Wright writes.....

[Jol Wilkinson]

53 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

The thing I don't understand is why somebody with your skill and ability and your preference for making things yourself, spends twice as much on a ready made gearbox that sticks out like a sore thumb under the boiler of some of your smaller locos.

 

They really are not difficult to make. I have had complete novices put one together at Missenden with a "Come and see me if you get stuck" and half an hour later they come to show me a finished, smooth running box, done with no help at all.

 

I don't understand why you regard then as requiring skill. Which bit do you mean? The two folds in the metal frame? Putting in the bearings? Or putting the gears on the shafts?

 

That is really all there is to them.

 

 

 

 

That's all that is required for most etched frame gearboxes but some people still get it wrong. I think it is a lack of what my old Physics Teacher called "uncommon sense". Too often people don't "think" about what has gone wrong when something doesn't work properly.

[LNER4479]

1 hour ago, polybear said:

 

Perhaps regard it as a challenge - a sponsored TW build to raise funds for CRUK?  If so then you can count me in.....

Throw in a swear box and we’ll make thousands…

[Jeepy]

2 hours ago, ScRSG said:

Or you can also use 100 degree solder which "sticks" to both brass and whitemetal, tend to keep the iron on the brass side and let it flow to the whitemetal with the flux.

 

Ahh! Another experiment to play with..... I get the feeling that may require a bit more care but well worth trying with the scrap material first if i can aquire some 100 degree solder, some fun experiments coming up! Thank you! 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

[Theakerr]

Mayflower, a loco I cabbed many times.  Bachmann late model body and chassis.  Rather than making a new chassis for a 'detailed' old Bachmann body on an old split frame chassis as you do Tony, i just replace the split chassis with the new chassis.   I do now have several tenders and bodies though.  Re the tender coal backplate when I was researching my Mayflower conversion I found it in both positions depending on the loco even on later totems based on photographs.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Theakerr
Wording clarification

[Tony Wright]

3 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

The thing I don't understand is why somebody with your skill and ability and your preference for making things yourself, spends twice as much on a ready made gearbox that sticks out like a sore thumb under the boiler of some of your smaller locos.

 

They really are not difficult to make. I have had complete novices put one together at Missenden with a "Come and see me if you get stuck" and half an hour later they come to show me a finished, smooth running box, done with no help at all.

 

I don't understand why you regard then as requiring skill. Which bit do you mean? The two folds in the metal frame? Putting in the bearings? Or putting the gears on the shafts?

 

That is really all there is to them.

 

 

 

 

When we next meet up Tony (if ever allowed) I'll show you a loco built with a High-Level 'box. Make sure you bring your ear defenders! 

 

The builder is not a novice, and the loco is very well-built (visually). 

 

If you see it, perhaps you'll explain, please, where he's gone wrong. 

 

I have one DJH-powered loco with a 'sore thumb'. If I use a DJH 'box now in, say, an 0-6-0 I drive off the rear axle. It requires a wee bit of metal removed off the bottom of the backhead, but by the time it's crewed, the 'box is all but invisible.  

 

 

The sore thumb! 

 

'Stung' by your criticisms (which were broadcast for all to read), I resolved to 'do better'.

 

 

So, in the next J6 build.............................. In fairness, I think this has a Comet 'box/Mashima combo (I forget), but the principle of 'invisibility' is the same. 

 

 

 

 

And the next one. It's easier to see (or not see) in this shot. 

 

 

I haven't come across an into-cab shot of one of my J6s, but I hope this J17 illustrates what I mean; being powered by a DJH AM10. 

 

If I may sum up, please?

 

DJH 'boxes are 'expensive' and potentially-visible in smaller prototypes. At the same time they're ready-made, take minutes to install and always (in my experience) run 'perfectly'.

 

High-Level 'boxes are superbly-engineered, are far cheaper than DJH's and beginners can make them, so that they also run 'perfectly'. However, for whatever reason (and this applies to all fold-up, make-yourself gearboxes in my experience) they can be assembled so that 'perfection' is not achieved.

 

I understand (and, I hope, respect) everything you say, and your constructive criticisms and observations are always taken on board. I also understand (seeing how I 'road-tested' the latest DJH motor/gearbox combinations) that I might appear to have a 'vested interest'. That said, I tested the new 'boxes by building locomotives around them - in the case of the AM9 (the big one) inside an A1 and in the case of the AM10 (the small one) inside a K1. Both performed (and continue to do so) perfectly, and they both run on Little Bytham (a V2, similarly-equipped with an AM9, now runs on Retford). I hope folk realise I will never recommend a product unless I'm thoroughly happy with it, and, in these cases use it (them) and continue to do so. 

