Up-grading Hornby-Dublo/Wrenn 'Duchesses'

[MacDuff999]

I have recently started to add one or two Stanier 'Coronation' Pacifics to my loco stud. Although one of the first was a DJH Ivatt variant kit, which is slowly coming together, I have also started to build a Comet chassis, which I intend to match with a H/D 'Duchess'. The third and (I think final) addition has just arrived in the post - a very nice Wrenn 'City of London'. The loco (on yard-length test track) runs smoothly and quietly, and is in very good cosmetic condition. The only fly in the ointment, so to speak, is that it has plastic wheels on the tender, which keeps de-railing. I had intended to change the plastic wheels anyway, (something I knew about before I decided to acquire the loco) but in order to do this, it will mean removing the tender sub-frame which holds the wheels. The options then, as far as I can see, are to a) assemble a Comet sub-chassis kit of the relevant type, and fix it into the H/D tender chassis, or b) to forget the H/D tender altogether, and obtain and build a Comet kit of the right type. I obviously need to make sure that the tender running quality is good, to match with that of the loco. It is a pity though, as the tender itself is in really quite good condition. Any thoughts or suggestions from modellers with experience of similar situations welcome. 

[92220]

Hi Ian,

I’ve not tried to rechassis a Wrenn or HD tender, but the Comet ones are pretty accurate and go together well.  The only thing I would say is that using the correct 4’3” wheels will mean you have to remove some material from the baseplate, and the brake shoes need filing back a fair bit.  Now whether the Comet tender might then draw closer attention to the less detailed loco body, I’m not sure.

Matching the Comet frames to a Wrenn or HD loco body, I’m not sure about.  I am fairly sure they were designed for the Hornby body.  But I would suggest to make the adjustments to the frames before you start assembling, or at least before you get very far.

Iain

[TerryD1471]

20 hours ago, MacDuff999 said:

I have recently started to add one or two Stanier 'Coronation' Pacifics to my loco stud. Although one of the first was a DJH Ivatt variant kit, which is slowly coming together, I have also started to build a Comet chassis, which I intend to match with a H/D 'Duchess'. The third and (I think final) addition has just arrived in the post - a very nice Wrenn 'City of London'. The loco (on yard-length test track) runs smoothly and quietly, and is in very good cosmetic condition. The only fly in the ointment, so to speak, is that it has plastic wheels on the tender, which keeps de-railing. I had intended to change the plastic wheels anyway, (something I knew about before I decided to acquire the loco) but in order to do this, it will mean removing the tender sub-frame which holds the wheels. The options then, as far as I can see, are to a) assemble a Comet sub-chassis kit of the relevant type, and fix it into the H/D tender chassis, or b) to forget the H/D tender altogether, and obtain and build a Comet kit of the right type. I obviously need to make sure that the tender running quality is good, to match with that of the loco. It is a pity though, as the tender itself is in really quite good condition. Any thoughts or suggestions from modellers with experience of similar situations welcome. 

Hi Ian

 

This is an area in which I have some experience, having built chassis for several Hornby Dublo bodies.

 

The question that springs to mind is "Do you want to make use of the superb hauling power of the original H/D chassis?" if so, do you want to fit scale wheels to the loco to replace the original tiny ones? If this question is irrelevant, please ignore it!

 

The main issue which you raise concerns the tender derailing. Have you checked the back-to-back measurement of the plastic wheels? If they are set to 14.5 mm even the plastic wheels should not derail.

 

There is another issue with the H/D or Wrenn tender. The model is an amalgam of two different types and is therefore incorrect, not being an accurate model of either type. The front is based on the (Type 1) ex-streamliner tender, while the back is based on the (Type 2) originally built for the batch of unstreamlined locos (6230-4). The Comet tender is the best replacement, but they produce AFAIK the 4 different types which went behind the Duchesses, so pick your prototype carefully!

