Hornby Dublo R1

[hayfield]

I brought a Hornby Dublo R1 quite cheaply, after waiting some time the Wills version to come up on Ebay at a reasonable price. Thats not happened and I was woundering if its worth the effort of detailing this model up. Hand rails are the 1st thing to come to mind along with Westinghouse pumps and other pluming, perhapps even rounding off the bottom of the boiler.

 

Has anyone done this? tips, suggestions welcomed and if it does not work then chassis sell on Ebay for more than I paid for it.

[Graham_Muz]

Hi

 

The body itself is slightly compromised to fit the standard 0-6-0 chassis wheel spacing and other than the obvious moulded handrails etc it is not a bad representation and with only a little work can be made into a nice model.

 

Being the Dublo / Wrenn chassis it uses 1/8" axles so rewheeling with something like Romfords is a simple job and Mainly Trains do etched coupling rods for this chassis which make an instant improvement too.

 

Here are a couple of (poor) pictures of mine after fitting the Romfords, etched rods, handrails etc. I also fitted etched bars (also from Mainly Trains etchings) to the rear lookouts.

 

[Wayne Rite]

Hi,

 

Ian Rice did one in one of his books, I seem to recall that he moved the front splasher forward to a more accurate setting, removed the coal from the bunker and made up a new cab front with the correct spectacles etc, he also opened out under the boiler and fitted a scale chassis.

 

I got a scale chassis for the R/R1 off of Ebay some years ago, it was originally made by Andrew Mullins of Branchlines in Exeter, perhaps the new owners still have them in their list?

 

I know Andrew also did some lost wax castings for the boiler backhead and replacement scale splashers for the front but again not sure if they are still available.

 

After living in Australia for many years I have found that if something is advertised or reviewed that is pertinent to my modelling needs then I buy it, I would rather be looking at it than for it.

 

It also means that when I decide something will never get built or is about to be replaced by something RTR, then I maake a judement call as to whether I still need it, and if not off it goes to the auction.

 

Cheers

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Financially, if this is the H-D item and in good condition, I suggest you look at selling it intact; or exchanging for the cheaper Wrenn equivalent plus some wonga if such a deal can be set up, should you fancy the chopping about job.

 

As already mentioned Iain Rice gives a good illustrated 'how to' in his 'Detailing and Improving Ready to Run Locos' (Irwell Press) which can still be found s/h. There's enough good stuff in this body to make an improvement and detailing project well worthwhile, as Graham's pics amply prove.

 

... After living in Australia for many years I have found that if something is advertised or reviewed that is pertinent to my modelling needs then I buy it, I would rather be looking at it than for it. ...

This process also works in the Northern Hemisphere, and saves a lot of scrambling around later.

[SRman]

Funnily enough, I was looking at the R1s I have and wondering whether to detail one or two of them and replace the original magnets with neodymium versions to make for better running on DCC. As I have picked up a few very cheaply (one was given to me!) with minor damage and poor repaints, there would not be any major loss of value to a collector!

 

The discussion here has given me food for thought, and Graham's finished and detailed model doubly so (excellent work, there Muz).

 

[melmerby]

Funnily enough, I was looking at the R1s I have and wondering whether to detail one or two of them and replace the original magnets with neodymium versions to make for better running on DCC. As I have picked up a few very cheaply (one was given to me!) with minor damage and poor repaints, there would not be any major loss of value to a collector!

 

The discussion here has given me food for thought, and Graham's finished and detailed model doubly so (excellent work, there Muz).

 

 

I have a HD R1 chassis under my Wills GWR U1 0-6-2T, I replaced the HD motor with a suitable Mashima, much quieter and less current draw.

With Romford wheels all round it runs quite nicely on DCC with a TCS chip.

N.B. I bought the R1 when they were still current, so no loss of value then by being butchered!

 

Keith

[Horsetan]

...Iain Rice did one in one of his books, I seem to recall that he moved the front splasher forward to a more accurate setting, removed the coal from the bunker and made up a new cab front with the correct spectacles etc, he also opened out under the boiler and fitted a scale chassis.

 

I got a scale chassis for the R/R1 off of Ebay some years ago, it was originally made by Andrew Mullins of Branchlines in Exeter, perhaps the new owners still have them in their list?

 

I know Andrew also did some lost wax castings for the boiler backhead and replacement scale splashers for the front but again not sure if they are still available.....

 

All still available from Branchlines. The chassis fret looks like the same one used in their SECR O/O1 kit and, from a design point of view, suffers from a very weak topline if you are building it with sprung or compensated suspension.

 

Iain Rice referred to his improved R1 in MORILL Modelling Handbook no.4 "Ready To run Locos". Not sure whether this book is still in print, but you may be able to find a secondhand copy.

[Captain Kernow]

Here's a Wrenn R1, which I detailed a few years ago. I also gave it mixed traffic lining, which they never carried in reality, but I rather liked the effect.... I also removed the moulded plastic coal from the bunker, so as to make it look half-empty, and put a curved underneath to the boiler from plasticard:

 

 

 

It also has turned Romford driving wheels and replacement coupling rods (Alan Gibson 'Universal' ones).