 

I'll recommend High-Level 'boxes as well. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

Edited June 16, 2021 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Theakerr said:

Mayflower, a loco I cabbed many times.  Bachmann late model body and chassis.  Rather than making a new chassis for a 'detailed' old Bachmann body on an old split frame chassis as you do Tony, i just replace the split chassis with the new chassis.   I do now have several tenders and bodies though.  Re the tender coal backplate when I was researching my Mayflower conversion I found it in both positions depending on the loco even on later totems based on photographs.

Very nice.

 

I once made the foolish assumption (when writing captions for BRILL) that if a B1 had the later device on the tender, the rear coal division plate would be moved forward. Wrong! The same is true for V2s. 

 

I think it's safe to state (or is it?) that any B1 in LNER days would have a tender with the coal division plate towards the rear, spanning the pick-up dome. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[t-b-g]

20 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

When we next meet up Tony (if ever allowed) I'll show you a loco built with a High-Level 'box. Make sure you bring your ear defenders! 

 

The builder is not a novice, and the loco is very well-built (visually). 

 

If you see it, perhaps you'll explain, please, where he's gone wrong. 

 

I have one DJH-powered loco with a 'sore thumb'. If I use a DJH 'box now in, say, an 0-6-0 I drive off the rear axle. It requires a wee bit of metal removed off the bottom of the backhead, but by the time it's crewed, the 'box is all but invisible.  

 

 

The sore thumb! 

 

'Stung' by your criticisms (which were broadcast for all to read), I resolved to 'do better'.

 

 

So, in the next J6 build..............................

 

 

 

 

And the next one. It's easier to see (or not see) in this shot. 

 

 

I haven't come across an into-cab shot of one of my J6s, but I hope this J17 illustrates what I mean; being powered by a DJH GB10. 

 

If I may sum up, please?

 

DJH 'boxes are 'expensive' and potentially-visible in smaller prototypes. At the same time they're ready-made, take minutes to install and always (in my experience) run 'perfectly'.

 

High-Level 'boxes are superbly-engineered, are far cheaper than DJH's and beginners can make them, so that they also run 'perfectly'. However, for whatever reason (and this applies to all fold-up, make-yourself gearboxes in my experience) they can be assembled so that 'perfection' is not achieved.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

 

The J6s certainly look lots better with the revised arrangements Tony. I applaud you for changing your methods very much for the better.

 

You have mentioned problems with High Level Gearboxes put together by others. Have you ever put one together and had a problem with it yourself? I don't build nearly as many locos as you do probably no more than 70 or 80 in total but apart from using up a couple of Portescaps I had in stock the High Level boxes have been my first choice and I have genuinely never had a single problem with one. Every single one I have used has given me smooth running with no difficulty.

 

My philosophy is that if there is something wrong it has a cause. If there is a cause it can be traced and if it can be traced it can be put right. If a gearbox is noisy, something is causing it, very likely either gear mesh or a gear rubbing on a frame spacer, or perhaps Chris had accidentally popped the wrong gears in the packet. I have never known it but it must have happened some time.

 

Whatever it is, there has to be a cause and a fix for it but I would be astonished if the noisy one you mention is down to the design or manufacture of the box components. My guess would be a gear rubbing on a spacer or a brake hanger wire or suchlike. I had a problem like that once but it was my own fault not the gearbox. A few swipes with a file and all was well.

 

Hopefully I get to give it the "once over" sometime.

[Tony Wright]

Some time ago on here I posted pictures of some smashed-to-bits kit-built locos. They belong to Elaine of Elaine's trains (who gave me an excellent overall price today for some - several! - second-hand items; many thanks, Elaine). She'd been involved in a serious RTA on the way to a show and these locos suffered severe damage. Thankfully, she made a full recovery. 

 

After the insurance was sorted out, I've got them back now, and she's generously supporting CRUK by seeing what can be obtained for them. Luckily (as it happened) they were glued together, so, in many cases, they reverted to kits. Mechanically, several survived!

 

I'll be going through them, seeing what can be salvaged (there are many) and seeing what can be raised. Obviously, not a lot will be asked, but even if many are 'scrapped', things like motors/gears and wheels should have a 'residual' value. 

