Jump to content
Izzy

Farish Jinty & 4F - 2FS & DCC - with stay-alive

Recommended Posts

Recently I bought a Farish Jinty. As others are also looking at and undertaking conversion of these newer models with split-chassis construction and coreless motors to 2FS, and there are some uncertainties as to the actual construction and parts dimensions, alongside the best methods of conversion, I thought I would start a thread dealing with this particular model. I have included as many dimensions as possible for those that might find them useful.

 

It's a nice loco, and weighs about the same as the Farish 08 at around 40gms thanks to the footplate and side tanks/bunker being metal castings. The wheels are 9.5mm and the wheelbase 16.5mm x 17.5mm. The coreless motor is 7mm x 16mm and the gear reduction is 47-1. It runs very nicely under DC, but issues have been encountered when attempting to fit a decoder to run under DCC, which I will detail at a later stage for anyone interested.

 

Removal of the wheels is quick and easy. Undo three screws, remove the keeper plate, (on which are the brakes, outside brake rods, NEM coupling sockets, and guard irons), and the wheels can be lifted out. 

 

post-12706-0-37202900-1393599782.jpg

 

Here is a shot of the wheels before removal. There are circular flanges on the rear of the square bearings which locate in slots to retain them in place.

 

post-12706-0-28529900-1393599959.jpg

 

And another shot of the chassis showing the slots where the bearings fit. You may also just spot the drive gear peeking out in the middle rear of the central axle slots. This engages with the 15 tooth gear on the middle axle. This is of the standard Farish gear size, is 5mm OD, and a significant factor in the 2FS conversion possibilities. The chassis, assembled, has an overall width of 6.3mm.

 

Also arrowed here are the two clips on the smokebox moulding retaining the front of it in place on the footplate which need releasing when removing the body for decoder fitting.

 

post-12706-0-05612000-1393600880.jpg

 

 

 

The coupling rods are retained on the wheels by what appear to be 14ba hexagon headed bolts. Despite their small size they look large on the model, as do the rods. I find using small flat faced tweezers best for undoing these.

 

 

post-12706-0-33134600-1393601016.jpg

 

 

These are the wheels, axles, and bearings after removing one wheel from an axle. The new wheel design is an adaptation of the previous one and achieved by adding a boss of 2.9mm diameter and 2mm length to the rear of the casting. This is set in about 0.3mm from the rear tyre face. The axles are plain shafted 1.15mm diameter. The plastic insulating bushes are thus about twice the length of before, and help to ensure truer running wheels as well as making it easier to remove/replace them on the axles. This I found, is best achieved by gently twisting them on the axles.

 

post-12706-0-63455800-1393601136.jpg

 

The bearings are phosphor bronze, 1.5mm thick, with a 3mm bore. The figure over flats 3.95mm. The circular rear flange portion is 5mm diameter, and 0.5mm wide. The square portion is thus 1.0mm wide. Inner bore faces and the outside of the flange are chamfered.

 

post-12706-0-47464900-1393601530.jpg

 

 

The wheels are an easy running fit in the bearings, and the bearings a loose fit in the chassis. It's all very sloppy. Despite, or perhaps because of this, running qualities are very good, and current collection doesn't seem an issue even without the benefit of 'Simpson' springs.

 

 

On the face of it there would appear to be two main methods of conversion to 2FS. Machine the current wheels to reduce the flange width so they pass through 2FS flangeways with ease and re-set to the 2FS 8.5mm b-t-b. Or replace with 2FS wheels. Neither can be achieved without modification to the bearings, whilst the latter option brings additional issues with it of what diameter muffs can be used and either finding a suitable replacement 15 tooth final drive gear or adapting the current one, either of which also directly affects what size muffs can be used because of the 5mm OD.

 

Taking all this into consideration, and as new couplings rods of the correct size would have to be obtained as well if 2FS wheels were used, and I don't know if they exist, I elected to try the first method since it would cost nothing, (as I have the means to undertake it), and being non-destructive it should be possible to re-set the loco to N standards if it didn't work out.......and if it did, then I could go on from there should I wish.

 

I'll detail the conversion in the next post.

 

Izzy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Izzy
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That makes two of us then John!

 

Thank you Izzy for posting this.

 

M :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what its worth, here is my plan (or rather two plans) of how I will convert mine once it arrives.

