54xx Conversion

[Denbridge]

35 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Correct of course on both counts, OFFTHE RAILS.  If the starting point is a Bachmann 64xx, then a 54xx is a 64xx with larger wheels.  Chronological order of prototype construction at Swindon goes; 54xx prototype, 54xx production, 64xx early variant (all up to this point with Bachmann style cab; lip on leading edge of roof and radius between cab rear and side of bunker) later variant 64xx, then 74xx (later style cab: squared off join between spectacle plate and roof and square between cab rear and bunker side).

 

So the Bachmann cab is suitable for any production 54xx and early 64xx.

There was also the 64xx prototype using 2062 as the guinea pig.

[hayfield]

5 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

It's alright, I dug it out last night and it's not a Sutherland kit, it's Stephen Poole. I was mixing it up with the Flower I got at the same time which is Sutherland.

 

I think both of them ended up in the Nu Cast range.

 

It has the parts to make the variants including providing for difference in the buffer height.

 

 

 

Jason

 

 

Jason

 

At the weekend I bought a Stephen Poole 54xx at a local show. the body had been started, the chassis is a Stephen Poole brass one built to 00 gauge with Romford 20mm wheels, Mashima motor and Branchlines motor mount and gears. Only seems to be missing the coupling rods and crank pin bosses

 

I wondered why there were 12 splashers and why the buffers fitted into slots in the buffer beams and not holes, thanks for educating me !!

 

Quite likely the chassis will bite the dust in favour of an etched one

[DCB]

The prototype 2080 also had its buffers moved down the buffer beam when fitted with 5' 2" wheels, usually on a 2021 they are almost in line with the top of the running plate.  From photos its buffers always look a bit high, which they would if the tried to move them down.  3" is easy but for 6"  I reckon they must have fiddled with the springs as well to get the buffer height down.   Another reason for her short time with 5' 2" wheels perhaps?

[Denbridge]

49 minutes ago, DavidCBroad said:

The prototype 2080 also had its buffers moved down the buffer beam when fitted with 5' 2" wheels, usually on a 2021 they are almost in line with the top of the running plate.  From photos its buffers always look a bit high, which they would if the tried to move them down.  3" is easy but for 6"  I reckon they must have fiddled with the springs as well to get the buffer height down.   Another reason for her short time with 5' 2" wheels perhaps?

2080 had the entire buffer beams moved . Not just the buffers.

[DCB]

14 hours ago, Denbridge said:

2080 had the entire buffer beams moved . Not just the buffers.

A bit of research reveals 2080 had its buffer beams changed, There are photos and drawings of it with the front buffers on a 2021 type buffer beam.  In a photograph With the deep 2021 buffer beam the buffers are higher than the adjacent loco while in a photo of it with narrow tanks and Churchward style cab the front buffer beam has been changed to the shallower 57XX type.  The drawing shows the shallower rear buffer beam which must have been fitted when the bunker was altered. Obviously these were changed again in 1932 when the remains of 2080 were scrapped and new frames etc added to make 5400 standard with the rest of the 54XX class.  2062 also ran with 5'2" wheels before being rebuilt with 4'7 1/2" wheels as the prototype of the 64XX class

[Denbridge]

On 24/10/2019 at 02:01, DavidCBroad said:

A bit of research reveals 2080 had its buffer beams changed, There are photos and drawings of it with the front buffers on a 2021 type buffer beam.  In a photograph With the deep 2021 buffer beam the buffers are higher than the adjacent loco while in a photo of it with narrow tanks and Churchward style cab the front buffer beam has been changed to the shallower 57XX type.  The drawing shows the shallower rear buffer beam which must have been fitted when the bunker was altered. Obviously these were changed again in 1932 when the remains of 2080 were scrapped and new frames etc added to make 5400 standard with the rest of the 54XX class.  2062 also ran with 5'2" wheels before being rebuilt with 4'7 1/2" wheels as the prototype of the 64XX class

You are confusing your locomotives. 2062 never ran with 5'2" wheels. It was the guinea pig for the 64xx and was fitted with 4'7 1/2" wheels. The replacement 5400 was an entirely new machine and didn't use parts from 2080 which was scrapped completely, though any parts of use would have been incorporated into the spares pool.

