Triang Hornby Pannier Tank for EM Gauge

[Barclay]

Looking nostalgically through the box in my loft that contains all the old 00 relics from the 1970's and '80's I found myself pulling out the old Triang Hornby pannier tank that had started it all. Around 1972 my Dad bought me one of these and thus began a life-long hobby. A quick check of the loco against some drawings showed that, whilst not exactly perfect, it wasn't far out in any of the important dimensions. Could it be brought back to life, and actually be used as a credible, if far from state of the art, loco. on my EM layout? I have decided to have a go, with the caveat that some of it's issues, primarily very thick plastic mouldings, I'm just going to have to live with. Even better there were some 8750's at Birkenhead, which is just up the line from my semi-imaginary Saltport layout. The progress so far:

 

This is not mine, but a photo from the internet to show what it looked like when new:

 

 

But by the early 1980's it looked like this, with some separate handrails, and, its crowning glory, a new safety valve bonnet from Peter K - probably the first detail part I ever bought.

 

 

First job has been to strip the loco to a bare shell, before starting to re-instate some of the dodgy, or missing bits. We have a better chimney from Phoenix; Buffers, injectors, whistles, and lots of handrail knobs from Gibson, a smokebox door handle of indeterminate origin, rear spectacle grills from a Mainly Trains etch, now available from Wizard, and lots of wire for piping, beading, etc. The tank vents have been turned up in the mini-drill, and the whistle shield bent up from brass sheet.

 

 

Then a quick dust of primer to unify everything, and show me where the rough bits are.....

 

 

I have also removed the plastic between running plate and tank that is where the boiler should be, and intend to have a brass boiler attached to the chassis, which will be from a Comet kit. However I will see how that goes. Unusually I have built the body first this time, but it was a while before I was sure it was going to be worth proceeding or not, and now I think it will, I can get on with it, but I must finish Roy's C12 first as he might be reading this!

 

 

Edited June 21, 2019 by Barclay

[Darlington South Junction]

Looking great so far! Really does go to show that you can make Triang models look great without using a huge amount of stuff!

[Nile]

That's quite a transformation. I'm wondering if using a Comet chassis will cause a problem lining the wheels up with the splashers, have you checked this? An alternative would be the former Mainly Trains chassis that is a direct replacement for the Hornby one.

[Barclay]

I'm fairly sure the wheelbase checked out when I was  comparing the dimensions. If not then I'm moving the splasher - That's not a compromise I'm prepared to make. I didn't know Mainly Trains did a chassis - Wizard incorporates both the Comet and Mainly trains ranges, I wonder if they do both?

[Nile]

Yes, Wizard now sell both.

[timbowilts]

To slightly hijack this thread, I did something similar to a Hornby pannier body some 30+ years ago, before I got married! It has been “converted” to a representation of a 64xx long before the Bachmann one was dreamed of. The smokebox top was filed down flat and a replacement chimney fitted. That had fallen off when I rediscovered it a week ago (whilst looking for something else as one does). It has a scratchbuilt chassis, made from plasticard. It is fitted with a coupling at one end only as it is/was intended to work with a single autotrailer.

I hope this inspires someone.

Tim T

Modelling South Wales branches in EM

[hayfield]

On 21/06/2019 at 21:00, Barclay said:

I'm fairly sure the wheelbase checked out when I was  comparing the dimensions. If not then I'm moving the splasher - That's not a compromise I'm prepared to make. I didn't know Mainly Trains did a chassis - Wizard incorporates both the Comet and Mainly trains ranges, I wonder if they do both?

 

What you could use is a Southeastern Finecast etched brass replacement chassis, whilst not being accurate for a GWR Pannier its a direct replacement for the Hornby chassis and has brake gear to boot

[Barclay]

Thanks for your comments, I've checked the body more carefully against the drawings and the wheelbase is indeed wrong. The front splashers are too far forward. I want to use the Comet  chassis as it's correct, so those splashers have to go. More plastic bashing to follow....

[BernardTPM]

If I remember correctly, the Tri-ang Jinty chassis that this model used wasn't actually the right wheelbase for a Jinty either.

[Barclay]

We are not at home to Mister c*ck up so the front splashers have been removed, not without some collateral damage, and two new ones made up, but I won't be fitting them until I'm sure it all lines up properly !

 

 

[Barclay]

With the splashers now in the right place work has finally begun on the chassis. The Comet chassis appears to favour springing with all 3 axle holes capable of being removed to allow  for 6-wheel springing. I favour beam compensation so the front two sets of axle holes were sawn out to take MJT hornblocks and the rears re-inforced as they will be staying put to locate the fixed (and powered) rear axle. I hope the picture makes this clearer than the text....