 

I'll post some pictures in due course.

 

She also left a PC kit-built LNER triplet diner (in teak) which I've checked and repaired. 50% of what it makes will go to CRUK. There's also a Kirk Quad-Art (again, in teak). I've checked and repaired this - some of the interior detail has come loose, but the roofs will come off. There's also a Chivers 'Pigeon' van, again in teak, which is very nice. Likewise, 50% of anything made on these will go to CRUK. 

 

I'll post pictures later this week for folk to see. 

 

Thanks once again, Elaine. 

[Tony Wright]

11 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

The J6s certainly look lots better with the revised arrangements Tony. I applaud you for changing your methods very much for the better.

 

You have mentioned problems with High Level Gearboxes put together by others. Have you ever put one together and had a problem with it yourself? I don't build nearly as many locos as you do probably no more than 70 or 80 in total but apart from using up a couple of Portescaps I had in stock the High Level boxes have been my first choice and I have genuinely never had a single problem with one. Every single one I have used has given me smooth running with no difficulty.

 

My philosophy is that if there is something wrong it has a cause. If there is a cause it can be traced and if it can be traced it can be put right. If a gearbox is noisy, something is causing it, very likely either gear mesh or a gear rubbing on a frame spacer, or perhaps Chris had accidentally popped the wrong gears in the packet. I have never known it but it must have happened some time.

 

Whatever it is, there has to be a cause and a fix for it but I would be astonished if the noisy one you mention is down to the design or manufacture of the box components. My guess would be a gear rubbing on a spacer or a brake hanger wire or suchlike. I had a problem like that once but it was my own fault not the gearbox. A few swipes with a file and all was well.

 

Hopefully I get to give it the "once over" sometime.

Thanks Tony,

 

I've built three HL 'boxes. Two in locos for myself and one for a friend. I didn't have the slightest difficulty with making any of them, and they all work beautifully-smoothly (and continue to do so). The only caveat I'd add on this is that one had the final gearwheel fixed to its axle with Loctite/superglue. Though it worked (works), I have to say I'm not happy with this arrangement for obvious reasons. I believe every HL 'box now has a grubscrew to retain the final drive. 

 

I'm sure the cause of the noise (racket!) in the one I mentioned is not due to the poor manufacture of components. But, in a way, it illustrates the point I was making. The 'cause' must be that it's assembled 'incorrectly' or (less likely) it's installed incorrectly. I suppose the way to check will be to take it out, but, I have to say, it's a long, long way down my list of priorities.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by Tony Wright

[Jack P]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

High-Level 'boxes are superbly-engineered, are far cheaper than DJH's and beginners can make them, so that they also run 'perfectly'. However, for whatever reason (and this applies to all fold-up, make-yourself gearboxes in my experience) they can be assembled so that 'perfection' is not achieved.

 

As a novice, who's built less locos than I have fingers, I've found the HL boxes to be nothing but endless simplicity. Even my very first was smooth and quiet after a little running in. 

I haven't been as lucky with comet gearboxes, or any of the others I've tried, especially single stage affairs.  

I definitely understand why it's preferential to use a gearbox/motor combo that is ready to drop in and works flawlessly. I personally can't justify the price of the DJH box, when a HL motor and gearbox is about half that. 

The other benefit, is the HL boxes come in so many different variations that you can find exactly the one you need to fit a specific protoype.

 

Of course though, when it's your time/efforts/shekels, you are able to make your own decisions, and I certainly understand your reasons for doing so!

[Tony Wright]

4 hours ago, Jack P said:

 

As a novice, who's built less locos than I have fingers, I've found the HL boxes to be nothing but endless simplicity. Even my very first was smooth and quiet after a little running in. 

I haven't been as lucky with comet gearboxes, or any of the others I've tried, especially single stage affairs.  

I definitely understand why it's preferential to use a gearbox/motor combo that is ready to drop in and works flawlessly. I personally can't justify the price of the DJH box, when a HL motor and gearbox is about half that. 

The other benefit, is the HL boxes come in so many different variations that you can find exactly the one you need to fit a specific protoype.

 

Of course though, when it's your time/efforts/shekels, you are able to make your own decisions, and I certainly understand your reasons for doing so!

I'm delighted that you've achieved success with building your HL gearboxes, Jack.