[DCB]

On 03/11/2019 at 14:04, Denbridge said:

You are confusing your locomotives. 2062 never ran with 5'2" wheels. It was the guinea pig for the 64xx and was fitted with 4'7 1/2" wheels. The replacement 5400 was an entirely new machine and didn't use parts from 2080 which was scrapped completely, though any parts of use would have been incorporated into the spares pool.

I had another look at the saga,  There is some confusion as to which 2021 was used as guinea pig for the 64XX,  Brian Haresnape in Collett and Hawkesworth locomotives says 2062 was the guinea pig for  the 64XX but this cannot be right.  2080 must have been the guinea pig for both 54XX and 64XX by being fitted with 5ft 2 and then 4ft 7" wheels  then 4ft 1" wheels again as it was not withdrawn until 1952. 2062 was withdrawn in 1930 and must have been the loco rebuilt with new cylinders and valve gear to form the prototype 54XX   KJ Cook in Swindon steam states a full set of 54XX components were made so the prototype could be rebuilt to match the production engines and the remains scrapped. That must have been 2062 as several sources list 2080  as running post WW2 

[Denbridge]

12 hours ago, DavidCBroad said:

I had another look at the saga,  There is some confusion as to which 2021 was used as guinea pig for the 64XX,  Brian Haresnape in Collett and Hawkesworth locomotives says 2062 was the guinea pig for  the 64XX but this cannot be right.  2080 must have been the guinea pig for both 54XX and 64XX by being fitted with 5ft 2 and then 4ft 7" wheels  then 4ft 1" wheels again as it was not withdrawn until 1952. 2062 was withdrawn in 1930 and must have been the loco rebuilt with new cylinders and valve gear to form the prototype 54XX   KJ Cook in Swindon steam states a full set of 54XX components were made so the prototype could be rebuilt to match the production engines and the remains scrapped. That must have been 2062 as several sources list 2080  as running post WW2 

No confusion. 2080 was the prototype. It was never fitted with new cylinders etc. The 'new' 5400 which replaced 2080 was an entirely new locomotive. The prototype for the 64s was no.2062. 2080 was never fitted with 4ft 7in. Wheels and was withdrawn before the 64xx concept even became a reality.

 

Edited November 5, 2019 by Denbridge

[DCB]

11 hours ago, Denbridge said:

No confusion. 2080 was the prototype. It was never fitted with new cylinders etc. The 'new' 5400 which replaced 2080 was an entirely new locomotive. The prototype for the 64s was no.2062. 2080 was never fitted with 4ft 7in. Wheels and was withdrawn before the 64xx concept even became a reality.

 

What are your sources?  2080 was not withdrawn until 1952.  Great Western Engines Names Numbers Types and classes 1940 to Preservation, and the 1948/50  ABC confirms this.

I know the Wikipedia page says 2080 was the 5400 prototype,  but that cannot be right as 2080 survived another 20 years.

2062 was the loco rebuilt with the new cylinders and three bar motion to test the new parts prior to the series production of the new locos, of  54XX, 64XX, 48XX, 58XX , 74XX classes which used the new motion.    Testing was needed after the fiasco of the 56XX which needed the braces fitted across the top of the frames to hold the slide bars down after the bars  bent upwards when 5600 was first tested.  2062 was withdrawn in 1932 the same year 5400 was built probably using 2062's wheels cylinders and motion though probably not the boiler.  5401 was the first standard 54XX built in 1931.

The pictures of 2080 post war seem to show auto gear was still fitted.  The only other plausible explanation is that the 2080  which ran post 1932 was 2062 renumbered,

[JimC]

RCTS says 2080 carried the 5'2 wheels for a few months, and that there is no evidence she ever carried the number 5400. It states 2062 was the locomotive which became the first 5400, and that it was also fitted with 4'7.5 wheels in November 1930. Its not clear to me from RCTS whether 5400/ex 2062 kept the 4'7 wheels until it was withdrawn, or whether the 5'2 wheels were replaced.

