Stevelewis Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 Steve- I'm sorry but not entirely surprised to hear this. I'm afraid I'm a sceptic and when I read that you were buying a third I considered placing a bet on it failing.......seriously though, is there some suggestion that the motion is assembled using an adhesive of some sort? I must have missed that in the thread! When N0.3 fell to pieces in the motion area I had a good look at the way the pin was retained on the crank from the extended centre axle, using magnifying glass etc and very bright light. but I could not see anything at all it looked like a push fit, (I checked to see if any sort of retaining clip had fallen off but nothing found). It was reported sometime ago when the valve gear failures started to occur that the pivot pins were secured with adhesive, the latest theory is that the lubrication which is applied at the factory (and they do seem to lubricate as far as I can tell) seems to cause the adhesive to lose its grip over time , it is particularly noticeable that all my failures have occurred on the left hand valve gear and 2 or 3 others I know of were the same left side failures, the locos were packed on receipt facing the left side of the box, so this would indicate that the adhesive on the left side would be affected more than the right hand side as gravity would draw the right hand side adhesive down and away from the valve gear, This assumes that the locos in their individual boxes are packed in to shipping cartons left side up,( which is the case in the one I saw in a retailer). We probably will never really know what the problem was caused by, but it is sad to note that there are thousands of M&W size steam locos in use in N Gauge around the world and valve gear failure on such a large scale as the MW is unheard of (correct me if I am wrong) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Smith Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 Adhesive is used quite a lot in industry, aerospace was my area before retirement. There could be several reasons for an adhesive joint failure, sometimes in combination. Components must be properly cleaned. An appropriate one or two part adhesive used. There must be sufficient contact area for the expected loads. The adhesive must be cured correctly, also, and maybe relevant in this case, the adhesive should not be susceptible to attack by likely contaminants. There might also be aging issues. All this might sound a bit exotic for a model engine but something is obviously wrong and it may be adhesive related. Variability, ie some fail some don't, could even be incorrect assembly by one individual. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted September 30, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 30, 2017 Steve and I had a chat about this the other day and it does appear to be a assembly process failure rather than actual physical design. I also had a chat with Andrew Burnham today and it's been a real mixed bag with a pile of random failures but not as excessive percentage wise as first it appeared, these haven't been returned en mass but slightly more than usual failure rate hence the change of supplier so you can read into that there's been a subsequent issue too. Thanks to Steve's photos proving the pin is sliding out rather than ripping out by twisting either there's not enough adhesive / tolerance holding the pin or it's the wrong kind. Bemo Ge4/4-3's drive failures are down to them not splining or loctiting the shaft into the Delrin joint so it's not the only manufacturer to have issues, all 5 I had failed at one or both ends and had to be loctited. Cheap superglue isn't good enough if oil and grease are around, you need a proper loctite type securing it, so it may also be contamination on the pieces as they are assembled preventing it sticking well and working loose easier which I find more likely than it seeping in with those tight fits. Anyway Heljan have come up with a solution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 Adhesive is used quite a lot in industry, aerospace was my area before retirement. There could be several reasons for an adhesive joint failure, sometimes in combination. Components must be properly cleaned. An appropriate one or two part adhesive used. There must be sufficient contact area for the expected loads. The adhesive must be cured correctly, also, and maybe relevant in this case, the adhesive should not be susceptible to attack by likely contaminants. There might also be aging issues. All this might sound a bit exotic for a model engine but something is obviously wrong and it may be adhesive related. Variability, ie some fail some don't, could even be incorrect assembly by one individual. Totally off the subject but sort of related, I have heard that 2 part adhesives are used to help fit aircraft wings? One tends to get quite a few tall stories in my locality from workers at Airbus Industries ( Aerospace) whose Broughton ( Hawarden) wing facility is but 5 miles away! We experience several Beluga loads of wings flying over our house every week at 1500', even after 20 years of the Belugas existence I still go into the Garden to watch them, wife thinks I am daft! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Smith Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 Other people could probably answer with more up to date information as mine is limited to engines but certainly two part adhesive has been used for aluminium to aluminium bonding in the past in wing and fuselage construction. I've no idea how airliner wings are attached but smaller busjets are attached by close tollerance bolts ie bolts with a very tight fitting diameter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 (edited) One thing that I hadn't realised until seeing the latest photos, is that the coupling rods only appear to join the middle and rear wheels - is that correct? Presumably this is because of lack of space. If I understand it correctly, the wheels are gear driven so the whole motion could be a static etch, for all the difference it would make on THAT score Edited October 1, 2017 by rockershovel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 One thing that I hadn't realised until seeing the latest photos, is that the coupling rods only appear to join the middle and rear wheels - is that correct? Presumably this is because of lack of space. If I understand it correctly, the wheels are gear driven so the whole motion could be a static etch, for all the difference it would make on THAT score No loco to check now! but as far as I recall the coupling rods linked all wheels being jointed at the centre axle crank, only 2 axles are gear driven from memory these at the centre & rear ones, any one with a loco please check to confirm this!! Further photo of my now returned number 3 atached Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted October 1, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 1, 2017 (edited) Rods are on all three axles see post #775 photo Edited October 1, 2017 by PaulRhB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pre Grouping fan Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 No loco to check now! but as far as I recall the coupling rods linked all wheels being jointed at the centre axle crank, only 2 axles are gear driven from memory these at the centre & rear ones, any one with a loco please check to confirm this!! Further photo of my now returned number 3 atached Locos are driven from rear two axles. So far mine is ok but only brief tests until I build/ have access to a layout to run properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Rods