Hornby 14xx and High Level Kits chassis - build diary

[nickwood]

 

1 hour ago, jazzer said:

I will be OO gauge so that seems to say a rigid chassis is ok but it seems to me kits built chassis are much lighter than RTR and I wonder if there will be enough weight with a plastic body , even perhaps with a bit of lead in, to ensure good pick up and pulling power ( max 4/5 coaches or equivalent goods train ) is not compensated?

 

Weight can be an issue. The only High Level chassis I have built (so far) was to go under an old Mainline Dean Goods body and tender in OO, I do have a 14xx to build so this thread is very useful. In the Dean Goods there is nowhere to add more weight. Mainline had already placed weight in the boiler and the motor and gearbox take up all the other potential space to add more. Consequently it will barely manage to pull two coaches or 4 wagons and a brake van unless they are very free running. Having said that the Oxford rail RTR version isn't much better in it's haulage capacity and I prefer to run my hybrid most of the time. 

[RobMG]

11 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

Forgive my being a bit dense here, Rob apologies if you have already made this clear, but if the leading driven axle is in fixed bearings, then I don't understand how you can compensate the rear driven axle and the pony axle and put the gearbox on the rear driven axle at the same time?

 

This doesn't seem to fit with my understanding of how three point compensation works.

11 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

 

 

Ah yes, Cap'n,

I am sorry I got a bit muddled there, I don't know why I thought the leading driving axle was fixed. I hadn't looked at it for ages. No the driving axles are beam compensated. The gearbox is on the rear of those, and of course is floating . I had thought the beams didn't work very well, but I have checked it all now, and it is ok. The Mashima motor needs the other end of the shaft shortening , which is not going to be easy.  If I can manage to do that without wrecking the motor it will all fit in out of sight.   As it is it runs really well.  I still need to make steel coupling rods as they were missing from the kit, and the outside frames for the trailing, not pony wheels.  

I hope I  made that more understandable.  Sorry once again for the confusion..

 

11 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

 

 

 

 

[DLT]

Lovely job, Highlevel stuff is excellent.

[Izzy]

15 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

Forgive my being a bit dense here, Rob apologies if you have already made this clear, but if the leading driven axle is in fixed bearings, then I don't understand how you can compensate the rear driven axle and the pony axle and put the gearbox on the rear driven axle at the same time?

 

This doesn't seem to fit with my understanding of how three point compensation works.

 

Thanks.

 

 

I’ve often built locos like this, one fixed axle/twin beams on the other pair. It isn’t true 3-point compensation of course, but unless your using P4 ( and mostly even if you are), or have really bad track work, it works quite okay. Mainly it’s about improving current collection isn’t it. Adding just the minimum downward axle movement to the fixed one, no need for a beam or springing, just let it be able to drop a bit (0.5mm is enough), produces said 3-point if it’s essential for track holding.

 

Izzy

[Captain Kernow]

13 hours ago, jazzer said:

 

  Thanks for your very helpful comments Cap'n. As it happens  I have a well used Bachman 57xx  that really needs to go in the works for a chassis overhaul so I have the option of putting a new chassis on that as well as/instead of the 0-4-2.  No doubt the 57xx chassis is virtually the same as your 74xx. so I might go for that option first , but a few further questions first if I may :-

 

I am inclined to go for the High Level Kits version because everyone speaks highly of their quality. I am not bothered about fitting too much fiddly detail at this stage because on examining the 57xx body its clear that, like your 74xx, that most small detail is going to be obscured by the  body , especially as it is a working loco generally viewed from aa minimum of 18inches away, usually more, not a static exhibit. If I get a smooth slow running shunter I will be more than happy. So with that background is the  High Level  0-6-0 a fair project as a starter ? I would imagine the basic chassis is no more complicated than the Comet/wizard but the attraction is that you get  the motor and gearbox in the price , the gearbox being highly rated in terms of quality, it seems .  Is that a fair assessment?

Secondly to compensate or not to compensate? I will be OO gauge so that seems to say a rigid chassis is ok but it seems to me kits built chassis are much lighter than RTR and I wonder if there will be enough weight with a plastic body , even perhaps with a bit of lead in, to ensure good pick up and pulling power ( max 4/5 coaches or equivalent goods train ) is not compensated?

 

Any observations will be much appreciated . Thanks in advance .

 

Hi Jazzer,

 

I gave this same advice to a couple of friends in our club recently.

 

The High Level kit is undoubtedly the most detailed around (although the choices are now effectively between High Level and Comet, as the Perseverance isn't available new any longer).