 

Option 1 - basically what Nigel Hunt has done. Bore out the bearings to 3.2mm (yes I do own a 3.2mm drill!) insert the Association drive bearings 3-112 into the hole, probably filing a bit off the back to allow the muff to be a bit longer. Use 3mm muffs (If I am lucky) or 2.3mm muffs and Association wheels. Coupling rods from my Farish Jinty etched chassis. With this method, the wheels can be fitted to the muffs and quartered before putting them into the chassis.

 

Option 2 - Uses the frames from the Jinty etched replacement chassis as overlays. With the frame bushes (3-113) it is designed for, these are also 3.15mm (1/8") O/D so fit into the Farish bearings as well once bored out. This method requires the wheels to be fitted and quaretered into the chassis, but allows the use of the etched brakeblocks and brake rods provided to replace the Farish ones.

 

Both methods depend on the wheel spacing of the Farish chassis to be accurate to 1/148 scale to match the coupling rods, although the second method is more amenable to correcting that.

 

I rather suspect the gear will be a metric one (Dapol use M0.3) and so a replacement could be ordered from the same supplier the Association use.

 

Chris

Edited by Chris Higgs
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the face of it there would appear to be two main methods of conversion to 2FS. Machine the current wheels to reduce the flange width so they pass through 2FS flangeways with ease and re-set to the 2FS 8.5mm b-t-b. Or replace with 2FS wheels. Neither can be achieved without modification to the bearings, whilst the latter option brings additional issues with it of what diameter muffs can be used and either finding a suitable replacement 15 tooth final drive gear or adapting the current one, either of which also directly affects what size muffs can be used because of the 5mm OD.

 

 

You need to take care that if you move the wheels out on the axles, that they then do not foul the outside brake rods.

 

I would suspect you can get way with the adjusted wheels still running the the bearings, albeit towards the outer edge.

 

Chris

Edited by Chris Higgs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that perhaps I should explain at this juncture that I decided to obtain a Jinty as it was a loco with no traction tyres. Originally I had intended to get an Ivatt 2-6-0, or perhaps a WD 2-8-0, but when I discovered the fitment of traction tyres, (which I have disliked intensely since I first encountered them in the early 1970's), and meant that the only course for me would be to re-wheel with 2mmSA wheels - then a totally unknown option, their purchase was abandoned.

 

This is how I have undertaken the conversion

 

The Farish wheels were machined by removing 0.2mm from the rear tyre faces. This was carried out using a little Sieg 0 'baby' lathe with the wheels held in a ER 16 collet chuck using a 10mm collet. Many won't have access to a lathe of any description, but getting this little one has proved quite useful as it is quite light (15kgs), small, and quiet, and has enabled me to use it on my indoor portable workbench - an old metal framed computer stand - in the warm, and also see what I am doing through a magnifying light now that my eyesight isn't what it once was. It's just the right size for 2mm work, and much better than standing in a coldish shed at my main lathe and milling machine during the winter months.

 

I have read of as much as 0.3mm being removed from some Farish wheels, but I believe some care is needed here as the actual dimensions of the castings seems to vary from wheel to wheel, and so the amount needs varying accordingly. Certainly, at this stage, I discovered that as well as two wheel castings being used due to the different balance weight locations - those on the centre drivers being by the crank, the others opposite -  the castings were also dimensionally different. The centre ones being the standard 2.2mm width while the outers were 1.9mm wide and with a tyre profile much closer to that of 2FS than usual. As the centre castings had wider tyres but with deeper set spokes, I also managed to remove 0.2mm from their outer tyre faces so they ended up as 1.8mm wide, the others being 1.7mm. Ideally I would have liked to reduce them all to at least 1.5mm maximum, as I managed with my 03/04/08 diesel shunters, but this did not prove possible. Every 0.1mm reduction in width makes a considerable difference in looks. 2FS wheels are of course 1.3mm in width and look so very much the better for it.

 

Here they are just being tried on the axles without the bearings to check all's correct.

 

post-12706-0-19258900-1393791431.jpg

 

 

Having machined the wheels the next point to consider was increasing the width of the bearings. The general opinion is that 0.5mm needs adding to the outside faces to prevent the wheel stubs falling out of them when set to the 8.5mm b-t-b. Not having any suitable phosphor bronze material, or being confident that I could add anything on the outside and also match the internal bore size well enough, (the bore chamfer making it impossible to get a smooth bore), I decided instead to reverse the bearings, so the original flange was on the outside, and add some more flanges from brass on the inside. These I made to 5mm OD, and 3.5mm ID to clear the chamfer, and soldered them in place on the front faces, which then became the backs.