[hayfield]

Thanks all for your replies,and the photo's show its worthwile. RMweb seems to be busy tonight thats why I am a bit late replying.

 

My locos body paintwork is a bit tired and I paid less than chassis sell for it, so there will be no great loss.

 

I do have a Wills etched replacement chassis (I believe Southeastern Finecast do an even better one now)and spare Romford 18mm wheels if I want to go down that road, I also have a couple of chassis with Romfords fitted. One even has a K's Mk 1 motor with a flywheel and runs surprisingly well, it has homemade brake gear as well (strange what comes up on Ebay).

 

Fitting a new type magnet is worth while, I did this to a Wills GWR U1, with great sucess and this uses the R1 chassis.

 

The idea was to detail the body, I have a spare Westinghouse cylinder, does anyone make the boiler pipework as SEF do not fit these to their model. Also I will try and find a plan as the front windows need to be remodeled and lamp irons etc need to be fitted. The boiler bottom is also a great improvement.

 

Thanks again and if anyone has thoughts or photos please share them

[Nick Holliday]

I don't think the R1's were fitted with Westinghouse cylinders, the SECR favoured the vacuum brake and the class wasn't fitted with pull-push gear. The equipment fixed to the front of the right hand tank is, I believe, the steam reverser. I don't know whether Branchlines do a casting of this. ACE Models do an etched kit for the R/R1 in 4mm and I don't know if they could be pursuaded to sell you one of their castings as a spare, assuming they provided one in the first place - I haven't checked my kit for that.

[hayfield]

I don't think the R1's were fitted with Westinghouse cylinders, the SECR favoured the vacuum brake and the class wasn't fitted with pull-push gear. The equipment fixed to the front of the right hand tank is, I believe, the steam reverser. I don't know whether Branchlines do a casting of this. ACE Models do an etched kit for the R/R1 in 4mm and I don't know if they could be pursuaded to sell you one of their castings as a spare, assuming they provided one in the first place - I haven't checked my kit for that.

 

Nick thanks for putting me right, its a cylinder I just thought (wrongly) it was a Westinghouse. The Southeastern kits do not have the pipes that come out of the boiler sides that are on the Hornby Dublo version. I think Markits may do a posh version, I might just try and coble some up with some wire and brass

[Horsetan]

.... ACE Models do an etched kit for the R/R1 in 4mm and I don't know if they could be pursuaded to sell you one of their castings as a spare, assuming they provided one in the first place - I haven't checked my kit for that.

 

That must be a new one - I had a look at the website, and it certainly wasn't listed. We are talking about the same maker known as Ace Components, I take it?

[Adam]

Nick thanks for putting me right, its a cylinder I just thought (wrongly) it was a Westinghouse. The Southeastern kits do not have the pipes that come out of the boiler sides that are on the Hornby Dublo version. I think Markits may do a posh version, I might just try and coble some up with some wire and brass

 

Branchlines do a (rather nice) brass casting for said steam reverser, much better than the Markits turned version which will lack much of the fine detail.

 

Adam

[Nick Holliday]

That must be a new one - I had a look at the website, and it certainly wasn't listed. We are talking about the same maker known as Ace Components, I take it?

Don't know about Ace Components - the name seems to be Ace Products on the website. I have to say the website is hopelessly out of date - the only reliable way of seeing what he has to offer is at the few exhibitions he attends mainly in the south-east. I bought the R/R1 kit off him about two years ago, so it certainly exists, as does a 4mm version of the LBSC C2X which was on sale at Epsom & Ewell this year.

[SRman]

I am open to correction here but didn't the South Eastern use a different feed-water system on some of its locos that looked like a Westinghouse pump at the front of each of the tanks. The R/R1s may well have featured this as well.

[mr b]

didnt Hattons use the R1 chassis in their pannier tank late 1950's, the one I bought at the time has a Tri-ang jinty chassis, the cheaper option of the two.

 

 

mr B .. modelling Nethertown

[Il Grifone]

didnt Hattons use the R1 chassis in their pannier tank late 1950's, the one I bought at the time has a Tri-ang jinty chassis, the cheaper option of the two.

 

 

mr B .. modelling Nethertown

 

Yes it was available with either chassis. There was also Gaiety's own chassis for it. The casting was quite crude even by 1950s standards and (roughly) represents a 27xx pannier* despite the 5700 number on it. It was presumably passed off as a 57xx, because the last 27xx was scrapped at about the time the model first appeared. It's one of the few prototypes for which Romford's 18mm 16 spoke wheels are more or less correct. Neither the R1 nor the Jinty chassis has the correct wheelbase, but both have the great avantage over the original of being reliable and having round wheels.

 

* Parallel chimney, whistle on the cab roof and square windows in the cab. The valance and steps are also typical of a 27xx.

[97xx]

On 22/08/2010 at 23:21, Graham_Muz said:

Being the Dublo / Wrenn chassis it uses 1/8" axles so rewheeling with something like Romfords is a simple job and Mainly Trains do etched coupling rods for this chassis which make an instant improvement too.