 

However, putting the additional complexity to one side for a moment, the High Level chassis takes you down the route of twin-beam suspension, which is more complex than single beam suspension, the latter being my preferred method, if it can be fitted. The HL chassis can, however, be built rigid as well, with no difficulties.

 

Also, some of the frame spacers in the High Level version form motion brackets and the like, so there is little, if any, choice in terms of where you put them, whereas you can vary the positioning of spacers in the Comet chassis, to suit where you want to locate pick-ups etc. (ie. mounting some PCB board on the underside of a frame spacer).

 

Although the HL chassis kit comes with a gearbox, it is very similar to the existing HL range of gearboxes, which you can purchase separately from HL and put in a Comet chassis. HL also sell motors (as do Comet, who also sell their own range of gearboxes, although I don't have any experience of assembling those).

 

One other thing to bear in mind, the highest gear ratio in the HL gearbox supplied with their chassis kit is 54:1 (the others are 30:1 or 40:1 and you must specify to Chris Gibbons when ordering).

 

If you want a higher ratio (which I always prefer, for really slow speed controllability), you'd have to use one of the other, separate HL gearboxes (or a different type of gearbox). I usually favour 60:1 or often, 80:1 or even higher). Then again, my locos only trundle slowly up and down short layouts, they're not on a continuous run for any length of time, in which case a lower ratio may be more suitable, to avoid the motor working too hard for too long.

 

So, if this is your first chassis kit, I'd suggest the following:

 

i) Comet chassis

ii) HL gearbox with motor of choice (plus flywheel, if you can fit one it)

iii) single beam compensation with gearbox driving the fixed, rear axle (compensation, even in OO, really does help with pick-up)

 

You should be able to squeeze some 'liquid lead' or similar in various recesses of the pannier body, to help with the overall weight.

 

The HL chassis presents difficulties in building it with single beam compensation, although with a bit of care it, it can be done.

 

One benefit of the HL chassis over the Comet one, is that HL provide a false 'under boiler' as part of the chassis, to replace the cast section that is part of the Bachmann chassis.

 

You can replicate this on a Comet chassis and I will be doing just that on one or two future builds in due course, but it's equally easy to get some suitably large diameter plastic tube and glue this into the loco body itself, although this may impose limits on the motor and gearbox configuration.

 

I hope this helps!

 

[RobMG]

I should have taken a picture of the chassis wihtout the body on, but I forgot . Will do one later.  It shows the compensation unit anyway.  I need to remove the extended shaft so it doesn't try to protrude into the cab.. 

I am just debating whether to remove the top feed, or if maybe it is too much faffing around and just leave it. The loco will be in early BR livery , and they could have either depending on what was available when the loco was in Swindon..

 

Rob

[RobMG]

Before you say anything cap'n  the axle holes are elongated to allow for up and down movement...

 

Rob

[Captain Kernow]

46 minutes ago, RobMG said:

Before you say anything cap'n  the axle holes are elongated to allow for up and down movement...

 

Rob

Thanks, yes, I saw that. It's an interesting configuration, it seems different from the Perseverance 14XX chassis I built a year or so ago for my Hattons body.

 

Presumably there's also some movement on your pony axle?

 

What's also interesting is that the pivot for the twin-beam compensation unit doesn't seem to be exactly in the middle, or is that just an optical illusion of the camera?

 

 

Edited May 25, 2020 by Captain Kernow

[RobMG]

It's not in the centre, whoever put it together used the holes for the brake hanger wire to pivot it. That would have been ok but he'd cut them off flush so there would have been no way to fit the hangers. any  way it wasn't soldered very well because it fell apart.  I may well re drill it centre between the axles.  I will make sure the trailing wheels have movement.  

As for whether the chassis is a Perseverance, I don't think so now, but I haven't aa clue what it might be.  It is etched, but that is all I can tell you.   It is completely different in design to the chassis I have for my pannier, and obviously to the Comet chassis I have. Much more crude.   I am stumped there I'm afraid....

 

Rob

[dougidle]

Day 8

After 2 separate packages and another delay while I waiting for some Loctite, 4803 finally moved under her own power over the bank holiday weekend. One of the problems with starting from nothing is that everything you need, you have to order so there's a long delay while you wait for something to arrive.