 

They clearly suit your needs, and before long you'll be counting the number of locos you've built on your toes as well. 

 

I'm not quite sure, but I must be beyond 500 locos built by now. Not as many as the renowned Mike Edge, of course, and nowhere near the 10,000 (yes!) claimed by one demonstrator at shows. Ever since DJH motor/gearboxes came out (25 years ago; more?), I've used them; not exclusively, but certainly for preference (originally, they were only supplied as kits). Inside a big loco, there are no issues of their being obtrusive. At least scores must be in locos I've built for customers, and more than 100 in my own which run on Little Bytham (I've just done the maths!). Several customers insisted on Portescaps, but, left with the decision, I've installed DJH 'boxes. None has ever failed, though the odd Mashima powering them has conked out. If configured correctly, because of DJH's method of securing the motor, the duds can be changed without recourse to removing the 'box (this isn't always the case with other 'boxes, where the bottom-fixing screw for the motor is totally inaccessible without removing the whole thing, including the worm). 

 

Having only ever built three HL 'boxes, my terms of reference are more (much more) limited, though, as I mentioned to Tony Gee, I've had complete success with them. I've also had 'success' with other 'boxes, but only after a lot of fiddling in some cases. Fiddling to ensure that they're quiet; something extremely difficult to do in many single-stage combinations. 

 

As you intimate, to me, the ability to open a packet, check that all is well, lightly ream bearings/gearwheels (something I do as a matter of course with every chassis/drive I make) and just drop-in a drive (in ten minutes) is worth the price.

 

 

A drop-in, just like this; in the new B1 frames I'm making. Brand new and not having run more than a few feet, I'll let Graham Nicholas comment (if he wishes to) on how sweetly it ran.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[Clem]

9 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

think it's safe to state (or is it?) that any B1 in LNER days would have a tender with the coal division plate towards the rear, spanning the pick-up dome. 

I think they started fitting the new arrangement about 1955. My recent K3 conversion (61833) has the later - and incorrect - version. I fitted about 1980 before I knew all the subtle differences you could find within classes. 61379 Mayflower was common as muck around Nottingham even though she was an Immingham engine but for some reason or another I always missed seeing her. I never did. I've heard she was a bit of a duff one.

[Clem]

33 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I'm not quite sure, but I must be beyond 500 locos built by now. Not as many as the renowned Mike Edge, of course, and nowhere near the 10,000 (yes!) claimed by one demonstrator at shows.

10,000!!! Building at one per day that would take getting on towards thirty years. I think he might have some trouble with numbers..... or a very active imagination.

[dibateg]

Bristol models B1... I never did manage to complete mine and it too ended up being chopped up for ballast weight. None of the sub assemblies, boiler, cab, frames etc seemed to be able to fit to each other....

 

I'm lucky enough to be able to build better B1s these days, this will be 61264 from the 7mm scale DJH/Piercy kit.

 

An interesting discussion regarding gearboxes, the vast majority of mine are ready made - ABC or MSC. I've only made up a handful of kits where those motor/gearbox assemblies won't fit. I don't like doing them, which is curious, as I should be quite capable!

 

Tony

 

[MarkC]

I too like the HL gearboxes - and the gearboxes in the chassis kits produced by 52F Models (Peter Stanger), which are basically the same setup, are superb. Indeed, the two 52F chassis I've built, an A8 and a H1, are probably the nicest kits I've ever had the pleasure of using.

 

I put together an Alan Gibson gearbox (now discontinued) with a DS10 motor, in preparation for a build for someone which sadly never happened. Not sure what it will eventually go in though. (I've another, unassembled, AG gearbox somewhere, but again, will it be used?) From memory,they're 38:1 gears, which is a bit high for my present requirements.

 

Mark

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Clem said:

10,000!!! Building at one per day that would take getting on towards thirty years. I think he might have some trouble with numbers..... or a very active imagination.

Quite agree Clem,

 

Sadly, he's now died, so we'll never no the truth of the matter (though dropping off a zero is probably nearer the mark..............)

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Brit70053]

 

On Tuesday at 20:49 Tony Wright said :"     The body has been nicely weathered (it might have even been renumbered/renamed - did Bachmann ever make 61002?), so I decided to make a 'proper' job of it. 

 

                 I've just tried to 'speed read' catching up on the thread after a day out yesterday, so apologies if I've overlooked any reply to Tony's question about Bachmann making a model of 61002.

