British Outline 'HO' - what's the story?

[Philou]

Should anyone be interested in UK outline H0 locos, over on catawiki there is a Fleischmann Warship 'Gladiator' presently on bid at 95€ (about 5 hours to go before closure). There is also a Mehano Class 66 (not in UK colours) currently bid at 135€ (about 1 day 5 hours to go).

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

[rue_d_etropal]

nice to see Britsh HO under a new separate category. Now just need to persuade some manufacturers to supply loco chassis!!!

 

[Andy Reichert]

43 minutes ago, rue_d_etropal said:

nice to see Britsh HO under a new separate category. Now just need to persuade some manufacturers to supply loco chassis!!!

 

 

The economics of selling a moderately priced, high parts cost chassis, separately from a moderately priced, low parts cost body make that highly unlikely. 

 

 

[rue_d_etropal]

If someone is prepared to commission an order, cash up front, which is how most commissions are done, then it should be possible. Just needs enough interest in such a project.

I would not expect a manufacturer to do it themselves,although this is what Japanese manufacturers do and as a result have benefitted both N gauge and OO9 as a result. Only now have the jpanese manufacturers got properly interested in OO9(or close to that scale) with fully r2r models.

[47137]

23 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

nice to see Britsh HO under a new separate category. Now just need to persuade some manufacturers to supply loco chassis!!!

 

Simon, could you do chassis as prints? Like a diecast chassis block, but as a limited run. I see metal prints can be had for body shells. The only "traditional" manufacturing would then be for matching side rods. This would leave the modeller to assemble purchased wheels, axles, gears and motor onto what would be a nicely "true" chassis.

 

- Richard.

[rue_d_etropal]

It is not an area I really want to work in, as there are too many variables, depending on what each modeller wants. I have found that using r2r chassis is better in the long run. If someone else wants to do 3D printed chassis blocks, I have no objection.

My experience with the less fine plastics showed me that accuracy was a problem, and even if I fixed something one time, next time it might come out slightly different. Only talking fractions of mm, but enough to be a potential problem.

I have found that people are quite willing to adapt r2r chassis, and most modellers prefer r2r as they don't feel confident enough to build their own working chassis.

[47137]

7 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

It is not an area I really want to work in, as there are too many variables, depending on what each modeller wants. I have found that using r2r chassis is better in the long run. If someone else wants to do 3D printed chassis blocks, I have no objection.

My experience with the less fine plastics showed me that accuracy was a problem, and even if I fixed something one time, next time it might come out slightly different. Only talking fractions of mm, but enough to be a potential problem.

I have found that people are quite willing to adapt r2r chassis, and most modellers prefer r2r as they don't feel confident enough to build their own working chassis.

 

Fair enough ... so, going back to persuading some manufacturers to supply loco chassis (above), would these be their existing chassis supplied as complete spare parts? Or perhaps something more generic, like a diesel/electric loco chassis able to support a selection of motors, driveshafts and bogies? British H0 is really made for post-steam projects.

 

When I did my class 81 conversion, I bought a complete, brand new Hornby class 67, stripped it and sold on so many of the unwanted parts as spares the project was very economical.

 

I keep wanting to compile a list of 4mm scale chassis substitutes for 3.5mm prototypes, but really I only know what I have already done. I bought a copy of Mike Sharman's 'Wheel Specifications for the Modeller' but a comprehensive list was a bit daunting.

 

- Richard.

[rue_d_etropal]

Quote

British H0 is really made for post-steam projects

Have to disagree there. No reason why steam should not be possible, but easier with inside cylinder locos as Jack Nelson was doing in the 1940s.

As for chassis, the one I am thinking of is the new Bachmann J72 , as it is close enough tomost British 0-6-0 locos, especially tank locos. I know wheel size of some was slightly bigger, but in HO I don't believe most people can notice.