 

These are the machined brass washers and the finished adapted bearings.

 

post-12706-0-44889100-1393791635.jpg

 

post-12706-0-24163800-1393791651.jpg

 

And tested in the chassis

 

post-12706-0-45990800-1393791912.jpg

 

And here is it nearly re-assembled, just the keeper plate to re-fit

 

post-12706-0-05924700-1393792040_thumb.jpg

 

Here is a side by side comparison, the before and after. I'm sorry the shot angles aren't exactly the same.

 

post-12706-0-69457500-1393792053.jpg

 

The brakes shoes needed thinning, cutting away on the inside, paring back to half the original  width, to clear the flanges and allow the maximum side play. At this the outside faces of the wheels just touch the brake rods and the crankpins just about clear the footsteps and a little casting on the footplate in front of them. I carved small amounts away here with a sharp scalpel to ensure clearance. This needs painting before re-assembly. You can see here that the keeper plate has circular recesses into which the bearing flanges fit.

 

A quick word about the quartering. Generally with most steam locos the right hand side crank leads, (whether you are looking front or rear - it works out the same). I have always 'quartered' by eye, by lining up the spokes. Depending on the number of spokes this may be in-line with each other, allowing for the 90 degree difference, or opposite at one point. Those for the Jinty do work out to be in-line, and twisting the wheels on the axles to align them I found quite easy. A point to note is that with this model there is a lot of leeway. The coupling rods are a very easy fit over the crankpin boss. The boss is about 1.5mm, the holes in the rods 1.6-1.7mm.

 

 

post-12706-0-93924200-1393792464.jpg

 

post-12706-0-63149400-1393792474.jpg

 

 

 

I think that perhaps I should say that this conversion wasn't primarily about the Jinty in terms of finescaling it as such, but simply to allow it to run on 2FS track. As someone modelling the green diesel era I bought it purely as an experimental vehicle. To see what was possible with the latest Farish steam locos, what kind of minimum radius a small and simple standard tank loco could be persuaded around in 2FS, and what kind of performance the new coreless motor designs could deliver.

 

Saying I am quite pleased with the results of the 2FS conversion and the locos performance rather understates it. As bought it could cope with 9" radius track without issue. It can't now, but it can cope with the 12" radius on the hidden section of my circular layout, (soldered track with gauge widening via a 3-point gauge,) and anything above that seems a breeze.........

This won't be of concern to most 2mm modellers, whose aims and standards are rather better and higher than mine, and for whom space and track radius are not an issue.

 

Here are a few shots of it under test on my circular layout under construction.

 

 

post-12706-0-04914500-1393792715.jpg

 

post-12706-0-86365000-1393792731.jpg

 

post-12706-0-08980000-1393792747.jpg

 

post-12706-0-89544200-1393792756.jpg

 

post-12706-0-94689700-1393792767.jpg

 

You will see that some work could sensibly be undertaken to improve the looks beneath the footplate. The coupling rods and crankpins stand out as being far too big. I will replace them if I can find any suitable. I'm not sure if the 2mm SA etched Farish ones (3-205) are of the same wheelbase size. This will also need new/different crankpins. I am currently working on this aspect, and if I manage to sort anything out, I'll post the results.

 

The front/rear coupling pockets on the keeper plate need sorting as well, as with the NEM sockets removed there is a big empty hole and the guard irons just look to be hanging in mid-air. DG's will of course, also be fitted.

 

 

Next post I will deal with the DCC issues. Hmm........

 

Izzy

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Izzy
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just returned my model to Hatton's for a replacement due top poor running,

even after the prescribed 1hr running in in both directions, the little loco still juddered and refused to run smoothly at low speed, which I'm assuming is down to the quartering.

I'd be interested to know if anyone else has has the same problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The layout looks nice too any more photos

 

Hi John,

 

Thanks, kind of you to say. There is a shot here in this thread - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/81001-signal-position-advice/  It was the reason I returned to 2mm/N, to be able to have a circular layout in the space available to me. The standard isn't terribly high, and it's experimental in respect of the general track radius, that the baseboard is card - layered artists mount board actually, I'm using servos for point and magnet control, and it's DCC switchable to DC. It's very much a work in progress.