 

Having said that I have butchered several H/D plastic body/ metal chassis tenders to give a reasonable approximation to the ex-streamline (Type 1).

 

I can probably bore for Britain on this subject, but if this has raised any queries in your mind, please ask away!

 

ATB

 

Terry

[MacDuff999]

 Thanks for your replies and comments Iain and Terry. Iain, I did make sure that, having acquired the H/D Duchess body, I physically checked the frame dimensions with it, when I subsequently bought the Comet chassis kit. The match is pretty good, and having almost completed the assembly of the basic Comet chassis, it should only require a little dressing of the frames just behind the buffer beam to achieve a snug fit. And somehow align the front chassis spacer with the body fixing hole on top of where the steam chest would be. From what you say regarding the tender, maybe 16mm wheels would save a certain amount of hassle. As far as your questions go Terry, as my layout does not include a main line, my 'Coronations' will not be hauling long, heavy trains. I do, nonetheless, appreciate the weight of these locos, but certainly don't anticipate fitting scale wheels to the H/D models at this stage. The first 'Duchess' I started work on is a H/D body on a Comet chassis, and will eventually (I hope) appear as 46232 'Duchess of Montrose', drawing the non-streamlined tender from a DJH kit. The DJH kit loco body is planned to become 46224 'Princess Alexandra', drawing a Comet de-streamlined tender. My acquisition of the LMS Loco Profile book on the class, has enlightened me quite a bit re the various tender types drawn by the class. The DJH kit is of an Ivatt variant, so it is perhaps going to be a bit challenging for me to change the relevant cab sides to those of an earlier series loco, by using the sides from a Comet Stanier cab etch, supplemented by suitable width spare etch, to fill any gap in the lower front edge cab side trimming. My layout is based on a small part of the ex-Caledonian route from Edinburgh to Glasgow/Carstairs, and these Pacifics will be 'visitors' from 66A Polmadie, both green. The rather nice Wrenn model I recently acquired, that of the plastic tender wheels, will likely be a red 46238 'City of Carlisle', an English loco from 12B Upperby. I had thought of back-to-back as something to check Terry, but I seem to have mislaid my gauge!!       

 

Ian. 

[92220]

Hi Ian,

I admire your willingness to have a go à this, although I also think that altering the Ivatt Coronation to a Stanier version is a quite challenging task, to be honest.  
The Comet Stanier cab etch is for an 8F cab I think, so the wrong size for a Coronation.  The way the DJH cab folds up means that joining different or additional sides even of the correct size isn’t easy.  
The trailing truck and rear frames are completely different as you know, but I’m not sure how easily you can convert one to the other.  You could use a Comet spare etch for the rear frame extensions and a separate Comet LMS Pacific trailing truck, but quite a bit of head scratching may be needed.  
Not sure what plans you have for the tender but the part-welded tank was used on (I think?) 46253-5 as well as 46256/7.  For the latter two, the roller bearing axleboxes on the DJH tender frames are not separate, they are cast in one piece with the frames, so altering them will be a massive job.  You could remove them completely and replace with Comet plain axleboxes 
The DJH cab roof is the wrong size and shape (although I don’t think it’s any more or less wrong for each of the Ivatt and Stanier versions). 
Anyway, just a ramble through my thoughts.  Intrigued to see how you go about this.

 

best wishes,

 

Iain

[cypherman]

Hi Macduff,

Sorry I have had no experience putting new chassis onto this engine. The only updating I have done is converting the engine from 3 rail to 2 rail, swapping the wheels with comet ones and a bit of glazing plus a full repaint to original spec.

