GoingUnderground Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 16 hours ago, Nearholmer said: I was thinking more of hacking-potential than the origin of species. They nicked the idea from Bassett Lowke anyway. Steam, electric, or clockwork, in gauges 0 and 1 from c19920 onwards. I think everyone was doing it. Certainly Meccano/Hornby were with their first O gauge locos, apart from the Metropolitan Railway MetroVic Bo-Bo despite its 4 wheeled chassis. No one could say that the first Hornby tinplate locos were true models, especially as the electric ones all had a light bulb mounted where the smokebox darts should have been, and the only differences between LMS, LNER, SR and GWR models was the livery and on GWR liveried models the dome.. But as the 1930s went on Meccano/Hornby locos became more realistic, culminating in the O gauge Princess Elizabeth. But when production resumed in the late 1940s they went back to generic. Many of the Trix Twin locos were equally unprototypical. The loco in your photo reminded me of the more expensive Meccano/Hornby tank locos of the period. IUf it hadn't been for the text, I'd have thought it was Meccano/Hornby tinplate O gauge. What is interesting is that they don't try to hide the fact that it's a generic model and is sold in liveries which the loco that inspired it, assuming it was an SR or its forebears design, would never have worn, LMS, CR, LNER, LNWR & GWR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted March 10, 2021 Author Share Posted March 10, 2021 11 minutes ago, GoingUnderground said: No one could say that the first Hornby tinplate locos were true models, The first Meccano 0 gauge tinplate model trains were direct copies of Bing products, so they were 1:1 scale models of what the opposition was making, and so very accurate that it is still debated whether they were using appropriated tooling! But, they didn't put the 'Hornby' label on those ones, and they seem not to be mentioned in polite circles. However, perhaps my main point wasn't clear: I'm suggesting that Triang got the idea of using the C14/S14 as inspiration for their generic 0-4-0 from Bing/BL. The 112 Tank was so popular that it is very conceivable that their product designer was well aware of it. The strange thing about the 112 is that it was never sold in LSWR livery, although the GNR is easily mistaken for that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoingUnderground Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 23 minutes ago, Nearholmer said: The first Meccano 0 gauge tinplate model trains were direct copies of Bing products, so they were 1:1 scale models of what the opposition was making, and so very accurate that it is still debated whether they were using appropriated tooling! But, they didn't put the 'Hornby' label on those ones, and they seem not to be mentioned in polite circles. However, perhaps my main point wasn't clear: I'm suggesting that Triang got the idea of using the C14/S14 as inspiration for their generic 0-4-0 from Bing/BL. The 112 Tank was so popular that it is very conceivable that their product designer was well aware of it. The strange thing about the 112 is that it was never sold in LSWR livery, although the GNR is easily mistaken for that. I don't think that Frank Hornby was too worried about copying German products in the aftermath of the First World War, when anti-German sentiment was running very, very, high and even senior ministers made anti-German statements "pips squeak" being one of them. It wouldn't surprise me if the first Hornby O Gauge models were indeed made by Bing for Hornby but not marked as such because of the anti-german sentiment. You were clear, and you may be right about the BL inspiration. But personally I doubt it. I know many hold Bassett Lowke in awe, but he was before my time. Richard Lines is known to have had Hornby O Gauge in later life and I wouldn't be surprised if that dated back to his childhood. Coming from the Lines family, who were a long established toymaking business, he would have known about Hornby O gauge models, particularly the No.1 tank locos, and their Dublo range, and probably also Bassett Lowke given their historic involvement with British Trix, itself a scion of Bing. Also, in the late 1950s Rovex seemed to start off with photos of locos and work those up into a model, the EMU being one example. They may have known of the Bassett Lowke loco and its origins and went looking for photos of suitable LSWR tank engines upon which to base the model. Or they may have known about the C14 anyway as the 3 post WW1 survivors were based at Eastleigh and there was an RCTS tour in 1952 which was hauled by a C14. https://sremg.org.uk/steam/c14class.shtml Strangely, this photo shouts "Nellie" but it looks wrong and falsely shortened as we have become so used to Nellie that we/I tend to take her as correct and the true C14 as the exception. But low cost to make and low selling price was their objective, not making a true scale model. The Steeple Cab was not a highly successful model, but its chassis went on to be made and sold by the 100,000s under Nellie, Polly, Connie, No 27 and their clones plus the North British, repaying its developments costs many, many times over. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted March 10, 2021 Author Share Posted March 10, 2021 28 minutes ago, GoingUnderground said: It wouldn't surprise me if the first Hornby O Gauge models were indeed made by Bing for Hornby but not marked as such because of the anti-german sentiment. That thought has crossed my mind in respect of "the tin-printed train", but the accepted history is that it was a copy, rather than bought-in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