 

Izzy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I've had a look and like what I see I think it's very nice there is some nice detail on the platform edges maybe we could see some more phot's .Just out of interest where did the class 17 come from

Regards john

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I've had a look and like what I see I think it's very nice there is some nice detail on the platform edges maybe we could see some more phot's .Just out of interest where did the class 17 come from

Regards john

 

 

Ps the station building is rather attractive as well

 

It's a long story, ( the BTH class 15 ). It started out as a cast whitemetal body kit to fit a Farish N gauge class 20 chassis, but when I saw what the standard was.........it ended up being scratchbuild to 2mm..... I did sort of mention on the VAG a long time ago that if I actually got it made I'd give some details, but I have never got around to it. If there is any interest I could do a thread. There a photo here - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/81727-n-gaugewhere-now/page-4 - # 80.

 

I'm grateful for the comments on the station building. However, as I'd rather try and keep this thread to the Jinty I'll post a few more shots of Tendring and the station building in it's own thread, so long as that's okay.

 

Izzy

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hi Izzy,

 

I have only one steam loco - Tornado. It is tender driven and supplied with traction tyres, but supplied with spare axles which can be easily swapped out if you don't want the traction tyres. I did this and it was a very simple job.

 

Although I don't know for sure, it wouldn't surprise me if Farish supply their other (new) steam locos with similar spare axles, for those who don't like the traction tyres.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Izzy,

 

I have only one steam loco - Tornado. It is tender driven and supplied with traction tyres, but supplied with spare axles which can be easily swapped out if you don't want the traction tyres. I did this and it was a very simple job.

 

Although I don't know for sure, it wouldn't surprise me if Farish supply their other (new) steam locos with similar spare axles, for those who don't like the traction tyres.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

 

Hi Ben,

 

I have got spares of the tender wheels from Farish in the past without problem. Unfortunately loco wheels are a different matter and so far I've had no joy. On a related issue I also asked about spares of the very nice coreless motor Farish are now using - again no luck so far.

 

Jerry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Izzy,

 

I have only one steam loco - Tornado. It is tender driven and supplied with traction tyres, but supplied with spare axles which can be easily swapped out if you don't want the traction tyres. I did this and it was a very simple job.

 

Although I don't know for sure, it wouldn't surprise me if Farish supply their other (new) steam locos with similar spare axles, for those who don't like the traction tyres.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

 

Hi Ben,

 

That's interesting to know. I do understand that the new N locos coming from DJ models will have traction tyres fitted as standard, the diesels anyway, but that non traction tyre spares will be available as standard from the off. Personally, the provision of replacements in the box with the loco as Farish seem to have done with Tornado seems the best solution to me, but perhaps this is only viable with simple drop in tender/diesel bogie type driven axles, and spare steam loco driving wheels/axles, with the attendant need to undo crankpins/coupling rods, isn't seen as necessary or feasible for the vast majority of buyers.

 

 

Hi Ben,

 

I have got spares of the tender wheels from Farish in the past without problem. Unfortunately loco wheels are a different matter and so far I've had no joy. On a related issue I also asked about spares of the very nice coreless motor Farish are now using - again no luck so far.

 

Jerry

 

 Hi Jerry,

 

Having ruined a couple of sets of wheels for both 03/04 and 08 shunters in the past when playing with seeing just how far I could push the machining of them - too far obviously - I did managed to obtain replacement sets of both from Bachmann/Barwell quite easily, at a reasonable £10 per set. This was complete with rods etc, and just ready to drop into the chassis. With both types I was offered a choice as to coupling rod colour. Perhaps I was just very lucky. In any case, complete sets, even if they are available might not be the answer since they would come with traction tyres again!

 

Izzy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Izzy,

 

I have only one steam loco - Tornado. It is tender driven and supplied with traction tyres, but supplied with spare axles which can be easily swapped out if you don't want the traction tyres. I did this and it was a very simple job.

 

Although I don't know for sure, it wouldn't surprise me if Farish supply their other (new) steam locos with similar spare axles, for those who don't like the traction tyres.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

 

I had the same with the Jubilee. Easy to swap. Unfortunately it then could not pull the skin off a rice pudding, sot he traction tyre wheels went back in.

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Izzy,

 

I have only one steam loco - Tornado. It is tender driven and supplied with traction tyres, but supplied with spare axles which can be easily swapped out if you don't want the traction tyres. I did this and it was a very simple job.

 

Although I don't know for sure, it wouldn't surprise me if Farish supply their other (new) steam locos with similar spare axles, for those who don't like the traction tyres.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

 

Hi Ben. 

 

None of the Coreless motor loco drive models come with non-traction tyred spares (Unfortunately) It would mean dismantling the valve gear to replace them so I can understand why! 