Edited August 13, 2021 by cypherman

[TerryD1471]

12 hours ago, 92220 said:

Hi Ian,

I admire your willingness to have a go à this, although I also think that altering the Ivatt Coronation to a Stanier version is a quite challenging task, to be honest.  
The Comet Stanier cab etch is for an 8F cab I think, so the wrong size for a Coronation.  The way the DJH cab folds up means that joining different or additional sides even of the correct size isn’t easy.  
The trailing truck and rear frames are completely different as you know, but I’m not sure how easily you can convert one to the other.  You could use a Comet spare etch for the rear frame extensions and a separate Comet LMS Pacific trailing truck, but quite a bit of head scratching may be needed.  
Not sure what plans you have for the tender but the part-welded tank was used on (I think?) 46253-5 as well as 46256/7.  For the latter two, the roller bearing axleboxes on the DJH tender frames are not separate, they are cast in one piece with the frames, so altering them will be a massive job.  You could remove them completely and replace with Comet plain axleboxes 
The DJH cab roof is the wrong size and shape (although I don’t think it’s any more or less wrong for each of the Ivatt and Stanier versions). 
Anyway, just a ramble through my thoughts.  Intrigued to see how you go about this.

 

best wishes,

 

Iain

Yes I concur with your thoughts Iain, and do wonder whether it is wise to try and "retro work" the Ivatt version back to the Stanier one, Ian, because of the differences Iain has outlined. The main difference between the "Type 3" tenders on 6253-5 and the "Type 4" behind the Ivatts is that the Type 3 has a high front cutout whereas the Type 4 has a lowfront cutout. And of course the roller bearing axleboxes.

 

The DJH cab roof does need some fettling and the front footplate around the inside cylinders is too short. Combined with an overlong smokebox, the overall effect is to "bunch up" the frontal appearance although this can be improved. A H/D bodyshell is better proportioned, but of course the firebox is too bulky at the front end to accommodate the massive motor and this needs to be cut down and remodelled.

 

ATB

 

Terry

[MacDuff999]

Morning Iain, and thanks for your observations. I am aware of the differences between certain parts of the main class design, and the Ivatt variant, although I had not picked up on the tender roller bearing axle boxes issue. I had recognised the different cab sides issue, and that of the cab profile, hence my intention to use only the actual sides from the Comet Stanier cab etch. I have already acquired, assembled and fitted a Comet replacement pony truck and bogie, which seems to work more or less OK, although I think the controlling arm on the pony truck needs a little 'tweaking', for the axle boxes to assume a fully horizontal attitude. I also have a Comet detail etch for the correct frame extensions, which I hope will fit without too much hassle. I ditched the DJH cast pony truck, after trying to get the same arm on it gently persuaded to the correct angle, to fit to the chassis pivot point correctly. Needless to say, it unfortunately fractured! I am trying to take this project very much in a step by step way, without blundering on and making a 'cats' of it. I want to see if I can get as close as I can to the original design, without using much, if any, modeller's licence. I will need to address the issue of the tender frames though, and the solution you mention of Comet frames, would likely be the first thing I would think of as a way out. I shall take it slowly, as I say, and perhaps post the odd photo as things move along. Also, thanks for your photos Cypherman, that looks quite tidy.  

 

Ian. 

[MacDuff999]

Thanks Terry. I will take a careful look at everything, and not rush into any major changes without due consideration. There is a chance I may end up not making the change at all, but it will be a considered decision, after reading your two posts, and looking carefully at the various parts and tasks which would be involved. 

 

Ian.   

[92220]

Ian, Terry,

 

yes I forgot the type 3 and 4 tender cut out differences.  Good point.
If I build any of the three DJH Coronations I have in the drawer, I will also use Comet deflectors and reposition the boiler handrail because the DJH versions are too small and the handrail too low.  It really changes the face of the loco.
 

I understand and applaud both the fun and the challenge of making something into something else, as you can see from my own thread!  So best of luck with it Ian and do show us how you get on.  

 

Iain

 

[GoingUnderground]

11 hours ago, cypherman said:

Hi Macduff,

Sorry I have had no experience putting new chassis onto this engine. The only updating I have done is converting the engine from 3 rail to 2 rail, swapping the wheels with comet ones and a bit of glazing plus a full repaint to original spec.

