Dapol Kitmaster Wagon Kits - coupling

[Crumplezone]

Hello folks,

I bought the meat van and tanker from the 00 kitmaster range by Dapol from my local shop. It has the metal wheels and more modern looking coupling so its the updated kit bar the 50 year old moulds they use.

My question is about the coupling, I read a few sources and watched a few folks put the kits together and they said the coupling was abit stiff, so what alternative coupling, specifically NEM socket types would I want to replace them with?

Its my first outting into creating the kits, so I'm not really sure on what I need to purchase as a suitable replacement, i.e. not just the coupling part but also the part the coupling would connect to on the wagon.

Ideally they will connect to other small sized NEM coupling from Bachmann/oxford models wagons.

Alternatively, if there is any modelling tips for making the coupling which comes with the kits less stiff and more responsive that would be great to.

Also another question which just came to mind, any suggestions on what to use or to purchase to add weight to the wagons? They don't seem to come with any in the kits.

Thanks.

[slngshotx]

I've done a few mineral wagons I glued the parkside nem blocks to mine

 

http://www.gaugemaster.com/item_details.asp?code=PA34

 

I then used standard Bachmann couplings https://www.track-shack.com/acatalog/Bachmann-36-030-Couplings-Nem-Shaft-Straight-With-Pocket-x10-Bachmann-36-030.html?gclid=Cj0KCQjwk_TbBRDsARIsAALJSObjq3a9czOfUvR4QZvEnqkjAiuasXEAo-KqGd9UZrK-Tky6qQeYNgYaAmpHEALw_wcB

 

For weight i use 2p under the load or in the van.

 

Hope that helps?

[davetheroad]

Interesting. I have over 100 ready built Dapol wagons and have spent some time making the couplings stiff. I found having the bar rigid gave less derailments when propelling wagons over points. The main problems with Dapol couplers is they are too floppy and the hook can easily detach so I am considering converting them to either Bachmann or Hornby

Edited August 23, 2018 by davetheroad

[Il Grifone]

Sorry I can't help with the couplings, as I use the Peco/HD coupling the kits were originally intended to fit.

 

For weighting, I either use Lead sheet (purchased from eBay for about £6 a square foot - will do loads of vehicles) or 'penny' washers. Wilko (usual disclaimer) sell these in bulk along with the nuts and bolts with which to secure  them. I find between 3 and 5 are usually sufficient. They cost about the same as a 2p coin, but it is illegal to deface the latter.

 

I have filled the tank wagon with plaster to weight it in the (distant) past, but this tended to make it top heavy. Some lead sheet or a large nut and bolt in the bottom of the tank would be better. I try to avoid the use of glue to fix the weight and rely on some mechanical fixing instead.

Edited August 23, 2018 by Il Grifone

[SRman]

Another vote for the Parkside NEM fishtail adapters and Bachmann NEM couplings, but avoid the cranked ones. For some reason, Parkside intended the adapters to be used with the cranked couplings, but if you pack the adapters with some plastic card, you can use any straight couplings, including Bachmann or Hornby tension lock, Kadees, or close couplings from Hornby, Roco or other brands, whatever takes your fancy.

[amdaley]

For weight you can use the weights that are fitted to car alloy wheels to balance them.

They come in strips which have a self adhesive backing. Pull off the paper backing & stick the weight where needed.

[Steamport Southport]

I found loads of free lead on the local church roof. 

 

 

Seriously though, places like Eileens Emporium sell it for a reasonable price.

 

https://eileensemporium.com/index.php?option=com_hikashop&ctrl=category&task=listing&cid=1225&name=8ba-10&Itemid=189

 

There is also the "fluid" lead.

 

https://eileensemporium.com/index.php?option=com_hikashop&ctrl=category&task=listing&cid=1224&name=8ba-9&Itemid=189

 

 

 

Jason

[DCB]