The thing with British HO, is that it is for everyone not just the pure scale people. It is the only scale/gauge combination that is pretty near spot on using r2r track and wheels. Anyone wanting to go finer , in effect P87 will build their own track etc. Nothing wrong in that, but the advantage HO has is that so much can be bought off the shelf. Anyone with a OO layout can convert it to HO, as track is almost certainly HO , and buildings etc are easier to replace than track . Main thing that holds people back is locos and rolling stock, and I am trying to address that, but I can do most of my designs in any scale. Although there are still a lot of people building kits, the trend in the hobby has been towards more detailed r2r, leaving a big gap between kit/scatchbuild and r2r, and it is that gap I am aiming at, and I think I am hitting the target pretty well, as business is growing.

[47137]

Fair enough - I am happy enough to build small steam engines. But please, what do you mean by "persuade some manufacturers to supply loco chassis"? Would these be some kind of new chassis, or is it simply a reference to suitably small 4mm models? Many thanks.

 

- Richard.

 

 

[rue_d_etropal]

thought I had said, but the chassis I mean is the new Bachmannn J72. If I had the money I would commission an order just for the chassis. Almost tempted to get one of the locos, and selloff the body, but until I start doing some suitable loco bodies I can wait(price might go down!)

[47137]

8 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

thought I had said, but the chassis I mean is the new Bachmannn J72. If I had the money I would commission an order just for the chassis. Almost tempted to get one of the locos, and selloff the body, but until I start doing some suitable loco bodies I can wait(price might go down!)

 

Ah ha!

 

I have one of the new J72s. I suspect the chassis is good for quite a few 3.5 mm projects. I had a LSWR G6 in mind, but unfortunately the Bachmann body, whilst remarkably like a G6, is nearer to 1:82 scale than 1:87. Something to pull those Trix wagons rather than my Fleischmann coaches.

 

The chassis has a coreless motor, so fabulous running with a decoder (this is a Next18 fitment), fair running with a non-feedback DC controller, and unsuitable for use with old-fashioned feedback controller like the Kent Panel Controls one.

 

The Bachmann body is a mixture of metal and plastic parts and modifications will be difficult compared to an all-plastic body. I could take the measurements of the chassis and post them up if people are interested.

 

- Richard.

[Moxy]

1 hour ago, 47137 said:

 

The Bachmann body is a mixture of metal and plastic parts and modifications will be difficult compared to an all-plastic body. I could take the measurements of the chassis and post them up if people are interested.

 

 

Yes please to the measurements, if you wouldn't mind Richard.

 

I know the new J72 chassis isn't supposed to fit the old ex Mainline body, but if we are modifying it into a G6 or J73 (or indeed anything else), is there any mileage in using the old all plastic body with the new chassis?  There seem to be plenty of old split frame J72's on ebay with split gears that could be used as body donors with the newer chassis.

 

Moxy

[rue_d_etropal]

I am not interested in the body, but I am sure someone would want it, for EM/P4.

As for the G6 , I think the old Dapol/Horby Terrier chassis might be closer and as the O2 0-4-4T is similar body then it could be modified for that as well.

 

The Dapol/Terrier chassis is a good start for HO. Only problem is the width of the motor which might be trick fitting in some locos. I suspect with the new versions of this loco, that the old chassis will be easy to get hold of at a good price. I already have a couple. Incidentally a J72 in HO would be a contender as well.

[47137]

3 hours ago, Moxy said:

 

Yes please to the measurements, if you wouldn't mind Richard.

 

I know the new J72 chassis isn't supposed to fit the old ex Mainline body, but if we are modifying it into a G6 or J73 (or indeed anything else), is there any mileage in using the old all plastic body with the new chassis?  There seem to be plenty of old split frame J72's on ebay with split gears that could be used as body donors with the newer chassis.

 

Moxy

 

I've set up an Excel spreadsheet to hold chassis details, and posted it in a new topic.

 

I've been looking for a Mainline body to try on my Bachmann chassis, and all I can do is report back when I find the answer :-)

 

- Richard.

