Kenton Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 Instead of cutting anything, can you not add a thin strip of brass or scrap etch to the runningplate edges and fill the joining gap with solder and blend in, after all you can hardly see the edges of the runningplate due the tool boxes etc ?. 10 thou strip or something. And before we all go thinking this is not prototypical in width, neither is the track, but we live with that. I'm not sure that is any easier to do (possibly more difficult now that the chequerplate half-etch is on) But worth considering - personally I still think the decision should be driven by which is the correct prototypical width. Adding to the footplate does have the additional problem in that the steps would be wrong and the battery boxes would be inset (or also need to be moved out) and that is a bit of a feature of this loco. Easy to say now - it is always worth checking these critical dimensions before building - but who among us ever remembers to do that? We take it for granted that the kit designer has built one of the kits before selling what are just test etches To me both options are a step into scratchbuilding and away from a kitbuild. Removing a 1mm section is not simple and just as easy to overdo it. Definite black mark for the designer IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted November 18, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 18, 2009 Usual advice here I'm afraid - what you see on a preserved loco is not necessarily what you might have seen on one in traffic in BR days! There are pics of D95XX in traffic not carrying shedplates and at least one Newport allocated loco, D9530, had the shedcode painted (probably stencilled) below the running number on the cabside (and that is how I recall another one as well - which definitely had the code stencilled). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phill Dyson (onslaught832) Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 I do like Brian's idea of modelling the cab door open.........a common sight but seldom modelled :icon_clap: Cheers Phill :icon_thumbsup2: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nortonian Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 Hi Kenton, Not having the kit in front of us makes this a little more difficult I know, but looking at the prototype photos, does Jordan just only need to fit the extra strip between the stairwells ?. Other than that, I would cut out new cab ends, which of course, you should`nt have to do. Kindest Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 Not having the kit in front of us makes this a little more difficult I know, but looking at the prototype photos, does Jordan just only need to fit the extra strip between the stairwells ?. I have the drawings from a 4mm kit that I have built and another one about to start in front of me and my notes handy. If I understand your point about adding a strip along the outside edge of the footplate correctly then the front and rear steps will end up set back - that will definitely look odd as they are such a feature. Adding a fillet at the back of the steps to bring them forward back in line with the rest of the footplate is a valid course - but one heck of a load of bother given Jordan's current build state - almost back to the start. Starting out with a new kit, not an option here, you would almost certainly do whichever is best to get to prototypical dimensions. Personally, I think cutting the cab ends is marginally better (speaking as a non scratchbuilder where any cutting of parts that should have been correct in the first place go against the grain). I wonder how many of these kits have been built ? I wonder how many of them have just ignored the overhang or simply filed off the 0.5mm either side. The temptation must be considerable. I think I may have opted to file it and curse the kit designer loudly as I did it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alcazar Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 Is it just the photos, or does the cab seem to overhang only at one end? Could the overhang have been caused by the bends to the cab, or even..........the bends to the footplate edges? I would definitely split the cab, and once done, solder the sides inside the front and rear, filing off any excess. It should be less than 0.5mm once the sides are inside the front and rear anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian daniels Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 I do like Brian's idea of modelling the cab door open.........a common sight but seldom modelled Cheers Phill My cab doors are hinged so open and shut. Did the kit come like this or was it something I did? My roof also comes off (intentionally I may add) making it easier to paint the interior later. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-UnitMad Posted November 18, 2009 Author Share Posted November 18, 2009 Is it just the photos, or does the cab seem to overhang only at one end? Could the overhang have been caused by the bends to the cab, or even..........the bends to the footplate edges? The cab and bonnets were only roughly in place, and the cab hasn't been soldered up, either, pending a descision on the width, so the photos aren't a clear guide. It is possible that the folds themselves are slightly inaccurate, but they shouldn't make things that far out, surely?... I have to say that if Brian had to modify the cab width, with his skill as a loco builder, then I don't think it's just my amateur efforts causing the trouble here... The cab doors do have provision to be hinged and working, which I intend to try, at least. Finally the date on the kit etches is 1992, which is a while ago now, rather frighteningly... the kit has been through several maker's hands, as I understand, so it seems that it hasn't been updated, and later producers may not have actually made the kit themselves, therefore not realise there's an error?? I did look at a made-up one on the PRMRP stand at Telford in September, but I can't remember what the cab width looked like; it's only when you build something for yourself sometimes that things come to light... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
djparkins Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 Finally the date on the kit etches is 1992, which is a while ago now, rather frighteningly... the kit has been through several maker's hands, as I understand, so it seems that it hasn't been updated, and later producers may not have actually made the kit themselves, therefore not realise there's an error?? I did look at a made-up one on the PRMRP stand at Telford in September, but I can't remember what the cab width looked like; it's only when you build something for yourself sometimes that things come to light... I seem to recall that Jim Harris produced a Class 14 at around this time. Its possible that he sold it on to 'whoever' and it has ended up with the current owner. Also I think the late Colin Massingham [MTK] did an O gauge Class 14 - but as I recall, it was released some time before 1992. Those are the only two Class 14 kits I've ever heard of in 7mm, so it could well be the ex-Jim Harris kit. With Regards, David Parkins, Modern Motive Power Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 It is a pity that the current (or former) retailers of the kit are not on RMweb (visibly at least) to pass comment and respond to the mud we are slinging Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-UnitMad Posted November 18, 2009 Author Share Posted November 18, 2009 I seem to recall that Jim Harris produced a Class 14 at around this time. Its possible that he sold it on to 'whoever' and it has ended up with the current owner. Also I think the late Colin Massingham [MTK] did an O gauge Class 14 - but as I recall, it was released some time before 1992. Those are the only two Class 14 kits I've ever heard of in 7mm, so it could well be the ex-Jim Harris kit. Thanks, David. This has "PMK" on the etches; "Pocket Money Kits" I believe? Was that Jim's company? It is a pity that the current (or former) retailers of the kit are not on RMweb (visibly at least) to pass comment and respond to the mud we are slinging What's with the "we"...?!?!? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phill Dyson (onslaught832) Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 If my experience of the MTK class 22 is anything to go by , I would say it can't be the ex-MTK as the parts fit together reasonably well & it actualy looks like the prototype Phill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugsley Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 "Pocket Money Kits" I believe? Was that Jim's company? If memory serves me correctly, yes. That was one of his ranges, I think the other may have gone by the name of Acorn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