 

While I was waiting for the new worm and lactate to arrive I primed the chassis white and then painted it black and the inside motion red. In hindsight I wish I'd sprayed it all black and then painted the red on afterwards but white is all I had so that's what I used. Once I'd fitted the gearbox I couldn't get it to move at all as it was fouling the motion so after a lot of  fiddling and swearing I just cut the rear part of the motion out and everything fitted. Being my first chassis kit, I'm sure the error is on my part and the small inaccuracies in the construction rather than the kit itself.

 

After several attempts I fitted some plunger pickups. I really struggled to get these to spring properly - either because my wire was to stiff or the legs were slightly bent as they went through the hole in the nylon. Once everything was wired up I ran the loco and it ran very poorly and the motor got extremely hot. After some help from the EM modellers page on Facebook I worked out that the wheels were not turning freely at all and that the additional resistance was being caused by the plunger pickups. Once removed, the loco ran very freely.

 

 

Today I have ordered the components to fit some wiper pickups and some styrene sheet to fabricate a floor for the cab.

 

To tie this back to the conversation here over the last few days I've built the chassis fully compensated (in for a penny, in for a pound!) and this works really well. It was quite simple to assemble, even for someone on their first chassis. The thing that I struggled with most was fitting wheels straight and true and then quartering them. I'm sure that when I build another, either a 57xx or 2251 I will make a better and more accurate job but for now I'm happy with the quality of the build. 

 

Once payday arrives later this week I will order the detailing kit from Wizard and start work on the body. Here she is so far, looking much better for a painted chassis although some of the paint has worn off because of the excessive handling. I'll touch it up once I'm finished getting the chassis to run.

[hayfield]

It is so rewarding building something that works, well done

[jazzer]

On 24/05/2020 at 22:52, nickwood said:

 

 

Weight can be an issue. The only High Level chassis I have built (so far) was to go under an old Mainline Dean Goods body and tender in OO, I do have a 14xx to build so this thread is very useful. In the Dean Goods there is nowhere to add more weight. Mainline had already placed weight in the boiler and the motor and gearbox take up all the other potential space to add more. Consequently it will barely manage to pull two coaches or 4 wagons and a brake van unless they are very free running. Having said that the Oxford rail RTR version isn't much better in it's haulage capacity and I prefer to run my hybrid most of the time. 

 

On 25/05/2020 at 11:06, Captain Kernow said:

Hi Jazzer,

 

I gave this same advice to a couple of friends in our club recently.

 

The High Level kit is undoubtedly the most detailed around (although the choices are now effectively between High Level and Comet, as the Perseverance isn't available new any longer).

 

However, putting the additional complexity to one side for a moment, the High Level chassis takes you down the route of twin-beam suspension, which is more complex than single beam suspension, the latter being my preferred method, if it can be fitted. The HL chassis can, however, be built rigid as well, with no difficulties.

 

Also, some of the frame spacers in the High Level version form motion brackets and the like, so there is little, if any, choice in terms of where you put them, whereas you can vary the positioning of spacers in the Comet chassis, to suit where you want to locate pick-ups etc. (ie. mounting some PCB board on the underside of a frame spacer).

 

Although the HL chassis kit comes with a gearbox, it is very similar to the existing HL range of gearboxes, which you can purchase separately from HL and put in a Comet chassis. HL also sell motors (as do Comet, who also sell their own range of gearboxes, although I don't have any experience of assembling those).

 

One other thing to bear in mind, the highest gear ratio in the HL gearbox supplied with their chassis kit is 54:1 (the others are 30:1 or 40:1 and you must specify to Chris Gibbons when ordering).

 

If you want a higher ratio (which I always prefer, for really slow speed controllability), you'd have to use one of the other, separate HL gearboxes (or a different type of gearbox). I usually favour 60:1 or often, 80:1 or even higher). Then again, my locos only trundle slowly up and down short layouts, they're not on a continuous run for any length of time, in which case a lower ratio may be more suitable, to avoid the motor working too hard for too long.

 

So, if this is your first chassis kit, I'd suggest the following:

 

i) Comet chassis

ii) HL gearbox with motor of choice (plus flywheel, if you can fit one it)

iii) single beam compensation with gearbox driving the fixed, rear axle (compensation, even in OO, really does help with pick-up)

 

You should be able to squeeze some 'liquid lead' or similar in various recesses of the pannier body, to help with the overall weight.

 

The HL chassis presents difficulties in building it with single beam compensation, although with a bit of care it, it can be done.

 

One benefit of the HL chassis over the Comet one, is that HL provide a false 'under boiler' as part of the chassis, to replace the cast section that is part of the Bachmann chassis.