 

Here are a couple of (poor) pictures of mine after fitting the Romfords, etched rods, handrails etc. I also fitted etched bars (also from Mainly Trains etchings) to the rear lookouts.

 

 

Revisiting a very old thread I appreciate, but found it as about to post a Q about the HD R1 chassis which I have used on a K's 97xx bodykit. The 97xx has come out quite respectably and might warrant a better looking chassis without going fully bespoke.

 

So, to those who have done this:

 

(a) If I fit 20mm Romfords/Markits with all flanged, is there any issue with e.g. 2' radius curves?

 

(b) Using the MainlyTrains rods, are they articulated or just dummy? Do they need to be articulated on this chassis if again running 2' radius?

 

Thanks

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, 97xx said:

 

Revisiting a very old thread I appreciate, but found it as about to post a Q about the HD R1 chassis which I have used on a K's 97xx bodykit. The 97xx has come out quite respectably and might warrant a better looking chassis without going fully bespoke.

 

Thanks

IMHO A strange choice of chassis for the 97XX

It was wrong for the R1 and even wronger (?) for the 97XX

The wheels are the wrong size, even Markits 20mm is wrong, you need 4' 7½" equivalent which is just over 18mm.

 

I can't see any reason why it wouldn't traverse 2' curves.

[hayfield]

It was the chassis K's decided to use for the loco

[97xx]

Yes all wrong I appreciate, but it was as John says K's choice...

 

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, hayfield said:

It was the chassis K's decided to use for the loco

I didn't realise Ks did body only kits, you learn something every day.

[Steamport Southport]

The same chassis as recommended for the J50 and MR 3F 0-6-0T. It was presumably what was readily available at the time.

 

Mine's still on the cardboard package.

 

Hasten to add mine is a recent purchase not bought in 1960 whatever.

 

 

Jason

Edited August 29, 2020 by Steamport Southport

[The Johnster]

On 25/08/2010 at 16:28, Il Grifone said:

 

* Parallel chimney, whistle on the cab roof and square windows in the cab. The valance and steps are also typical of a 27xx.

I don't think that's entirely right, IG. Whistle on cab roof and the valences are more like 2721 (not 27xx) than 57xx, but the chimney is far too thick, parallel or not, and is, I think, meant to represent a 57xx.  The square cab windows are not appropriate for 2721 or 57xx, and are from the 8750, so the model here (Gaity?) is a sort of generalised GW large pannier with features from all 3 classes incorporated in it but not an accurate representation of any of them.  Bearing in mind that in those days anything that ran and looked reasonably like the prototype from a distance at night in a fog to a short sighted bloke who'd left his glasses home was thought of as borderline miraculous, and some firms (Hornby 0, Trix Twin) didn't bother at all, this would have been acceptable enough for most 'average' modellers.

 

4 hours ago, melmerby said:

IMHO A strange choice of chassis for the 97XX

It was wrong for the R1 and even wronger (?) for the 97XX

The wheels are the wrong size, even Markits 20mm is wrong, you need 4' 7½" equivalent which is just over 18mm.

 

I can't see any reason why it wouldn't traverse 2' curves.

I agree, but the R1's wheels are not so far off the right size in one regard; the usual method of those days, used by HD and the other RTR volume manufacturers, was to make it as realistic as possible within the confines allowed by reliable running on coarse scale track and flangeways and 13" curves, so wheel size was measured from the outside edge of a very coarse scale flange,  Had HD modelled the R1s wheels (or the Duchess's, or the A4's, or any of them) to the correct diameter at the inside of the tyre, or the outer edge of the wheel away from the flange, the coarse and overscale flanges would have meant that oversized splashers and better clearances for the body/chassis fit would have been needed, so the wheels looked undersized while the outer edge of the flanges were correct.  The big engines (HD Duchess, Rovex Black Princess &c) were undersized anyway in terms of length, so the small looking driving wheels were acceptably in proportion for the standards of the day for RTR running.  But it showed up badly on leading bogies, which looked almost as bad as some early N gauge efforts!

[Il Grifone]

Somehow this failed to get posted when i wrote it earlier....

 

Why 20mm Romfords? The 97xx had 4' 7½" driving wheels, so 18mm would be better and leave a little more space for overscale flanges.

As regards all flanged wheels. it should be alright, but the drive to the centre axle may cause problems.

 

The Dublo R1 was an odd choice (a class with few members and nearly all different from each other in some way), but there was a Southern mania at the time. They could have done their E5 (2594) properly (or at least  better) and reused the N2 chassis but chose to produce an entirely new chassis , while penny pinching in a manner to rival their main competitor and use the N2 coupling rods (and wheels - here they're nearer than on the N2, but have too many spokes).

Probably the Gaiety pannier is supposed to be a 57xx (her number is 5700), but back then there wasn't the information available. They probably used a sketchy drawing (Skinley?) and a few photos, (possibly taken themselves on the lineside) without realising there were several classes of pannier tanks.