are on all three axles see post #775 photo Yes, I see it now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibber25 Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 One thing that I hadn't realised until seeing the latest photos, is that the coupling rods only appear to join the middle and rear wheels - is that correct? Presumably this is because of lack of space. If I understand it correctly, the wheels are gear driven so the whole motion could be a static etch, for all the difference it would make on THAT score The movement of the rods and motion is one of the distinctive features of the L&B Manning Wardles. A static etch certainly would not do - particularly on a model costing nearly £200. On test, so far, mine is OK. I spoke to an exhibitor at Woody Bay who had one on his layout and he has had no problems so far. A retailer to whom I spoke sold eight of them and has had none back. (CJL) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Legend Posted October 17, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 17, 2017 (edited) Yet post #852 suggests otherwise, so not comprehensive I think. Maybe bad and good batches out there. But then there's Heljan decision to use another manufacturer, so there must be something fundamentally deficient. Edited October 17, 2017 by Legend Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 (edited) The movement of the rods and motion is one of the distinctive features of the L&B Manning Wardles. A static etch certainly would not do - particularly on a model costing nearly £200. On test, so far, mine is OK. I spoke to an exhibitor at Woody Bay who had one on his layout and he has had no problems so far. A retailer to whom I spoke sold eight of them and has had none back. (CJL) It is a strange thing with these, I had 3 failures 2 from 1 retailer, who had 12 delivered and 8 or 9 returns, my 3rd was from another retailer, personally I have had no financial loss due to these 3 failures, as I have posted previously the failures all occurred at different lengths of running times ( Actual use on continuous run layout) the first occurred at around 5 hours running time,, the second one at around 20 hours running time and third just 15 minutes, all failures occurred when the locos were traversing an approx. 13.5" radius curve , and all on the left hand side. A friend of mine had one which lasted a week in use running every evening for 1 to 2 hours, whilst a friend of his bought a MW which covered 6" then the motion fell off again both left side failures ( see earlier posts re adhesive and lubrication interaction) I am aware that the retailer who sold me my 3rd one also sold one to another RMWeb member around the same time, his also failed! Re Dibber 25's comment re motion I agree that the loco MUST have a reasonable representation of the valve gear to command the asking price which no doubt will be even higher than £200 when the revised production eventually arrives which although stated as Q1 18, in some views is optimistic. Edited October 17, 2017 by Stevelewis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted October 26, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2017 We had an operating session on Tim Couling's Clyre Valley Railway yesterday so I took Yeo along for a run. I think this confirms it'll be worth waiting for the revised models. 16 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 Its always good to view inspirational photos such as these, I am sure many like myself get a little 'spurred on' when we see them Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted October 29, 2017 Share Posted October 29, 2017 That really captures the look and feel of narrow gauge, to me. Quite exceptional composition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul.Uni Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 (edited) According to Hattons, Heljan have announced models of Lew and Lyd. Both will be avilable in Southern Green, with Lyd also avilable is plan black and BR Black. Edited November 27, 2017 by Paul.Uni Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted November 27, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 27, 2017 I wonder why they had nothing about that in the cabinet with the locos at Warley? It's been hearsay for a while they were working on the options because of the good orders but nothing official so far direct from them Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidM Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 I wonder why they had nothing about that in the cabinet with the locos at Warley? It's been hearsay for a while they were working on the options because of the good orders but nothing official so far direct from them Like this? In the cabinet on Sunday Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivegreen Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 All that makes me wonder where those of us who have ordered 'Taw' (at a supposedly guaranteed pre-order price) stand. When and if 'Taw' appears, I'll believe it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted November 27, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 27, 2017 Like this? In the cabinet on Sunday DE5B875E-2B0B-4157-BE96-075C32E0B696.jpeg Ah now that explains it as there was Exe on her own on that shelf! The rest must have been nabbed for photography, I thought she looked a bit lonely! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Chris Chewter Posted November 27, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 27, 2017 Ah now that explains it as there was Exe on her own on that shelf! The rest must have been nabbed for photography, I thought she looked a bit lonely! I presume that was the 9953 release of Exe rather than a re-release of the 9951 SR green version. I can't help but feel disappointed. Exe in SR green was released in very limited numbers, and Taw appears to have completely dropped off the radar (Its certainly no longer on the Hattons website as far as I can see!), I feel frustrated that Heljan are concentrating on new releases of the Manning Wardle when orders on existing variants are still pending and left in limbo. Looks like I better pre-order an SR green Yeo before that sells out, but presently there's no guarantee that even Yeo will arrive! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 (edited) I agree Capn'A ..................... I had three MWs but all gone back faulty ages ago now and frankly i have lost the desire to build a L&B themed 009 layout now, so its a case of something completly differnt (ish) I am not saying that I wont buy a new version Heljan L&B loco though just the one though, may even re-livery it if and when they eventually arrive! Edited November 27, 2017 by Stevelewis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Roy Langridge Posted November 27, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 27, 2017 (edited) Could somebody who has one of these still, please let me know the length of them over the couplings please? Thanks in advance, Roy Edited November 27, 2017 by Roy Langridge Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted November 27, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 27, 2017 Could somebody who has one of these still, please let me know the length of them over the couplings please? Thanks in advance, Roy 105mm over couplings. As I understand it the original three are still being made at the new factory followed by the next batch. Some never arrived at all in the first batch. My pre orders for the SR liveried pair Taw & Exe are still valid according to Hattons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now