 

 

The coupling rods are used to locate the hornblocks to ensure the wheelbase exactly matches the rods.

 

Had a bit of fun with the rods as they are designed to allow a choice of pivoting them on the crankpin, or more correctly, at the joint. I managed to cut one for each method, and then had to re-solder one of them to ensure they both pivot on the crankpin, which I always do as it's easier.

 

The compensation beam will span the two front axles and traditionally it's pivot point is midway between them. However on a previous loco I tested moving the pivot slightly further forward to put more weight on the front axle at the expense of the middle one and that loco runs well, so I will be using this method here, too. Not my idea, sadly. I read it somewhere. I think the theory is that it reduces the chance of the front wheel riding up on a crossing or point blade, which I can't say has ever been a problem for me, even with my very industrial track, but it seems a sound idea to put more of the weight at the corners.

 

[Nile]

That idea rings a bell, it was in a Scaleforum guide a few years ago.

[hayfield]

On 28/07/2019 at 17:22, Barclay said:

With the splashers now in the right place work has finally begun on the chassis. The Comet chassis appears to favour springing with all 3 axle holes capable of being removed to allow  for 6-wheel springing. I favour beam compensation so the front two sets of axle holes were sawn out to take MJT hornblocks and the rears re-inforced as they will be staying put to locate the fixed (and powered) rear axle. I hope the picture makes this clearer than the text....

 

 

The coupling rods are used to locate the hornblocks to ensure the wheelbase exactly matches the rods.

 

Had a bit of fun with the rods as they are designed to allow a choice of pivoting them on the crankpin, or more correctly, at the joint. I managed to cut one for each method, and then had to re-solder one of them to ensure they both pivot on the crankpin, which I always do as it's easier.

 

The compensation beam will span the two front axles and traditionally it's pivot point is midway between them. However on a previous loco I tested moving the pivot slightly further forward to put more weight on the front axle at the expense of the middle one and that loco runs well, so I will be using this method here, too. Not my idea, sadly. I read it somewhere. I think the theory is that it reduces the chance of the front wheel riding up on a crossing or point blade, which I can't say has ever been a problem for me, even with my very industrial track, but it seems a sound idea to put more of the weight at the corners.

 

 

 

Barclay

 

I am building a couple of SR P class chassis (A Southeastern Finecast and a Branchlines) at the moment, I was going to joint the SEF coupling rods at the crankpin, but cut the first rod incorrectly at the joint. so had to rivet the joint.I must admit it not only works very well, but to my mind looks better

 

I have built both rigid as I was lucky enough to pick up a Hobby Holliday's Master chassis at a very reasonable cost, both chassis run very well. Next up will be to make a sprung chassis with hornblocks

[Barclay]

21 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

 

Barclay

 

I am building a couple of SR P class chassis (A Southeastern Finecast and a Branchlines) at the moment, I was going to joint the SEF coupling rods at the crankpin, but cut the first rod incorrectly at the joint. so had to rivet the joint.I must admit it not only works very well, but to my mind looks better

 

I have built both rigid as I was lucky enough to pick up a Hobby Holliday's Master chassis at a very reasonable cost, both chassis run very well. Next up will be to make a sprung chassis with hornblocks

One day I will have to be brave and try to make the proper joint. I'm very stuck in my ways, once something works, I tend to stick with it forever !

 

Nile - that's exactly what it was - Scaleforum edition of Scalefour News 2 or 3 years ago. I don't have it to hand to credit the author unfortunately.

[Barclay]

The gearbox is a High Level Loadhauler (68:1) and has gone together very smoothly, as they do. Motor is a Mitsumi M15N, which I bought a batch of for 65p each from ebay. They are smooth running and slow revving motors, approximately equivalent to a 12/20 in size - the only minor issue is the lack of motor fixing screws. On this one I have taken Ruston's advice and soldered the motor directly to the gearbox, top and bottom. This is by no means as alarming as it sounds and would enable it to be removed easily if required.

 

The boiler is from brass tube, attached to the chassis with a couple of spare frame spacers. The rear one faces backward to provide a 'shelf' for the motor to rest on:

 

 

The second picture shows a trial fit of the body, only rough at this stage, and the body has been through the wars since it's last picture, but it'll be fine.....

 

[Barclay]

The chassis is now wheeled up and after some running in on the rolling road, it is running well, so today has seen the brakes installed, and full marks to Comet for brakes that look the part and are nice and stout so that this ham-fisted modeller can fit them with ease.

