much crud as they can and re-distribute it about the layout, including places it hasn't run; I remember having a Lima Western that did much the same!

 

I do not regard these as split chassis in the steam engine Pethertonian sense; in fact, as these require compensation and brass bearings from which the motor supply is taken, it is arguable that no such thing has every been produced by the British RTR trade, obviously for cost reasons.  

 

Your comments about coreless motors are instructive; low mass cheap ones did not exist back in the day, and it is possible that the Portescap was a success in spite of itself.  According to this philosophy, the best motor would be the Hornby Dublo ringfield; massive, high rotating mass for a bit of flywheel effect, high torque at low revs, and very smooth; a HD loco can be pushed along with the wheels turning the motor through the worm and cog gears, not that I'd recommend it but it shows the build quality!  But the bitter truth is that a traditional HD type ringfield is too big for any 4mm application that I can think of unless you sacrifice the cab space and the daylight viewed through it, which is not acceptable in the modern market.

 

I do not rate steam locos which pick up with the loco and return through the tender as true split chassis either, and I have never been happy with tender drive; it just looks wrong even when the gubbiins are hidden properly like Airfix's and Lima's weren't...

 

IMHO, a proper split chassis on a steam locomotive model has brass frames separated by non conductive cross bearers, and live stub axles from the wheels to the bearings and the frames, with a dead centre section to the axle.  Current is taken from the frames, each of which is live, to the motor terminals.  I don't think anyone has ever made one of these as a mass produced RTR item, though there may be some Japanese Brass esoterica that I am unaware of using the method.  Hardly mass production even then, though, and possibly an indication of the production costs.

Edited July 20, 2018 by The Johnster

[MANTY1]

Appreciate the comments, but we seem to have got away from my initial request, which is "has anyone fitted the PS29 axle kit and what issues did you have".

Think the best thing is, I order one set and give it a go.

If it fails, well at least I tried.

[The Johnster]

I am an inveterate subverter of topics; my apologies for the part I have played in taking this one 'off'....

[Devo63]

I've only just noticed this thread today (don't know how I missed it!) having recently used a set of the Peter's Spares replacement parts on a Mainline pannier tank. The hardest part of the operation was, as mentioned above, to get the wheels correctly quartered. I took my time with this continuously checking the alignment before pressing the stub axles firmly into place and then checking the back to back measurements. The chassis ran perfectly for the first time in years when placed on the test track. All was done in about 15 minutes. My only problem after that was that I had misplaced the body fixing /  coupling screws after removing the chassis and had to search through 40 years of accumulated screws and fixings to find suitable replacements. I think it is about time to have another sweep of the railway room carpet with an extra strong magnet.

 

Dave R 

[The Johnster]

I have lost many many many many of these little screws over the years, and have a technique that prevents it.  A lump of blutack or plasticene, or similar sits by the work, and the screws are stuck into it as soon as they are removed, ideally on the end of a magnetised screwdriver.  That stops the little s*ds making their break for the border.  

 

I tried putting them in a small container, but of course it got knocked over by some clumsy fool about my size...