Edited January 11, 2020 by 47137

[Andy Reichert]

I'm slowly but steadily getting into chassis manufacturing for both HO and 4mm use. I'm just not releasing anything until I have all the t's crossed and i's dotted, and all the parts completed and in stock.  My main thrust is power and trailer bogies, but I've already started on my first steam chassis.

 

My motivation is that I need these things myself for Proto:87, and UK 00-P, but because I'm too impatient (and clumsy) with hand craftsmanship, I end up using manufacturing techniques. That means of course that stuff I make for myself can then be easily and quickly reproduced in moderate quantities. 

 

The comment about P:87 requiring all hand built track is incorrect. I already supply parts than will convert most commericial HO/00 turnouts to P:87/ 00-P on minutes with little or no skill.

 

Andy

[47137]

1 hour ago, Andy Reichert said:

The comment about P:87 requiring all hand built track is incorrect. I already supply parts than will convert most commericial HO/00 turnouts to P:87/ 00-P on minutes with little or no skill.

 

This topic concerns British railway modelling, and all mass-produced turnouts in 1:87 scale represent Continental or North American practices. Scaleway Type J flexi track (marketed for 00) can look pretty good on an H0 layout, but sadly none of their track or made-to order turnouts are 1:87 models of any prototype, British or otherwise.

 

P87 for a British application surely needs hand-built track and turnouts for anything representative of prototype track.

 

- Richard.

[davknigh]

00-P ?  I searched the site and found nothing. Any relation to P4?
 

Cheers,

 

David

[Andy Reichert]

6 hours ago, 47137 said:

 

This topic concerns British railway modelling, and all mass-produced turnouts in 1:87 scale represent Continental or North American practices. Scaleway Type J flexi track (marketed for 00) can look pretty good on an H0 layout, but sadly none of their track or made-to order turnouts are 1:87 models of any prototype, British or otherwise.

 

P87 for a British application surely needs hand-built track and turnouts for anything representative of prototype track.

 

- Richard.

 

Agreed. I'm British myself.  So I think the English language loose usage as quoted puts me on topic. At least ambiguously..  

 

The Proto:87 SIG, Unlike the Scalefour society, is  concerned only with the engineering necessary to meet the standard. How you model the appearance of non-critical functional aspects of 3.5 mm scale is entirely up to the participant. For those interested, I can laser cut the sleeper bases for 3.5 mm UK pattern turnouts if required. I'm already making real wood sleepers and timbers for 4mm scale. I don't do BH chairs, but representative FB is no problem.

 

00-P is my own solution to running 4mm UK outline on 16.5 mm gauge track with P4 flange ways. E.g " P4 - 2.33 ".  Which is why I'm making chassis. I want all my 16.5 mm gauge chassis to have simple, inexpensive and 100% reliable working suspension, so that scale flanges always stay firmly on the rails.

 

Andy

[Philou]

If anyone in this thread is interested over on Catawiki, there's what looks like a Class 08 shunter in H0 made by Roco in NS green. On a previous page there is also a fireless loco 0-8-0 but unfortunately made by Märklin.

 

Here's a link to the 08 to save trawling : https://www.catawiki.eu/l/33524149-roco-h0-43471-locomotive-diesel-serie-5-600-bakkie-hippel-en-couleurs-vertes-ns

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

Edited January 12, 2020 by Philou
Forgot to say presently being bid at 45€

[Moxy]

15 minutes ago, Philou said:

If anyone in this thread is interested over on Catawiki, there's what looks like a Class 08 shunter in H0 made by Roco in NS green. On a previous page there is also a fireless loco 0-8-0 but unfortunately made by Märklin.

 

Here's a link to the 08 to save trawling : https://www.catawiki.eu/l/33524149-roco-h0-43471-locomotive-diesel-serie-5-600-bakkie-hippel-en-couleurs-vertes-ns

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

Catawiki is a useful source for these Roco NS 500/600 class shunters (nearest UK model is a Class 11, but they can be turned into Class 08), I got one of the two I own from that website.

