Jump to content
 

Bachmann Stanier mogul


Sam*45110*SVR
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'd also want to experiment with very slightly lowering the cylinders, they look a mite high to me. If it's Bach's usual construction, this would be a doddle and fully reversible. (It probably is correct, but fiddle, fiddle, fiddle, until convinced.)

Cylinders, and driving wheels on the same centre line, bottom of cylinder at the same height (ish) of the centre line of the leading wheel. Set your model at either end of cylinder 'stroke', and look. :sungum:

Edited by bike2steam
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Midland Mole

SM002.jpg

SM016.jpg

 

That was the result from using auto colour in Photo Gallery, that bog standard editor. I will look at getting some better editing software at some point.

Thanks for the advice everyone, but I'm no happier really as I still think my photography skills are god awful! :D

 

Bach to the loco, the only thing I don't know about it is how it runs. I really must get a oval of track put up at some point so I can actually test/run in my engines. :)

Alex

Edited by Midland Mole
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to hear the sound decoder(s) being recommended for the Stanier Mogul. Guesswork instead of research haunts some producers! The sound should basically be a Stanier 5MT/8F with a MR 4F shrill whistle.

I'd have thought someone has a recording of the SVR one to use? If not, I think I read the SVR is overhauling the mogul in the next couple of years

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

The first thirty had a Midland-type “bell” whistle, but a Stanier Caledonian-type hooter was fitted to the final ten.

Interesting. My book are out of the ark, so 'Stanier Locomotives' By Haresnape (1981) states : One interesting point is that this class had whistles fitted instead of the characteristic Caledonian bass siren used on all other Stanier engines.

 

Illustrated History of LMS Locomotives by Jenkinson & Essery (1989) states :  Few, if any, were fitted with the characteristic Stanier hooter......

 

So it appears there is more up-to-date information out there...?

Edited by coachmann
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm disappointed to say the least! Picked mine up this afternoon and rushed home, fitted a chip and proceeded to 'run it in' and that's where the problems began. Straight away it was evident there was a clicking noise as it running, closer inspection showed it do be coming from the radius rod and combination link which was moving up and down rather than swing to and fro... so remove the chip, race back to the shop and exchanged it for another, back home fit chip... no click this time but definitely play / movement from the same place.

This one runs smoother and quieter but it doesn't look right in motion and I think for £135 it ought to be so tomorrow it will be back to the shop again, this time for a refund!

Link to post
Share on other sites

...there was a clicking noise as it running, closer inspection showed it do be coming from the radius rod and combination link which was moving up and down rather than swing to and fro... so remove the chip, race back to the shop and exchanged it for another, back home fit chip... no click this time but definitely play / movement from the same place...

 

 One tight rivet in the linkages - expansion link/radius rod/combination lever/connecting link - is all that's required to produce these kind of effects.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After letting the 2nd model run in a little, it does seem to have improved and is much better than the first (which had a loud clicking) although I'm still not 100% happy with it.

 

I've taken a couple of videos of each side running at the same speed (ss17/128).

 

https://youtu.be/1axCI13zACQ

 

https://youtu.be/-5ykCaVnkdQ

 

Please feel free to comment or compare to others, I need to know if I'm being picky or if there is indeed an issue with joint of the radius rod / combination lever.

Nathan

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

After letting the 2nd model run in a little, it does seem to have improved and is much better than the first (which had a loud clicking) although I'm still not 100% happy with it.

I've taken a couple of videos of each side running at the same speed (ss17/128).

https://youtu.be/1axCI13zACQ

https://youtu.be/-5ykCaVnkdQ

Please feel free to comment or compare to others, I need to know if I'm being picky or if there is indeed an issue with joint of the radius rod / combination lever.

Nathan

It would help if you ran it around your track in both directions rather than sit it on a rolling road.That might allow the gears and motion to properly bed in. Edited by Ian Hargrave
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would help if you ran it around your track in both directions rather than sit it on a rolling road.That might allow the gears and motion to properly bed in.