 

You can replicate this on a Comet chassis and I will be doing just that on one or two future builds in due course, but it's equally easy to get some suitably large diameter plastic tube and glue this into the loco body itself, although this may impose limits on the motor and gearbox configuration.

 

I hope this helps!

 

Thanks very much for those replies chaps. It answers my questions so Comet Chassis and High Level gearbox it will be. I wasn’t planning on compensating for the first go , but nothing ventured nothing gained so I will now.  I really appreciate that advice.

 

In reply to nick wood I have to say I have the Oxford rail Dean Goods and it is a super little loco. Unbelievably smooth and slow running. I don’t know what the maximum haulage capacity is but it handles a three coach branch set with no problem at all. That is the problem with quality control on rtr though. For every good runner you seem to get half a dozen dodgy ones. 

 

[Barclay]

Great work so far. With respect to the pannier tank I agree with Capt. K that the Comet chassis is a nice straightforward build, though not quite as detailed as High Level. It's built for springing but easily adjusted for simple beam compensation. As he says you can add a boiler bottom to the chassis, as I did here. Please be advised however that this gearbox configuration will slightly obstruct the cab, something that didn't matter with my old Triang-Hornby body. There's plenty of room, and gearbox options, to hide it away though!

 

[Captain Kernow]

1 hour ago, Barclay said:

Please be advised however that this gearbox configuration will slightly obstruct the cab, something that didn't matter with my old Triang-Hornby body. There's plenty of room, and gearbox options, to hide it away though!

And the presence of some footplate crew also helps!

 

Edited May 27, 2020 by Captain Kernow

[MJI]

As I have an Airfix one I am watching this thread.

 

Chassis not great but the motor is meaty!

[Paul Cram]

On 24/05/2020 at 11:32, RobMG said:

One day when I am rich, I will buy a High Level chassis kit.   I have another perseverance kit to build for a Bachmann 8750 pannier body.  It looks like a pretty good kit to me.....

 

Rob

I bought the high level J72 Chassis and which was on offer including the motor for £48 at Scaleforum. When you take into account it has a custom gearbox the chassis itself is cheaper than any of the alternatives and far superior.

[RobMG]

Hi Paul, that was a good buy with motor as well.   I am ok for motors, but I will get a  HL  chassis  I have two Bachmann  Panniers to provide with new chassis.  I have a perseverance chassis for one of them. the other I will use a High Level .   It will be wheels I will be searching for, pos Alan Gibson or Markits... 

 

Rob

[hayfield]

On 27/05/2020 at 10:52, Paul Cram said:

I bought the high level J72 Chassis and which was on offer including the motor for £48 at Scaleforum. When you take into account it has a custom gearbox the chassis itself is cheaper than any of the alternatives and far superior.

 

17 hours ago, RobMG said:

Hi Paul, that was a good buy with motor as well.   I am ok for motors, but I will get a  HL  chassis  I have two Bachmann  Panniers to provide with new chassis.  I have a perseverance chassis for one of them. the other I will use a High Level .   It will be wheels I will be searching for, pos Alan Gibson or Markits... 

 

Rob

 

 

Our favorite auction site quite often has these items listed and depending on how its listed the prices vary greatly

 

Comet and Perseverance chassis still packed go for decent money, as do Romford, Markit and Gibson wheels. But if you look carefully these at bargain prices can be found

 

I bought a completed Comet Schoors chassis, Markit wheels, Comet gearbox and Mashima for £28

 

Another lot was  built SEF N7 with a spare etched chassis  £36

 

Comet 3F chassis & GB2 gearbox, Markit wheels and Mashima motor £40 ish

 

Mainline 57xx with etched chassis glides along the track 

 

And I am waiting for a Comet pannier tank with 5 pairs of Markit wheels for £23

 

Over the past 10 years I have built up a comprehensive range of wheels motors and gearboxes just by looking for opportunist buys. Don't be afraid of buying lots where there are items you both want and don't want, the chances are the items you don't want will find several folk who do want them

[RobMG]

I do get a few good buys, but not as many as you seem to have done..

Well I'll keep looking

[Captain Kernow]

When I last looked, Wizard Models seemed to be out of stock of Markits pannier driving wheels, but that may have changed and they may, of course, still be available directly from Markits.

 

I'd be interested to see how folk get on with chassis that have been built by others, as my experience of this hasn't generally been a happy one and I have a definite preference to build the whole thing, from a new, unused etch, myself.