I have never found a way to make the Airfix / Dapol kits run nicely except by using the body on a RTR Chassis.
The BR Brake in particular was streets ahead of the competition and maybe still is.
Couplings are a pain. The standard Kitmaster coupling is floppy and not much cop, using Peco couplings improves them but you are still stuck with a weak chassis and they do pull in half after a while.
Now the RCH (Railway Clearng House) mandated that the coupling hooks were to be connected to each other and not rely on the wagon chassis and a thin brass strip under the wagon with a Triang metal Tension lock coupler soldered to it each end attached buy a couple of screws works well
Later plastic couplers ore moderately useless and the Nem Sockets supremely ugly but a loop of brass strip or wire and a Lima/ Airfix/Hornby couping hook makes a great DIY coupling for pulling. Reversing is still iffy.
I haven't yet found a way of weighting a Kitmaster/Dapol wagon which gets the centre of gravity low enough for acceptable running, so as I said mine are on RTR chassis or static models.
I melt lead car balance weights and lead flashing with a butane blow lamp to form ingots and cut them to size, hammer them which compresses them but can't get the weight low enough without hanging down looking ridiculous, and if I could weight them then the plastic is pretty poor bearing material so you need brass bearings
A nice 50 wagon rake or two of the minerals with chain couplings as a through mineral, or the tanks as a through oil train would work well, but as general purpose shuntable wagons I would treat the Kitmaster / Dapol as body kits.
The Kitmaster Powered Box van is fun, Mine wore out and is being rebuilt with a much modified Triang Dock shunter motor bogie for power, [Edit] but I suddenly thought a Wrenn Class 20 might be better, instead of nickingthe class 20 's Romfords for the triang chassis.  Actually come to think of it under present plans there will be nothing original left when I finish, bit like Flying Scotsman!  [End Edit]

Maybe Dapol should reintroduce it DCC ready to help some gutless wonder RTR locos haul a worthwhile train.

Edited August 24, 2018 by DavidCBroad

[The Johnster]

I agree that the weak point of these otherwise very good kits is the chassis, and the longer it is the weaker it is, so that the oil tank is a bit flimsy but the mineral is reasonably robust and a 60 wagon train can be used without issue.  But I had an 'Interfigo', the first kit I built when I was about 8 or 9, for many years and it lasted fine, though I never got the ballast right.  The oil tank is a particular problem for ballast as the centre of gravity is too high if you load the tank and you can do nothing to get weight lower down because of the open detail on the chassis.  

 

As for running, again this seems to be a function of the length and rigidity of the chassis; the minerals can be made to run very well indeed with metal wheels and brass tophat bearings, but the longer oil tank chassis tend to warp even if you have been careful to assemble them on a flat surface (a sheet of glass is best for this, as you can see in the reflection if the thing is lying flat as you glue it together).  The Presflo and Prestwin make up into rigid models and the 10' chassis such as the meat and the cattle van are ok, but running has never been quite as good as RTR, especially modern RTR!  The idea of using them with RTR chassis as body kits is fine, but only if you have a supply of RTR chassis, otherwise you have to buy RTR donors which kind of defeats the objects.  

 

My instinct would be to stick to Bachmann for your 16ton minerals, they are superb, and use Dapol/KM as siding lurkers rather than main line running stock.  I'd say that the extra cost of RTR is worth it unless you are talking about short trains, where the cost difference is less of a factor anyway, as I once had the task of making a 40 wagon mineral train for a club layout out of, in those days, Airfix kits.  It was boring, I tried to use production line methods to finish quicker, but the worst was trying to number them individually as I'd stupidly promised to do in the pub; I could manage maybe 3 or 4 a night before my eyesight and patience gave out, using PC, now HMRS, transfers.  I would never want to do such a thing again; you are supposed to enjoy a hobby but this was brutal! 

 

But I recommend these kits very highly despite all this comment to newbies progressing from reliance on RTR; they are easy, a pleasure to assemble, and will build your confidence for more complex kits or adaptations to RTR.  You will learn how to assemble a wagon square and true, you will learn a lot about painting and numbering, and you will finish up with a useable wagon and a sense of achievement for not a massive amount of money, and even if you mess it up you've got a siding lurker.  I had a meat van for many years which I modelled with the doors open on one side to sit in a goods shed being unloaded, and a couple of mineral with open doors for the coal siding.

 

The buildings are cheap and cheerful, but effective and easily adapted to other purposes; my 'modern shop' (might have been modern 70 years ago!) is the basis of the upper floor of a post war industrial building on my layout, and a water tank and a station canopy find employment in the same factory.  The engine shed is particularly useful as it is modular and can be extended in both directions to make a building any size you like.

 

Sorry, that rambled a bit, and was nothing to do with couplings; at the time I was using the kits I was using scale couplings which are no harder to fit to them than to any other stock...

Edited August 23, 2018 by The Johnster

[BangRoad]

I am building some B tankers at the moment. I have used the tension lock couplings supplied with an extra helping of plastic cement to prevent the sag. The couplings are quite coarse but aligned well they don’t give me any issues when running. I would definitely consider fitting NEM and slimline Bachmann though for looks.