locomad2 Posted March 11, 2021 Share Posted March 11, 2021 Here's my modifyed Polly, did it about 30 years ago, lowered body, wheels pulled out, bit of wire on the front. I know the C14 is a lot shorter prehaps another project. It runs very well, trusted X04 motor which they got in very well at the front leaving cab clear 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halvarras Posted March 13, 2021 Share Posted March 13, 2021 Oh dear! Despite having more than enough projects to be getting on with, this thread has me thinking! I'm now looking at the body of my very first loco, a blue 'Nellie' purchased in 1966 in the R24S set, which has been idle ever since I used its chassis under a scratchbuilt Class 06 in 1976, and thinking it would be nice to put it back into use, as I have some suitable (I think) Romford wheels, axles and bearings also idle. Plenty of chassis donors about........ I also bought a red Dock Shunter in '67 which had the dodgy wheels but I remember ran really nicely, better still once I'd laboriously scraped the dirt out of every single groove with a pointy instrument! Long gone, but decent used ones are still about (ironically three passed through my hands as part of a job lot many years ago, they all required a thorough service but ran really well - these things seem to be bullet-proof). I've seen some decent O-16.5 conversions done to the Dock Shunter in the past, the bigger cab actually looked in better proportion than the OO version. Again I have some scale wheels which would fit one of these (Millholme 14mm turned brass - anyone remember those?) - and new Tri-ang nylon gears, metal axles and insulating bushes to fit these that I've had stored away for decades........last night I dug them out and assembled the two wheel sets. My missus was distinctly unimpressed at me hammering the axles into the uninsulated wheels upstairs at 'an unsuitable time' but when you get the bit between your teeth.........well, you know! I discovered I even had 4 washers in the 'pack' so fitted these either side of the gears to help keep them central - further adjustment can be had via slit PECO fibre washers clipped on if necessary. They seem to be running true so it would be a shame not to use them now........ Yes, I've already identified an 0-4-0 chassis donor and a decent-looking Dock Shunter.......... Oh dear!! 1 2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halvarras Posted April 17, 2021 Share Posted April 17, 2021 It's all RMweb's fault...... Dock shunter (a chance find on Ron Lines' website at £20) with those late-night-hammered Millholme wheels fitted, and a green chassis-donor 'No 27' received yesterday from Tri-angman with the body of my 1966-vintage first-ever loco 'Nellie' perched on top. Both were bone dry but after wheel/commutator cleaning and lubrication they run very well. No 27 was initially a bit sluggish but that was quickly traced to clogged commutator slots - once they'd been cleared with a sharpened cocktail stick it was fine (that was a trip down Memory Lane, it's been DECADES since I last did that!) It's a slightly wobbly runner but the intention is to re-wheel it anyway by putting some other long-stored items to good use. I've attempted to shift my, ahem, 'brass detailing' on Nellie with Model Strip, but it left the ancient Humbrol paint alone and shifted the factory black paint instead, the reverse of what I'd intended! Despite this effect, after couple of other recent failures I fear surviving pots of Model Strip may now have well exceeded their best-before dates.....a pity because its ability to remove old enamel and factory printing while leaving the underlying paint finish intact (usually) could be an advantage over other methods when you didn't want to strip everything...... I'll mull over what happens next with these two while I get on with other things, but I have a couple of ideas.......it has been quite refreshing to handle models without fear of bits of fine detail falling off! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cypherman Posted April 17, 2021 Share Posted April 17, 2021 Hi all, Back to the topic of moving wheel widths. I was put on to this little device by one of the You Tube channels. I bought one from that selling place that shall not be named. It cost me £3.33 inc postage. It enables you get behind the wheels and gently ease them out with equal pressure on both sides. Guitar Bass Steel Tuner Knob Jack Switch Spanner Wrench Pins Puller Remover UK 2 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfwit Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 I've just aquired a Transcontinental diesel (R159) and I'm curious to know if all the diesel/electric Transconti. range were fitted with knurled wheels? I'm considering re-wheeling mine as I have done previously with a couple of Dock Shunters. Which may be considered sacrilege! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roythebus1 Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 Most were. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruffnut Thorston Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 Some later models had smooth wheels fitted. The later Dock Shunters, and possibly the later TC locos for export… Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandwich station Posted December 11, 2021 Share Posted December 11, 2021 9 hours ago, halfwit said: I've just aquired a Transcontinental diesel (R159) and I'm curious to know if all the diesel/electric Transconti. range were fitted with knurled wheels? I'm considering re-wheeling mine as I have done previously with a couple of Dock Shunters. Which may be considered sacrilege! The later ones had smooth wheels. Basically all Triang were knurled and sometime during the Triang Hornby period they were changed to smooth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfwit Posted December 12, 2021 Share Posted December 12, 2021 Thanks for the replies, just curious really. Regarding an earlier query of mine concerning armatures, Dock Tank armatures are longer than those fitted to the DMU(?) type bogies - 61mm and 58mm long respectively. So this afternoon's job swapping parts over was a waste of time. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandwich station Posted December 12, 2021 Share Posted December 12, 2021 12 minutes ago, halfwit said: Thanks for the replies, just curious really. Regarding an earlier query of mine concerning armatures, Dock Tank armatures are longer than those fitted to the DMU(?) type bogies - 61mm and 58mm long respectively. So this afternoon's job swapping parts over was a waste of time. Dock shunters use the transcontinental double ended diesel bogie. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfwit Posted December 12, 2021 Share Posted December 12, 2021 Yes they do, I have examples of both. But I have a DS that doesn't run too well, so I tried to fit a DMU armature, which shares the same part number. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandwich station Posted December 12, 2021 Share Posted December 12, 2021 15 minutes ago, halfwit said: Yes they do, I have examples of both. But I have a DS that doesn't run too well, so I tried to fit a DMU armature, which shares the same part number. DMU and Dock Shunter use different armatures. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruffnut Thorston Posted December 12, 2021 Share Posted December 12, 2021 Interestingly, the 1960 revised Service Sheets for the TC and Dock Shunter motor bogies, and the BR DMU and EMU motor bogies does quote the same X Assembly part number. X.112. This is also shewn on the Service Sheet for the R.753 E3001 Electric Loco. These are the earlier type of motor bogie, EMB, without the plastic top assembly used on the later, LMB, motor bogies. DMU and EMU Service Sheet. TC Series and Dock Shunter Motor Bogies Service Sheet. R.753 Electric Loco Service Sheet. There is a different armature, X.410, used for the TC Budd Railcar, and the BR Hymek loco. These use the Later type of motor bogie, LMB, with the plastic top piece, which is common to the nominally 3 axle LMB motor bogies. Also for the EM2, A1A, and EE Type 3, nominally 3 axle LMB bogies, but with a dummy centre axle. Armature X.247. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 Could it be a cost cutting exercise where later bogies omit the two ball bearings? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruffnut Thorston Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 I haven’t seen any without the ball bearings…. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfwit Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 Yes, its the fact that the two armature types share the same part number that caught me out. Both DS and DMU bogies share the same 37mm wheelbase, but the DMU type is slightly shorter. All of my examples are fitted with ball bearings. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewartingram Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 Hornby shortened other armatures too. I believe it was around the time they changed the motor from X04 to X03. Only real difference between them was the gear, but they shortened the armature , removed oiling pads etc. I remember the changes when I was a Service Agent. Must have been quite a cost saving over the number of motors they made actually. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruffnut Thorston Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 44 minutes ago, stewartingram said: Hornby shortened other armatures too. I believe it was around the time they changed the motor from X04 to X03. Only real difference between them was the gear, but they shortened the armature , removed oiling pads etc. I remember the changes when I was a Service Agent. Must have been quite a cost saving over the number of motors they made actually. The X.04 armature shaft was shortened first. This was to allow the same armature to be used for the X.04 and the then current Scalextric motors. This in turn meant that the brass worm had to be put onto the shaft “backwards”, as the hole is tapered, and there was insufficient shaft length to grip the worm properly if put on large hole first. At some point, both oil felt pads were deleted. The very last X.04 motors had the short shaft, brass worm, and no oil pads. The assembly part number X.04 was reused for the X.04 replacement motor. The X.05 number had already been allocated to the twin start worm version of the XT.60 TT Gauge motor, used in the Lord Of The Isles, Caledonian 123, and the Mk2 Turntable. The original X.03 predated the X.04. The main difference was, I believe, the type of motor magnet. Some original X.03 motors had no oil pads, and a plain brass back bearing formed as part of the brass partition between the armature and magnet. The first oil pads were fitted to just the front bearing. The rear oil pad, and the change of magnet type, were the last real modifications before the introduction of the shorter shaft. The new type X.03 motor has the short shaft, no oil pads, and is fitted with a black plastic, single start, worm. This needs a different gear wheel to the twin start worm fitted X.04. These new gears were mainly made in a silver grey plastic. The X.04 gears were either brass, or latterly black plastic. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfwit Posted December 26, 2021 Share Posted December 26, 2021 Just spotted this, re-profiled wheels on eBay (Dock Shunters etc.). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted December 27, 2021 Share Posted December 27, 2021 (edited) While we are discussing Tri-ang motor bogies, I have an early motor bogie from an EMD lookalike* diesel - the one with the X.04 driving an idler shaft through two spur gears. Can anyone tell me the distance between the centres of the two shafts? The two gears are stripped (how?)** and I would like to repair it. * She's obviously supposed to be an F-unit, but doesn't quite make it! ** Worn out teeth rather like their owner.... Edited December 27, 2021 by Il Grifone Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dzine Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 Hi Folks, Was the Budd Railcar power bogie used on anything else. I've had an offer of an unpowered Budd and wondered how easy and cost effective it might be to make some sort of powered up alteration? Kind regards Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now