Hornby J94 fixed but I don't know why ?

[Chrisr40]

Afternoon all. I would be very grateful for any thoughts as to the following problem I had with a Hornby J94.

It's a recent but pre used Lord Phil version. Upon receipt it was dripping in oil so I duly cleaned this off the base plate, pick ups and wheel backs. The loco was an intermittent runner and so I stripped it down cleaning everything as I went and reassembling. It looked like it was having pick up problems so I adjusted those. Still ran badly.

I was about to get grumpy and give up when I noticed one side had a lot of slop in the connecting rod and the crank pins were farther out that the other side. Tightening them gently has transformed the loco. My question is why would this work as all my other older J94s have lots of slop on both sides connecting rods. Is it just because one side was different from the other ? Apologies for long rambling question. Thanks

Chris.

[Halvarras]

I don't have one of these but, did you notice whether the crank pins are 'shouldered' - that is, the bearing part the coupling rod runs on is wider than the attachment part inserted into the wheel face, be that a friction fit or screw thread? (Would make sense so they don't get over-tightened during assembly.)

If the coupling rod on the 'loose' side was running on the narrower attachment part it may be that this model took exception to one rod running properly and the other slopping around a bit. In other words, the answer to your final question would be 'yes' - but I'm only guessing!

[Chrisr40]

Thanks Neil , I didn't sadly but grateful for the suggestion. It's better than I could come up with.

[The Johnster]

Space elves from the planet Zarg.  You owe them a favour now, so be afraid.  Be a very fraid. 

[Chrisr40]

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

Space elves from the planet Zarg.  You owe them a favour now, so be afraid.  Be a very fraid. 

Do they do plumbing ? Kitchen not mine .

Edited August 28, 2021 by Chrisr40

[The Johnster]

Found a Hornby J94 in the local antiques market on Saturday that was too cheap to leave there; it has been repainted as an NCB Hunslet, and I'm happy with the running (and I'm quite fussy about good slow running performance), but to get back to Chris OP's original question, I note that the coupling rods are a single piece each, rather than the correct seperate rods common on most current models.  Not a problem except if you want to make a carping criticism of the appearance as the loco traverses tight curves, but this is a setup that requires a good bit of slop at the crankpins for the long rod piece to flop about in.  I suspect that this does have some bearing (sorry) on the happy outcome Chris experienced.

 

I wouldn't totally discard my original theory, though, the Space Elves from the Planet Zarg.

[cypherman]

On 15/11/2021 at 00:40, The Johnster said:

Found a Hornby J94 in the local antiques market on Saturday that was too cheap to leave there; it has been repainted as an NCB Hunslet, and I'm happy with the running (and I'm quite fussy about good slow running performance), but to get back to Chris OP's original question, I note that the coupling rods are a single piece each, rather than the correct seperate rods common on most current models.  Not a problem except if you want to make a carping criticism of the appearance as the loco traverses tight curves, but this is a setup that requires a good bit of slop at the crankpins for the long rod piece to flop about in.  I suspect that this does have some bearing (sorry) on the happy outcome Chris experienced.

 

I wouldn't totally discard my original theory, though, the Space Elves from the Planet Zarg.

Hi Johnster.

It sounds like the one you bought was an early Hornby Ex Dapol model. I have just bought a mint and boxed Dapol BR J94 with extended coal bunker. That has one piece coupling rods. This is the same as my WD one. Although the WD one is much older. One of the first batch to be made by Dapol. Both mine have no problems with tight curves and points.

Edited November 16, 2021 by cypherman

[The Johnster]

Information useful, cypherman.  She has certainly seen some use but seems in excellent condition and low mileage; there is very little wear to the carbon brushes and the commutator is gleaming bright, as are the copper armature windings.  Wheels are a little dirty but not excessively so, and someone has done what I always do with new locos, which is clean out the grease lube and replace it with a suitable non-mineral machine oil.

 

She has settled in to her colliery role without any issues at all, a smooth and quiet runner with superb low speed performance and smooth stop/start ability, and more than enough power for anything I can hang behind her.  A good buy, and I'm very pleased with her.  She is my only Dave Jones designed loco, and I found her initially confusing to take apart, but got there in the end though how the pickups are mounted is still a mystery to me.  Not bad in terms of detail and looks the part, but there are ways to work her up a bit and I am currently awaiting deliveries from RT models and Railtec to this end. 

 

She can beat my Bachmanns when it comes to smooth slow running, which is praise indeed!  She has to deal with a no.2 curve in the fy, on a 3rd/2nd Hornby curved turnout with a long dead frog that my W4 doesn't like, and takes this in her stride. 

[Steamport Southport]

I don't think Hornby has done anything significant to it. Maybe a different motor.

 

I got mine on the day they first came out which was Warrington as it was at Dinting. Which I believe was the loco they measured and why I think it has some differences to a normal Austerity. First RTR model with sprung buffers.

 

Long before Dave Jones was involved with Dapol, he would have been in short pants. It came out about 1984!

 

I think you mean David Boyle.

 

I also believe some of the work was initially done by Airfix.

 

 

 

Jason

[cypherman]

Hi Steamport,

I know Dinting very well as I lived in Glossop just 2 minutes away for 22 years. It was a real shame that it shut down.

[The Johnster]

The more information the merrier; I get confused a bit with the history of models.  I remember 'Warrington' as being the first RTR Austerity produced by Dapol back in the 80s, and there are, correctly, detail differences between this and my model.  Didn't know it was the first RTR loco with sprung buffers, which are held in place by brass nuts that need painting to prevent their showing up in a side view of the loco.  The motor is an open frame 5-pole somewhat reminciscent of the Anchorage DS

 

'Warrington' was rebuilt by Hunslets following Army service as 'Royal Pioneer' and given a mechanical underfeed stoker and gas producer system, which included a different chimney with a reverse taper (this would be the principal difference to a 'normal' Austerity); it was originally built by RSH in 1944.  My model has the hopper bunker of the LNER prototype, 8010, 68010 BR number on the model, which was built by Hunslet.

 

It has, as of yesterday evening, acquired a new identity as 'NCB no.5', which is a bit freelance, as is the livery, a light green-grey.  As there were no hopper bunker Austerities in South Wales, at least not to my knowledge, I have convinced myself that these flights of fancy are justified under the authority of Rule 1.  A hopper bunker assumes mechanical overhead coaling, something else not especially likely in a South Wales colliery, but we'll live with the anomaly...