 

[hayfield]

Firstly

I am just happy if I get the correct size wheels, unless its one of those funny Southern or distinctive LNWR prototypes

 

What a mixed bad chassis built by others turns out, quite often its their failed attempts, they can be well built or just not started or part built. Just like buying a part built loco kit. If you rely on others building skills you may be in trouble. If you can build a chassis providing it does not look a wreck what's the Issue ?

 

As I am now modelling in either EM or the odd P4 loco I buy with this in mind try to let the picture dictate matters aided by the description if there is one at all. Mostly they are not painted so its an easy job unsoldering (solder braid comes in very handy). I remove the axle bearings as I like to rebuild them on mt chassis jig I have recently bought 2 locos at different times with spare etched chassis, both were quite inexpensive and unpainted.

 

I bought one chassis which was completely locked up. Gibson wheels which had had it, but paint stripper and a soldering iron deconstructed it, I replaced the bearings and its fine, even managed to save the brake gear. The motor seems OK and the gearbox is fine. That was the worst one, and rebuilt to EM gauge. Many may not have the time on their hands, but quite often its a ten minuet job unsoldering and cleaning up the parts. Another chassis was suffering from a bad attempt at opening up the chassis holes. The Hobbies Holidays jig sorted it out 

 

My latest buy for £23 is a Comet Pannier tank chassis, missing coupling rods and brake shoes/gear. plus 5 pairs of Markit wheels, I have brake rigging and coupling rods in my spares box, a Mainly Trains etch will set me back £6 and enough for several locos. I will need to change the spacers, and axles for EM gauge ones anyway and get some wheel bearings. Even if I had to buy the coupling rods and brake rigging I still would be £'s in pocket

 

However just look at what you can see, any experienced modeller should be able to make a sound decision, but only price what you can see that is sound, the rest is a bonus. If someone else values it more let them have it

[Captain Kernow]

46 minutes ago, hayfield said:

However just look at what you can see, any experienced modeller should be able to make a sound decision, but only price what you can see that is sound, the rest is a bonus. If someone else values it more let them have it

That's fair enough, John, each to their own preference.

 

I do actually have an EM 57XX chassis that I bought from a fellow enthusiast, which I am planning on converting to P4, with the Markits wheels being used for an OO pannier project. I was thinking of keeping the frames as they are, with EM spacers, but we'll see how that pans out. It's not likely to be done soon.

 

Interestingly, my friend John F (Re6/6 on here) has recently converted another EM pannier (from the same source) to P4 and it looks rather good.

 

[hayfield]

For my sins I have several different makes of frame spacers in both EM & P4, they vary, some manufacturers even use the same spacers for both. It not only depends on the thickness of the spacers but also the thickness of the frame material.

 

I can't see any issues of using the odd spacer, if anything a little sideways movement is fine.

 

The problem with Markit wheels are the size and shape of the flanges. Plus if you have cylinders clearance as the wheels are thicker, plus they clunk through the crossings.

[RobMG]

Here's a couple of pictures to show my Mystery etched chassis, and the bits I've been making  out of brass.  

I couldn't bring myself to cut off the beautifully moulded chimney saddle, so I turned a new chimney in the same fashion as the ghastley original Airfix effort but have attempted to make it look more convincing .  the smokbox door had to be replaced with a brass turning. I still obviously have to finish this with hinges etc. I looked at the cast items available but they were terrible things.   I have never seen a white metal or brass casting that ever looks anything more than a mess.  Hence I left the original chimney saddle in place.  Though I have turned complete chimneys and saddles.

As a matter of interest, I first made a compensated chassis 40 years ago using the Mike Sharman method, and of course used Sharman wheels, which excellent. A great shame we cannot get them anymore.  that loco was a LSWR 0395.  I have a photo somewhere.  I made others later. To my knowledge there were no etched chassis available in those days. Hope you like the pics.

 

Rob

[PMP]

On 25/05/2020 at 20:47, RobMG said:

  

As for whether the chassis is a Perseverance, I don't think so now, but I haven't aa clue what it might be.  

Rob

 

It definitely isn’t Perseverance. In the mid to late 80’s there were some cowboys in the trade who copied, (very poorly),  some 4mm manufacturers etches. Kemilway was one such brand that suffered this piracy. Some modellers bought etches expecting Kemilway quality and got nothing like it, and that affected Kemilway badly and they reduced their development and output because of it. This could be a home brew adaptation of a Perseverance design or their original work, but it’s not in Perseverance’s quality.

 

Below is an EM Airfix/Perseverance/Portescap/Ultrascale conversion. My first compensated chassis from possibly 30+ years back. Still working, might give it a refresher! Note rigid leading axle, compensation beam middle to rear axle.