djparkins Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 If memory serves me correctly, yes. That was one of his ranges, I think the other may have gone by the name of Acorn. Looks like its one of Jim's then! I don't imagine he'll be watching in on this thread though, from his current location - which might well be sipping tequila in a bar somewhere in Spain! David Parkins Among gale force winds & driving rain - in west Wales!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crewe North Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 [Looks like its one of Jim's then! I don't imagine he'll be watching in on this thread though, from his current location - which might well be sipping tequila in a bar somewhere in Spain!/quote] I have heard that he's due to make a guest appearance on the Mercian Models (who have the 4mm scale class 14 kit, which'll be the 7mm one blown down) have the stand at the NEC at the weekend......perhaps it's raining in Spain and he's run out of tequila B) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwr Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 Pocket Money Kits was a joint venture between Jim Harris and Jim McGowen of Connoisseur Models. Big Jim acquired all of the range much of which is still in the current Connoissuer catalogue. They are great kits to build. Acorn was indeed one of JIm Harris's names - The Transport Age I think was another. I seem to recall that Jim's class 14 was not his design and he acquired it from sombody else; I really can't remember who although I do remember a red box! Several of his range came this way and I think he took over the old DA range of wagons and locos. Jim reworked the artwork and may have produced new castings. Certainly the West Country came this way as possibly did his WD 2-8-0 which was later sold on. Paul R Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-UnitMad Posted November 20, 2009 Author Share Posted November 20, 2009 I seem to recall that Jim's class 14 was not his design and he acquired it from sombody else; It would certainly appear to have a convoluted history!!! Whatever; so far I think it's a good kit. The Cab width error is minor, and more importantly, easily fixed- though I tend to agree with Kenton that (especially given my soldering skills) filing down the cab corners is an easier option than soldering extra width to the footplate... Nothing to add further build-wise, I'm afraid; real life has that nasty habit of getting in the way of more important things like this... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phill Dyson (onslaught832) Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 Nothing to add further build-wise, I'm afraid; real life has that nasty habit of getting in the way of more important things like this... Yes I've noticed that too lately on my workbench/layout :icon_sad:..........look forward to a bit more progress when you get a bit of spare time :icon_wink: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancer1027 Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Me too. As you can see (well not see in my case) not alot of workbench activity from me . Rob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-UnitMad Posted November 23, 2009 Author Share Posted November 23, 2009 I didn't have much time today, but a little progress always helps... The cab is now in 4 bits and the width filed down... it really isn't much but removing the overhang makes all the difference! One of the cab ends has a tab to fit a slot on the footplate, so starting with that piece, the B end bonnet and side boxes are starting to come together... Caution:- Comedy Soldering under way... I got a bit too much solder on the iron for the join between the box and bonnet :icon_rolleyes: :icon_redface: ... still, nothing that can't be cleaned up a bit later.... The bonnet ends are whitemetal with cast details, but there are etched details that can be fitted instead, so in the pic below, from left to right, is an original end piece, the other one with detail filed off, and the two etched pieces to be soldered in place (and the fan grille still on the same fret). Onwards and Upwards... :icon_winker: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 I got a bit too much solder on the iron for the join between the box and bonnet : It really doesn't show that much. Just a note about soldering - That is the technique I use for white metal soldering - add solder to iron, take hot iron with blob of low melt solder to the job and use it to fill the gap between bits of white metal. For brass soldering I use effectively a dry iron (just tinned and wiped clean of excess solder) then I take the iron to the join which already has a small sliver of solder (chipped off the wire) and a drop of flux (or I use a small dab of solder paste - which is self fluxed). touch the iron to the join heat travels flux boils solder melts and you get a join. For brass joins you only need enough to make the join not to fill it up. The strongest joins are with the least amount of solder. Try it, you should find you use less solder and consequently have less to clean up. [Ed] Those lumps of white metal are another disappointment with this kit - I thought they were internal weights to add a bit of mass (like lead from the church roof repair) detail what detail Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phill Dyson (onslaught832) Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Soldering looks fine to me too Jordan :icon_thumbsup2: , five minutes with a fibre pen will soon sort out a bit too much solder :icon_cool: . The only bad soldering is when the bits drop off afterwards Phill :icon_wave: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancer1027 Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Hi Jordan , Nice work. coming on slowly Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosspeacock Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Hello Jordan, The gear ratio is 40:1 build looks as if its going ok. (sent a PM on new forum) Ross :icon_thumbsup2: :icon_wave: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steph Dale Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 Jordan, Nice to see you're back at the bench - that Class 14 is coming along well. I started one of the PMK versions (same kit) a couple of years ago and it's still sitting there glaring at me from its box. I did get the chassis to run, but ran out of steam after taking umpty-ump photos of '555 at the Dean Forest Railway. Yep, a little knowledge can be dangerous (or cause the contents of your workbench to unravel before your eyes)... If you're interested in seeing some/all of the pics drop me a PM and I'll try and dig them out. And/or I can take some pics of my model as it stands. Steph Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.