 

It's interesting though that they can produce the 3F & Fairburn with sufficient weight not to need them and still haul a decent load, yet other larger engines where even more weight could be incorporated are stuck with them. I hate them with a passion as the only thing they are good for is spreading filth over the rails and increasing the amount of track cleaning required. 

 

Tom. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As this loco comes DCC ready, fitted with a small circuit board and 6-pin socket, I did not envisage any real problems, save that of finding a suitable decoder. In order to fit a 6-pin socket board into the loco and keep it all below cab level and reasonably out of sight Bachmann have come up with a new right angled pin design decoder specifically to suit, which indicated that some fun and games might ensue in attempting to fit another make of standard 6-pin design. My normal choice these days is CT, but I was interested to discover if the new coreless motor might run reasonably well on the spare Bachmann (36-558) or Digitrax (DZ125) chips I had that I'd originally started out with in DCC. However, I did harbour the feeling that perhaps, removal off the circuit board and the hard wiring of a decoder may be required to achieve what I desired, a decoder of choice fitted out of sight below open cab level.

 

The first task was of course to remove the body, which is separate from the footplate and held onto it with four screws. As I have indicated in a previous photo, there are also some clips at the base of the smokebox that need releasing to allow the bodies removal.

 

post-12706-0-94222200-1394208778.jpg

 

 

Here are some shots of the set-up. And the blanking board. I have no idea what the wire wound things are, being a bit of a electronics dunce, although they feature on most Bachmann/Farish circuit boards, but in this particular case they get removed along with the blanking plug.

 

post-12706-0-74961400-1394208838.jpg

 

post-12706-0-57673600-1394208850.jpg

 

post-12706-0-28789200-1394208866.jpg

 

Sadly, plugging in a chip, any chip, only gave the loco the 'jitters'. It ran appallingly, like it was competing in the hop, skip, and jump. The reaction from a Bachmann decoder was violent, even on step 1 at 128 steps. It was less so on a CT, and with either, or a Digitrax, the reaction reduced as the speed steps were increased. Still there even at 3/4 speed, but more subdued. I have never had issues with previous DCC ready locos from either Farish or Dapol, but have had to remove the small circuit boards from the 03/04/08 diesel shunters, which aren't DCC ready, as the capacitors on these boards interfere with the DCC BEMF. This seemed remarkably similar, but much more extreme. Surely this wasn't going to be an issue with a DCC ready loco was it?  How could it?

 

Well, it seems it was, or with mine at least, as to date no one else seems to have had this problem as far as I can discover. Removing the board and hard wiring in decoders gave trouble free running, (I fitted a 6-pin harness as a temporary measure so I could swap decoders quickly and easily - all this with the body off of course), although once again the discovery was made that only a CT decoder could offer the kind of slow and smooth performance that is available by default under DC. I often wonder just why this should be so.

 

Since I had envisaged that I would probably have to remove the board it didn't particularly bother me. It sat too high anyway, and bending the pins on a standard 6-pin decoder wouldn't really produce one that could sit in place with the body on as far as I can see. Given the problems with the board, I'm afraid I didn't even bother to try it just to see. It might just work with a CT DCX 76, but frankly hard wiring in is far easier.

 

Anyway, removing the board frees up a lot of space in which to place a decoder, and sit it well below the open cab level, and nearly on the floor. It has to be clear of the floor to avoid shorts. A small clear piece of insulation is fitted to prevent breaching of the chassis halves, along with a raised spigot that lifts the board up a bit as clearance is also needed above the rear wheel flanges. The main circuit board is 14mm x 14mm, so this gives you some idea of the kind of room available when this is removed.

 

Even if you don't use DCC removing the board is something to consider as it frees up so much space in the cab and enables the fitting of crew etc should you wish. I know this means the capacitors etc then get removed, but if you build a loco yourself you don't fit them, well I never have, and I could not detect any difference in performance under DC with it removed.

 

The board is screwed in place and these provide the electrical connections to it from the chassis halves. I made up some right angled brackets from some scrap N/S etch and fitted them as connections to which either the motor or decoder leads could be soldered. They were made so a Bachmann decoder could just sit between them. But this does mean you can't remove the footplate without undoing them as they are then too wide.