 

                 They did produce a model of IMPALA as one of their earliest releases of the B1 Class and it was in the attractive early 'BR'/ LNER Green livery  with 'BRITISH RAILWAYS' in full on the tender. 

I was bought one for whichever distant birthday, but it initially didn't live up to the 'Super Smooth' running which was a heavily promoted selling point of these split chassis models. Despite all my attempts to resolve this, the running was never good and eventually the model suffered what could only be described s a catastrophic failure when a piece of chassis casting near the motor / worm/ gear cracked clean away from the main casting, allowing the motor to come out of it's location.

                  More in desperation than realistic hope I sent it to Bachmann's service department enquiring if they could effect a repair at cost.

I was more than delighted when I received a complete replacement Chassis free of charge and this is still running reasonably well all these years later, even though I have had to deal with the 'bowed plastic driving wheel inserts' (not the axle 'centres/muffs) which are seemingly one of the common problems with these models.

 

Regards,

 

                John

 

 

[Tony Wright]

As mentioned yesterday, I have some more items for sale. 

 

They might well have originated from a deceased modeller, and they're for sale now, with 50% of any proceeds going to CRUK. 

 

 

A Kirk Quad-Art. Some of the interior detail (seats/partitions) is loose in these, but the roofs will come off with persuasion. 

 

 

A PC dining triplet. 

 

As with the Quad-Art, I've conducted minor repairs on this set (footboards, trussing, gangways, bogies,etc) and both now run well (as 'layout carriages'). 

 

 

And a Chivers 'pigeon' van.

 

Anyone interested, please PM me with what you think is a reasonable offer. The Kirk kits are no longer available (are they?) and the PC ones are long gone. I think the Chivers one might be still current. 

 

Thanks in anticipation.

 

I have some chums coming over soon to run LB, so I won't be responding immediately. 

 

 

[MarkC]

4 hours ago, Clem said:

10,000!!! Building at one per day that would take getting on towards thirty years. I think he might have some trouble with numbers..... or a very active imagination.

Who was the prolific kit builder of this parish, a few years ago? Was it Metropolitan? He seemed to rattle through his builds, but even he couldn't compete with that output rate...

 

Mark

 

[jrg1]

5 hours ago, Clem said:

I think they started fitting the new arrangement about 1955. My recent K3 conversion (61833) has the later - and incorrect - version. I fitted about 1980 before I knew all the subtle differences you could find within classes. 61379 Mayflower was common as muck around Nottingham even though she was an Immingham engine but for some reason or another I always missed seeing her. I never did. I've heard she was a bit of a duff one.

Mayflower had a reputation for running hotboxes.

[Barclay]

On 16/06/2021 at 14:07, Norton961 said:

Re building Jidenco wagon kits, yes some can be built into a decent model, but the first hurdle to cross is that as supplied for vans and CCTs the sides are full length and the ends full width so the don’t fold up into a box! The solution is to break off the ends, trim, clean up and then solder to the folded up sides. The etches were drawn out by a person who had no concept of assembly. 
The under frames and castings can usually be consigned to the bin.

 

David

So that's why I had to squeeze mine in a vice to make it the correct width !

 

And replace the underframe, and the buffers, and the doors, and the roof.....

 

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, MarkC said:

Who was the prolific kit builder of this parish, a few years ago? Was it Metropolitan? He seemed to rattle through his builds, but even he couldn't compete with that output rate...

 

Mark

 

I won't say, Mark,

 

Because he's now died and it would be insensitive in the extreme. The 10,000 figure came up in conversation over dinner at a Chinese restaurant in St. Albans, several years ago now. All the others at the table just rolled their eyes. One of those moments when you know someone is rather bullsh!tting! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited June 17, 2021 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Tony Wright]

Some interesting items to photograph today....................

 

 

Built from a Judith Edge kit, this NE electric (what's its wheel-arrangement - 4-2-2-2-4?) was a first on Little Bytham. 

 

I'm told, a splendid kit!

 

 

And this SR push-pull set, modified from Bachmann RTR items.

 

Thanks for bringing these, Ian.

 

 

[Tony Wright]

Glad to say, everything I offered for sale on here this morning appears to have been sold.

 

Raising a fair bit for CRUK. 

[Michael Edge]

Thanks for showing the picture of No.13 - how is this one powered? The wheel arrangement was 2-Co-2, separate motors on each driven axle.