 

For weight I have cut some old tubular spanner’s up which fit nicely inside the tank held with a blob of no nails type glue. I also use large nuts and generally anything heavy I can get my hands on.

 

The biggest issue for me were the wheels supplied with the kit. The shallow flange on the Dapol wheelsets cause no end of hassle de-railing all the time. It’s not helped by the longer wheelbase of the tanker as they are prone to any slight twist in the track. But I immediately replaced them with Hornby wheels and the problem was solved!

[Crumplezone]

Hello folks, thanks for you insight on the coupling and weight. I will look into parkside nem sockets and the Bachmann coupling. I think my grandfather has a bunch of old nuts and bolts in his garage so might go dig through that for weights since people seem to be suggesting options like that seem to be ok to pop in the wagons.

I should have also explained alittle that the wagons are not going to be running in long trains or any real long distance running. I'm currently in the process of building a Ingenook 5-3-3 setup and will be using a Peckett and J50 so far for locos, so as long as the wagons can move through peco streamline medium points and can withstand abit of back and forth then that should be fine.

Again its abit of something new and I wanted to try out some wagon kit building, I'm not actually new to plastic model building as I do 1 in 350 ships and wargaming but not done model railway so just wanted to check with other folks who had put kits together. I could have gone with parkside dundas but the packs required me to get extra wheels since they only had plastic wheels in and I'm abit of sticklier for metal wheels for running quality and also feel eventually plastic wheels have the chance to be worn out over time while a metal one is going to require infinitely longer running before they show issue at all.

I'll have a go at the wagon kits on the weekend and see how it goes.

Thanks once again.
 

[Daddyman]

Another vote for the Parkside NEM fishtail adapters and Bachmann NEM couplings, but avoid the cranked ones. For some reason, Parkside intended the adapters to be used with the cranked couplings, but if you pack the adapters with some plastic card, you can use any straight couplings, including Bachmann or Hornby tension lock, Kadees, or close couplings from Hornby, Roco or other brands, whatever takes your fancy.

I don't quite follow this: if you use the Parkside NEM adapters as intended, and the cranked couplings as intended, the couplings will be at the same height as RTR stock.

 

Or perhaps you're saying that packing out the NEM adapters and using straight couplings will allow one to change to other types of coupling later if desired? 

[The Johnster]

Metal wheels are the way to go and I have eliminated plastic ones from my layout even on older stock.  Running is better, the pin points do not wear, and, perhaps the most important, the track stays cleaner for longer; plastic wheels are very good at picking up crud and distributing it around the layout, mostly where it will cause the most problems.

[tomparryharry]

A little bit of patience works wonders. I'll assemble just the one part, harden overnight, then the next. Like others, I've not used the kitmaster/Hornby couplings. I'm still using 3-links. The end of the rake is an adaptor wagon, with a Kadee No5 as the coupler. The original Kitmaster coupler had a hook on the rear, and an elastic band between. For weight, I'll use a penny washer, or 'mud' washer, to achieve the mass.

 

I've still got a load of Kitmaster/Airfix/Dapol couplers. If anyone needs spares, PM me.

 

My one & only grimble is the headstock: I do wish Dapol would upgrade the kit, and make the coupling slot vertical, not horizontal.

 

Still, the sun is shining, and it's Friday.

 

Happy modelling Folks!

 

Ian.

[Steamport Southport]

It is possibly worth pointing out that these had nothing to do with Kitmaster apart from Dapol using the name. They were Airfix.

 

http://www.kitmaster.org.uk/

 

The only wagon that Kitmaster made was the Motorising Van which was never reissued.

 

http://www.kitmaster.org.uk/MotorisingKitsI.htm

 

 

This was the Airfix range.

 

http://www.airfixrailways.co.uk/indexA.htm

 

http://www.airfixrailways.co.uk/indexType2.htm

 

 

 

Jason

[SRman]

I don't quite follow this: if you use the Parkside NEM adapters as intended, and the cranked couplings as intended, the couplings will be at the same height as RTR stock.

 

Or perhaps you're saying that packing out the NEM adapters and using straight couplings will allow one to change to other types of coupling later if desired? 

 

Yes, the latter! If you use them as intended, you are restricted only to the cranked couplings. Packing them increases the number of options considerably.

[tomparryharry]

It is possibly worth pointing out that these had nothing to do with Kitmaster apart from Dapol using the name. They were Airfix.

 

http://www.kitmaster.org.uk/

 

The only wagon that Kitmaster made was the Motorising Van which was never reissued.

 

http://www.kitmaster.org.uk/MotorisingKitsI.htm

 

 

This was the Airfix range.