Is there any better source than Gibson for the 5600 slide bar story? Gibson does like his conspiracy theories about Collett's supposed incompetence as a locomotive designer, but of course  Collett didn't design the locomotives anyway. A number of Gibson's stories/theories look rather suspect if you examine them in detail.
 

Edited November 7, 2019 by JimC

[DCB]

Great Western Engines by J.H.Russel has a picture of 5400 on page 193  It has the old style cab, but deep tanks like a 57XX rather than a 54Xx and the old style smokebox with tank brackets rather than the drumhead of the 54XX.  The picture is on the Wikipedia page on the 54XX but you can read the number on Russel but not on Wikipedia.  Russel says 2080 became 5400 and has a drawing of 2080 rebuilt as 5400 dated 1934, after 5400 was rebuilt as a standard 54XX. but this shows 2021 tanks not the larger ones carried by 5400 and is accompanied by a photo of 2080 with 5ft 2" wheels and inside brake rodding whereas 5400 with old cab has outside brake rods.    I suspect there is insufficient clearance for outside brake rods with 4ft 1" Wheels.   However  2080 ran until 1952 so it can't have been rebuilt as 5400. 

 

 

 

 

K J Cook in Swindon Steam mentions the first 56XX going "Off Beat" but not in as much drama as Gibson does.   The brace holding the 56XX slide bars does look very much like an after thought/ lash up compared to other GW Inside cylinder locos.

Edited November 7, 2019 by DavidCBroad

[JimC]

Interesting.

Fig 498 in Russell is of course 2080, and to my eyes that's also the locomotive that Templar has drawn as 5400 in fig 497. Fig 193, on the other hand, would seem to be a different locomotive - not just the brakes, but also the footplate, steps bunker etc are all different.

That tends to back up the RCTS suggestion that 5400 mk1 is a different locomotive to 2080. RCTS is consistent as they list 2062 withdrawn in 1930 - and few or no other pre war withdrawals of the class - and 2080 in 1952. In addition Cook - and who would know better - is quite firm that 5400 was rebuilt/renewed from 2062, not 2080. A post 1932 photo of 2080 might be interesting.

 

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by JimC

[DCB]

Construction went 54XX, 64XX to 6429, with early cab,  then the 7400-7419.   I believe  6430-39 were next then 7420-29  and finally in BR days 7430-49 all with later cab.   I can' find details of whether 6430-29 were built before or after 7420-29.       6430 -39 were ordered before 7400-19  but built later.

[Miss Prism]

You raise a good point, David. My interpretation of the 'build' date is that it tends to reflect the completion date of the lot, but locos within a particular lot can appear some time before that completion date.  That said, the 'build' date attempts to delimit the build window:

 

lot 294    (6410-6424) was 'built' 1934-5
lot 300    (6425-6429) was 'built' 1935
lot 305    (6430-6439) was 'built' 1937
lot 307    (7400-7429) was 'built' 1936-7

 

[JimC]

According to RCTS - and I've added 57s in brackets as one might guess it would be the same new build team erecting both. 
 

8/35   6420-2                                  [3]

9/35   6423-4   (9760-5)                [8]

10-35                (9766-9)                [4]

11/35 6425-9                                 [5]

3/36                  (9770-7)                [8]

4/36                  (9778/9)                [2]

5/36                  (9785-92)               [13]

6/36                  (9780-1, 9793-4)   [4]         

7/36    7400     (9782-4)                  [4]

8/36     7401-9                                 [9]

9/36                  (9795-9, 3700-1)   [11]

10-36                (3702-10)                [9]

11/36                (3711-4)                 [4]                         

12/36  7410-6                                  [7]

1/37    7417-9   (3715-7)                 [6]

2/37                   (3718-24)               [7]
3/37     6430-4                                 [5]

4/37     6435-9                                 [5]

5/37    7420-4                                  [4]

6/37    7425-9  (3725-7)                 [8]
 

Of course most of the shops would be making exactly the same parts whether it was a 64 or 74.