 

You need to signup/login to bid on locos, which works in broadly the same way to Ebay.  Unlike Ebay, however, they charge a commission on the final price, (around 9%) plus payment from the UK has to be by international bank transfer, which will also attract bank charges.  Just bear in mind there are these extra costs on top of whatever amount you bid.

 

Moxy

[Philou]

Just passing things on that might be useful for the H0 community - I just look for the 00 stuff that turns up - not a lot though.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

[47137]

4 hours ago, Philou said:

If anyone in this thread is interested over on Catawiki, there's what looks like a Class 08 shunter in H0 made by Roco in NS green. On a previous page there is also a fireless loco 0-8-0 but unfortunately made by Märklin.

 

Here's a link to the 08 to save trawling : https://www.catawiki.eu/l/33524149-roco-h0-43471-locomotive-diesel-serie-5-600-bakkie-hippel-en-couleurs-vertes-ns

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

The Roco NS600 has a lot to answer for - it converted me to H0 scale. I didn't know it existed when I found one for sale at a show. Then I bought some Lima wagons, and made a start. I now have three so I won't be bidding on this auction :-)

 

I have seen these locos painted up to look like a class 08, but really they are a class 11. The wheels and the shape of the cab are different on an 08. It is an easy conversion to make the model into a class 11, I wrote up my conversion a year ago.

 

- Richard.

[Andy Reichert]

On 11/01/2020 at 09:29, 47137 said:

 

This topic concerns British railway modelling, and all mass-produced turnouts in 1:87 scale represent Continental or North American practices. Scaleway Type J flexi track (marketed for 00) can look pretty good on an H0 layout, but sadly none of their track or made-to order turnouts are 1:87 models of any prototype, British or otherwise.

 

P87 for a British application surely needs hand-built track and turnouts for anything representative of prototype track.

 

- Richard.

 

 

This is some USA track with "branch line" sleeper length and spacing. Not sure how close this comes to reasonably representing UK 3.5 mm scale track.

 

Andy

[Pacific231G]

2 hours ago, Andy Reichert said:

 

 

This is some USA track with "branch line" sleeper length and spacing. Not sure how close this comes to reasonably representing UK 3.5 mm scale track.

 

Andy

Hi Andy

Sleeper spacing looks good but American ties are narrower than British and European sleepers. Someone who measured it up reckons that the spacing and sleeper dimensions in Peco's new OO bullhead track is spot on for the double champignon (bullhead more or less) track used by the Midi company in SW France so I think their sleepers were a bit wider as they used maritime pine for their sleepers which wasn't as tough as oak or Jarrah but available locally in vast quantities .

What few people seem to do is to narrow the sleeper spacing either side of each panel of track tos upport the rail joints. Probably a case for using a template to space sleepers. Even though the rail would not be cut there would be scope for adding dummy fishplates and possibly notching the railhead.

[47137]

9 hours ago, Andy Reichert said:

This is some USA track with "branch line" sleeper length and spacing. Not sure how close this comes to reasonably representing UK 3.5 mm scale track.

 

Andy

 

Hi Andy,

 

Most wooden sleepers in Britain are 10 inches wide, so 0.115" or 2.9mm, placed at a nominal 30 inch pitch so 0.345" or 8.8mm. Sleepers are closer together at rail joints and the pitch varies, closer on main lines and more casual on light railways.

 

The most visually appealing ready-made track for the scale is Scaleway Type J (00), with 3.4 mm wide sleepers at a 9mm pitch. This is bullhead track. Exactoscale 00 and Peco BH 00 use broader sleepers so really the Scaleway is the best bet.

 

For FB track, Kato Unitrack is pretty much spot-on for a British H0 main line but is of course a unit track system. I have Peco Streamline with the sleepers gapped out on most of my own layout.

 

What are the dimensions of your sample "branch line" track? Many light railways in Britain used a FB rail spiked to the sleepers.

 

- Richard.