 

http://www.airfixrailways.co.uk/indexA.htm

 

http://www.airfixrailways.co.uk/indexType2.htm

 

 

 

Jason

Quite right Jason. However, I'm of an age where the words 'Kitmaster' 'Dapol' 'Airfix' are used pretty much universally. I'd guess that a large percentage of RM Webbers would mentally translate the words simultaneously. I'm also guessing that both you & I are in that percentage.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

 

Now, where's my Kitmaster City of Truro (boxed, unmade)?

Edited August 24, 2018 by tomparryharry

[paulbb]

The Airfix Cattle Wagon is still the most dimensionally correct version of its type, albeit a little crude around the edges by today's standards. With all the Airfix 00 wagons,changing wheels ,adding weights and using a robust coupling of choice means that you will have a long lasting and good looking wagon.

My dozen or so have been running since the mid seventies. A great little product for its time.

[009 micro modeller]

They cost about the same as a 2p coin, but it is illegal to deface the latter.

A little off topic, but I think it would be legal to use a low value coin as a wagon weight in the same way that penny presses ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elongated_coin ) are legal, as long as you were only sticking it on. I don't see how squashing it is that different from cutting it up, but anyway...

Personally though I would probably use lead sheet or perhaps a washer if it was to hand.

[cctransuk]

... I think it would be legal ..... in the same way that penny presses ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elongated_coin ) are legal .....

 

Not in the UK it wouldn't be !!

 

https://www.royalmint.com/help/coinage-faqs/destroying-coinage/

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Edited August 24, 2018 by cctransuk

[SRman]

Not in the UK it wouldn't be !!

 

https://www.royalmint.com/help/coinage-faqs/destroying-coinage/

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

I think that applies to a good many countries: it is illegal to modify, deface or destroy legal tender. It is certainly the case here in Australia, and in New Zealand too, and I believe all of the EU countries.

[Nick C]

Not in the UK it wouldn't be !!

 

https://www.royalmint.com/help/coinage-faqs/destroying-coinage/

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

But as the wikipedia article in @009 Micro Modeller's post points out, the coins are neither melted nor broken up, so it is legal - the law doesn't actually mention squishing them (nor glueing them to the inside of a model wagon...)

[tomparryharry]

The Treasury by & large, won't pursue an individual for defacing a coin. They will act if there is a case of defrauding the State. For gluing in a 2p piece won't cause a revolution. After all, there must be countless millions of 1 & 2p pieces up & down the country, nestling in the floorboards, piggy banks, and old whisky bottles. 

 

One of my Oxford welding sets ran very nicely when the worn out contactors were replaced by old halfpennies. Was this illegal? No, it wasn't. The pre-decimal currency ceased to be legal tender some years ago. You can sell them, donate them, hoard them, create art from them. In fact, anything by way of trade. You are not allowed to duplicate or replicate them, with intent to defraud HMG.

 

If you do want to get rid of your old 1&2 pence pieces, donation is the most honourable act you can achieve. Right now, I'm doing a collection to allow a tired old soul, and his red-hot Italian au-pair, for a years sabbatical to Sicily . Give generously!

 

Cheers,

 

Fred Needle-Street.

[cctransuk]

But as the wikipedia article in @009 Micro Modeller's post points out, the coins are neither melted nor broken up, so it is legal - the law doesn't actually mention squishing them (nor glueing them to the inside of a model wagon...)

 

I think that you'd find that, if push came to shove, 'squishing' UK coins would be interpreted as 'broken up' - as would any action that rendered them illegible or incapable of use / unacceptable as legal tender.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[The Johnster]

Ecky thump we don't half cover some odd ground on some of these threads; great fun and instructive though!  I wonder when anyone was last prosecuted for disfiguring a coin in this way, and suspect that, while it is still certainly agin the law and on the statute books, any action by the Public Prosecutor would be dependent on the intention to defraud implicit by using such a coin as currency.  Using it as a weight, for which you could argue that you have paid the proper amount in terms of the face value of the coin, is probably not even on the Prosecutor's radar!  

 

The pennies that are used to regulate Big Ben's clock mechanism are of course no longer legal tender, but for much of the period of their use in this way were and could be used as currency.

 

Halfpennies with one side filed and polished down to use on shove ha'penny boards presumably contravened the law at the time when they were legal tender.  I recall playing in one Forest of Dean pub many years ago where the landlord claimed that he'd polished the 'tails' sides because he'd heard that disfiguring the monarch's image was High Treason and still subject to the death penalty.  Hmmm...