I hope that you got the board out of the kitchen before SWMBO found out. If I tried that and was caught, I'd be for the high jump. I always wait until 'er indoors has gone out and I know roughly how long I have before she comes back.

 

Nice combination of Dublo and Triang 1st generation platform and station buildings, even if the booking office is back to front.

[MacDuff999]

On the subject of tenders, I had forgotten - in my response to your comments gents - that I would be building a (I would have thought correct) de-streamlined Comet type behind the DJH loco. My plan was then to use the DJH tender with another member of the mainstream class, but Iain's comment about the roller bearing axle boxes alerted me to something I had overlooked, That then puts one or two other things back in the melting pot, unless I acquire and build another Comet tender for the H/D bodied 'Duchess', thus leaving the DJH one as spare in effect. 

 

Ian.       

[MacDuff999]

Just read your latest post Iain, regarding your 'stored' Coronations not yet built. So you would use Comet smoke deflectors instead of the DJH? I haven't got round to doing anything with the body really yet, although I have wondered whether Gibson handrail knobs with 0.45mm wire, for example, might be a little under scale? I shall certainly need to fill and re-drill the handrail knob holes on the H/D body, for which I do have Comet smoke deflectors.

 

Ian. 

[92220]

Yes for sure use the Comet deflectors.  

 

 

The DJH ones are undersized and therefore the handrail pillars are too low on the boiler and smokebox.  The handholds are also better on the Comet ones.  They are a bit fiddly the first couple of sets you do, but they get easier.  I used Gibson pillars.

 

Iain

[cypherman]

2 hours ago, GoingUnderground said:

I hope that you got the board out of the kitchen before SWMBO found out. If I tried that and was caught, I'd be for the high jump. I always wait until 'er indoors has gone out and I know roughly how long I have before she comes back.

 

Nice combination of Dublo and Triang 1st generation platform and station buildings, even if the booking office is back to front.

Hi,

That is just my test track laid/fastened on a plank. The platform is to check the gap between wagons and loco's and the platform edge. There are points further along the plank to the right to make sure the wheel alignments are correct and the engines do not derail. Plus i have a very forgiving wife who was in the living room.....  .

[MacDuff999]

Iain, I checked some photos in the LMS Profile book, as well as my own collection of 'Coronations' on a memory stick.  'Duchess of Montrose' has, in 2/3 instances, the 'wrong' type of deflectors (based on the Comet item description) during my chosen time period. So, having bought the 'correct' type from Mr Wizard, I will now need to re-order set of the ones which appear in the photographs!  Regarding the DJH kit, all things considered, I will not deviate from the intended loco type now, and will build the kit as number 46256 'Sir William' etc. The shed allocation might be a bit of a stretch, but never mind. I decided not to go ahead, partly as I may have another candidate for 46224 'Princess Alexandra', so that will (hopefully) in the fullness of time, give me 4 of the class! They were one of my clear favourite classes in the 50's anyway. I have almost sorted out the body fixings to attach the H/D body to the Comet chassis now Terry, so I might post a photo or two soon, of progress so far. 

[TerryD1471]

On 14/08/2021 at 13:53, 92220 said:

Yes for sure use the Comet deflectors.  

 

 

The DJH ones are undersized and therefore the handrail pillars are too low on the boiler and smokebox.  The handholds are also better on the Comet ones.  They are a bit fiddly the first couple of sets you do, but they get easier.  I used Gibson pillars.

 

Iain

Hi gents

 

I am intrigued, Iain, by your comments about the height of Comet's smoke deflectors compared to DJH's. So intrigued that I went and measured the heights of every different type I could lay my hands on. I have used Jackson Evans etched deflectors on a good many of my models (esp. Hornby Dublo body conversions) and the results are quite intriguing:-

 

Original Wrenn & H/D  20 mm

Tender drive Hornby  20 mm

Recent Hornby  20 mm

DJH  20 mm

Jackson Evans 20 mm

Crownline/ M&L  19.7 mm

Scratch built (origin unknown) 20 mm

 

I don't know what height the Comet ones are as I've never used them, but they look appreciably deeper than 20 mm. Could it be that everyone is out of step except for Comet? I ask because I'd like to know!