OK, I can give that ago.

 

Just to clarify, the issue is the combination lever lifting up the radius rod slightly rather than swinging back and forth

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

OK, I can give that ago.

 

Just to clarify, the issue is the combination lever lifting up the radius rod slightly rather than swinging back and forth

I think it's the way Bachmann try to get everything in prototypical bits. My Ivatt 4 does the same because the valve rod doesn't have anything to adt as guides at the back end and two valve piston discs at the front end to keep it in line. Hornby always used to 'Design Clever' by having the radius arm as a fixed bit of metal so it so it couldn't go anywhere

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Chatting with a friend who has bought one, he said it's a fabulous model but the LMS lettering on the tender is off centre towards the back and the font is wrong and too small. Luckily it isn't printed, but a transfer so it's fairly easy to remove.

 

Is he sure? - I mean there are prototype photos of Bullied's Q1 class showing the lettering positioned off centre on some, but not all of the locos. I believe there were also differences with the lettering styles used by Crewe and Derby works even in Stanier's day - so are we sure the lettering is wrong for this particular loco.

 

In any case, I severely doubt Bachmann are using 'transfers' - the lettering on the tender will be Tamp printed - just like all the other lining, builders plates etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chatting with a friend who has bought one, he said it's a fabulous model but the LMS lettering on the tender is off centre towards the back and the font is wrong and too small. Luckily it isn't printed, but a transfer so it's fairly easy to remove.

 

After 1927, the positioning of L-M-S on the tender varied, mainly to avoid them being placed over rivets, which lead to early fraying. On rivetted Fowler tenders, it was impossible to avoid rivet lines and maintain the general rule of M over the centre axle and L/S spaced equally on either side, so the M was offset from the centre, and L/S spaced accordingly, but also avoiding rivets. There is a good picture of the variations in Essery and Jenkins LMS Locomotives volume 1 on p196, and a photo of 2979 and tender on p161.

Before 1927, lettering was generally placed to achieve overall horizontal and vertical proportionality, which meant that the rivet lines were ignored.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chatting with a friend who has bought one, he said it's a fabulous model but the LMS lettering on the tender is off centre towards the back and the font is wrong and too small. Luckily it isn't printed, but a transfer so it's fairly easy to remove.

fig_4a11.jpg

This is the real tender behind 13245, but more likely 13265. The LMS was offset upwards and rearwards to clear the lines of rivets. The lettering was gold with counter shading, i.e. two shades of red for side and bottom of the digits.

Edited by LMS2968
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, according to the book ' The book of the Hughes & Stanier 2-6-0' by the RCTS.

'The engines were painted black, and lined out in red, with 10" gold numbers, and 14" letters 'LMS' spaced at 40", positioned slightly to the rear of the tender to avoid the rivets. None of the class have been recorded in the short-lived 1936 livery, which was never used at Horwich where the class were shopped. In 1937 a new livery appeared with the characters in chrome yellow shaded vermillion. Wartime saw the omission of the red lining. Only 10 of the class received the written 'British Railways' livery, but all received the mixed traffic lining of cream, red, and grey lining.'

 

I have a list of the ten if anyone needs it. :sungum:   

Link to post
Share on other sites

As mentioned in my previous post No 157, 42968 was used on a Wigan area railtour on 13 August 1966.   http://www.sixbellsjunction.co.uk/

 

Photos here on Wigan World website.

 

http://www.wiganworld.co.uk/album/photo.php?opt=5&id=24315&gallery=Central+Station&offset=0

 

Brit15

Edited by APOLLO
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Further info from the same book, that some might find useful. In November 1963 Horwich deferred responsibility of the class to Swindon due to the run-down to closure, only 8 were dealt with there (42945/53/4/8/61/75/8/83 ), and running in turns were freight trips to Westbury, probably the extreme south-westerly for the use of thee class .

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...