 

 

Just for comparison, here is the original chassis:

 

 

Inside the body, plasticard mountings have been installed, so that it sits at the right height on the chassis, with a nut melted into the rear one for attachment. I have also given it a coat of paint from a Railmatch spray can. You can see the primer inside the cab cut out, showing the foot-thick plastic here that will have to be painted matt black and perhaps disguised with  a driver leaning on the ledge.... Oh well, it was never going to be perfect.

 

 

 

Pick-ups next - that's always fun......

 

 

 

[Barclay]

Hi everyone - it's been a while but all those last minute bits take ages, and the limited visible progress didn't seem worth posting. And then, whilst soldering the pickups I must have lingered with the bit too close to the final drive gear because it was suddenly the wrong shape! Only England's ludicrously improbable test match victory that same afternoon saved my day. Plus Chris Gibbons' kind and speedy response to my problem which had the loco up and running again by the following weekend.

 

On the chassis the tank balance pipe was added to the boiler underside, before my usual revolting attempt to paint the completed chassis. I've been building loco's pretty regularly for some 25 years and one day I really hope that I will remember to paint the chassis before wheeling up...

 

 

Then the painting was completed before lettering with HMRS Pressfix transfers.

 

 

And finally today a very light weathering mix was sprayed on, mostly over the top of the tank/boiler area, and some weathering powders used to break up the plain black bits.

 

 

Now I just await the number plates from Narrow Planet - 9651 was built at Swindon in 1946 so is only a year old here, which is my excuse for keeping it quite clean, although I think 12 months at Birkenhead in 1946/7 would probably be quite enough to render it filthy. GWR aficionados will note that I couldn't bear to paint that safety valve cover, although age and the weathering have toned it down. Given that this was my first ever train set loco I'm quite happy with the results and it's great to see it running  after all these years, although I'm sure a Bachmann body or even a K's one would have made a better starting point.

[DCB]

On 21/06/2019 at 21:00, Barclay said:

I'm fairly sure the wheelbase checked out when I was  comparing the dimensions. If not then I'm moving the splasher - That's not a compromise I'm prepared to make. I didn't know Mainly Trains did a chassis - Wizard incorporates both the Comet and Mainly trains ranges, I wonder if they do both?

If it has sentimental value then an upgrade is a good move.   Our Bachmann 64X doesn't like 2nd radius curves while the Hornby is happy on 1st and even 13" radius curves so the equation isn't as completely black and white as one being better than the other.

I have a detailed Hornby 8750 with Romford wheels which looks the part until it is seen with a Bachmann pannier. .

I did a 64XX conversion from the Hornby 57XX which ended up being scrapped when the Bachmann version came out, it was too wide, and the wrong wheelbase compared to the Bachmann, and succumbed when I tried to  fillet the thing by sawing it length ways to narrow the body.

It now has a Bachmann body and the chassis with 5 ppole Hornby Dublo 1/2" motor is being adapted to fit. 

The Chassis should be 7ft 4 +7ft 4,  Triang is 8ft + 8ft 2 and the 57XX/2251/2721 etc  7ft 3 +8ft 3.    Moving the splashers is not easy, mine had the splashers moved, tanks and cab lowered, bunker to cab curve added, and Romfords fitted and though intended as an Auto engine it was so sure footed it spent most of its time shunting.   The Triang Ivatt Chassis is a lot nearer the correct wheelbase.

64XX has a prominent side tank support in front of the leading splasher while the57XX has a bracket on the smokebox side.  The early 64XX also had a curve between bunker and cab rear which the last 10 64XX which followed the first 74XX did not feature

[Barclay]

The extra width was something I didn't think I could tackle without destroying it either! It does make this EM gauge loco look a little like a 00 one though.

[Barclay]

The number plates arrived yesterday from Narrow Planet. They look nice in brass but of course a relatively humble engine built post war would be much more likely to have cast iron plates with cream painted numbers so I have tried to represent this.

 

I am very impressed with the smooth and quiet performance of the cheap Mitsumi motor. It's slow revving too so with 68:1 gears the loco is actually a bit too slow for a real pannier. Not a problem for me as it will only ever shunt wagons anyway. I was slightly concerned with how quickly the motor heated up, even running light, but yesterday I was on the EMGS stand at the Mid-Essex club's show at Shenfield, so I took the opportunity to give it a good run on the rolling road. It ran more or less all day, so more than an actual mile I should think, with no adverse effects, so all good.

 

 

By the way, if anyone wants the old number plates (3650), PM me by all means.

 

 

Edited September 22, 2019 by Barclay

[Miss Prism]

36 minutes ago, Barclay said:

but of course a relatively humble engine built post war would be much more likely to have cast iron plates

 

Listing of brass and cast iron plates

 

[Barclay]

Interesting - a right old mixture in fact. Looks like I got it right, but more by luck than judgement...