 

post-12706-0-77020800-1394209008.jpg

 

post-12706-0-51119400-1394209023.jpg

 

I made up a small stepped board using 20thou black plasticard and stuck in place with d/s tape to ensure any decoder fitted wouldn't end up shorting itself out somehow, (you have to remember all the lower body sides and bunker as well as the footplate are metal).

 

post-12706-0-10957300-1394209089.jpg

 

I then spent some considerable time and effort trying to coax a decent usable performance out of a standard Bachmann 36-558 chip. Many might be happy with the results, but eventually I ended up fitting a CT DCX 76 wired decoder. Using anything else just really seems a waste of time, and not worth the effort.

 

Here's how I fitted firstly the Bachmann, and then the CT. Since the Bachmann was a 6-pin and too long I bent the pins through 180 degrees before soldering the wires to them. The DCC feed goes to the two centre ones - doesn't matter which way around, with the motor feed to the outer ones, the 1&2 pins.  Red to the extreme outside to give correct direction without having to reverse it via CV setting. It's wrong in some of the photos - how I know!

 

post-12706-0-07197800-1394209810.jpg

 

post-12706-0-68913600-1394209828.jpg

 

post-12706-0-79533900-1394209841.jpg

 

post-12706-0-82889800-1394209855.jpg

 

post-12706-0-18582500-1394209869.jpg

 

post-12706-0-45690600-1394209885.jpg

 

post-12706-0-42580000-1394209897.jpg

 

The wires both from the motor and decoder have been left long until I am certain that further changes are not needed.

 

 

edit:- Just thought it might be useful to add these shots for a comparison between the fitted board and the replacement arrangement. The original would sit in place higher than shown, the top of the board being level with that of new one. Forgot to add a packing piece to show this clearly.

 

post-12706-0-51281800-1394268330.jpg

 

post-12706-0-98898300-1394268342.jpg

 

 

 

I should I feel mention here that I set up and make most decoder adjustments via my Sprog 2 and JMRI, and only make a few other CV changes 'on the main' using my Prodigy Advance2. I can't imagine now using anything else other than my Sprog/JMRI, it makes it all so easy and simple, and every time I use it I feel a debt of gratitude to those who make it all possible.

 

The loco is now under extensive testing, having fitted couplings, for long term running quality and haulage capabilities. Here it is on a mineral train of 16T's.

 

post-12706-0-93377400-1394209907.jpg

 

Seems like the rail engineers/builders are re-building the bridges to hopefully a much better standard at the moment.........

 

Izzy

 

 

Edited by Izzy
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as a matter of interest here is a comparison between the Farish coupling rods, and some etched 2mmSA ones I have to hand. This helps to illustrate the problems, and advantages looks wise, of replacing them. The crankpin holes in the Farish are bigger than the bosses on the 2mm ones.

 

At the top are some 16mm x 18mm. As you can see, if only I could shift the centre pin by 0.5mm to give the 16.5mm x 17.5mm needed they could be used, even just as a temporary measure to test things. I might try and do this, although another little issue is the crankpin size of 0.5mm, where as the Farish are 14ba, (clearance 1.1mm).

 

Below these are some 16mm x 17mm ones. These are the correct size for 8' x 8'6" at 2mm scale. This clearly shows the size difference that exists between N at 1:148 and 2mm at 1:152 and why you can't just swap bits between them easily.

 

post-12706-0-35664900-1394271355.jpg

 

 

Izzy

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what the wire wound things are

Inductors (chokes) for suppression. They pass DC but block AC (so the opposite to suppression capacitors) and are wired in line with the feeds from the track. They would block the DCC signal, hence they are on the blanking plug to be removed when you fit a decoder. If they were not on the blanking plate then you would need to replace them with wire links

 

Andrew

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look at etch 3-205 specially made for farish locos including Jinties

 

I did notice that, but have wondered whether the older 3FT/4F have the same wheelbase as the newer models, seeing as how Farish weren't always terribly accurate in the past in this respect. I shall have to get some and see. It would be handy if they were also etched to allow for the larger crankpins, but maybe the older models have different ones anyway.

 

 

Inductors (chokes) for suppression. They pass DC but block AC (so the opposite to suppression capacitors) and are wired in line with the feeds from the track. They would block the DCC signal, hence they are on the blanking plug to be removed when you fit a decoder. If they were not on the blanking plate then you would need to replace them with wire links

 

Andrew

 

 

That's interesting. I presume then, that those on the bigger boards that stay in place get bypassed somehow when a decoder is plugged in.

 

 

Thanks to you both, appreciated.

 

Izzy

Edited by Izzy

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.