 

Terry

 

[MacDuff999]

Well folks, following Iain's post re smoke deflectors, I got out my 'wrong' pair from Comet, and set them against both H/D and DJH bodies. Albeit not flexed to reflect the lower-part angle inwards towards the smokebox, they seemed about the right height, OK within what Terry reports as a discrepancy of 0.03mm. in comparison with most other suppliers.   

[MacDuff999]

First stage photo of the H/D 'Duchess' body on the basic Comet chassis, after having arranged the front and rear fixing points for it. Albeit not strictly within the topic, also a photo of the DJH Ivatt variant atmore or less the same stage.

[MacDuff999]

Here is a photo (not best focus) of a P3 Wrenn model of 'City of London', in rather good condition. It runs smoothly and quietly too. I think replacing the original bogie/tender wheels with the scale versions from Markits does make a difference to its appearance, for a start. The tender will have to be replaced by a Comet version, as it is the wrong type for what I intend, in due course,  to be number 46238 'City of Carlisle'. I am undecided at the moment, whether it is worth changing the smoke deflectors and perhaps handrails. Have you, Terry, or any of the other contributors to this (or Iain's Camden ) thread, any experience in trying to solder detail items to a H/D body? I may be mistaken, but would one be successful in doing that, as if it were done a la white metal kit? I had thought of perhaps adding turned buffers too, but is that going too far and gilding a plastic spoon?    

 

 

[steam69]

You cannot solder to Mazac, I suggest that you use Araldite or Superglue.

 

Richard

[MacDuff999]

OK thanks Richard. I just wasn't sure exactly what kind of metal it was. 

 

Ian.   

[MacDuff999]

Terry, or anyone, have you ever replaced the flangeless centre driver on a H/D model?

[TerryD1471]

Hi Ian

 

I'm glad you have had an answer to your question about soldering Mazak and that it is a no-no.

 

To answer your question, yes, I have replaced the centre drivers, but I also replaced the others too, because, as you will note they are only about 22 mm diameter and seriously underscale. 26 mm (or even 27 mm) Romford/Markits wheels are desirable.

 

If you have a good City of London, that is a good start point with a super powerful motor, but note that the front of the firebox is very lumpy (compare with the DJH loco) and needs cutting back with a set of files, dental burrs or any other way of removing metal.

Secondly I would fret out the cast metal "skirt" at the base of the boiler to reveal daylight and create the illusion of a round boiler. Use tiny drills and files.

Thirdly, the cab side windows could do with opening up using Swiss files. Check the DJH model to see how large they need to be.

 

On to the DJH kit, it's good to see how much progress you've made so far. I hope you have not fixed the smokebox front in place, as this is usually one of the last jobs to do. The open front of the smokebox will allow you access to the inside of the boiler for securing handrail knobs (especially if like me you have sometimes used split pins).

If you compare the DJH smokebox with the H/D one (which is quite accurate), you will see that it extends too far forwards, so any steps you can take to shorten it (like filing down the front and thinning down the smokebox door as much as possible) would be desirable.

Secondly, the footplate ahead of the smokebox and around the inside cylinders is too short and could do with extending forward to gain the right proportions. I have used a length of 1.6 mm brass square to do this on 46256 and am planning to do so with my DJH models of 46238 and 46245. It doesn't solve the problem completely but it does help to make things better.

 

I will follow up with pics to help with my words.

 

ATB

 

Terry

[cypherman]

HI all,

Just a question here. This thread was about upgrading the Duchess. But from what has been talked about here there is precious little left of the original engine. As there is so little left you might as well go the whole hog and buy a kit. Just  thought.