Building kits for Tyneside in the BR era. J24 and PDK D49/2

[Jol Wilkinson]

John,

 

motor size is usually dictated by gauge, i.e whether it will fit between the frames. If using a motor mount that lifts the motor above the frames you have more choice. The width inside the firebox will be about 15.4mm as they were designed to fit between the frames which were usually 4 ft (scale 16.0mm) apart on the real things. So you could use a 1020, 1024, 1224 or possibly even a 1420/24.

 

With small boiler Iocos I like to mount the motor in an "underslung" position, which leaves as much room as possible in the firebox and boiler for ballast. That limits you to what motor will fit between the frames, a 1020/24 being ideal for 00. This photo of a LNWR Jubilee 4-4-0 will give some idea. This has a High Level  Roadrunner 54:1, although I normally use London Road Models single stage motor mounts with 30:1 gears on small wheel locos, 50:1 on the larger wheel passenger locos.

 

[mikemeg]

Returning to more familiar territory, I've begun planning the building of the London Road J25. I'm given to understand that there are a few things not quite right with the model but photos I've seen sugges5 it will make a perfectly açceptàble model for my purposes. Those looking for something more accurate may prefer to see Mikemeg,s excellent posts of his ArthurK build.

The kit comes with a large set of drawings and instructions. The loco chassis can be either rigid or compensated. The tender chassis gives the option of either a fold up or traditional 2 sides and etched spacers.The boiler is pre rolled.

I will build the loco ànd tender body alongside the chassis as far as possible to check for height and clearance issues. I want to get the Mashima1020 and High Level Compact+ into the frames at an early stage,as I suspect clearance in the firebox or boiler will be tight. I want to drive off the centre axle if possible, but have a feeling I will be using the rear one.

John

 

John,

 

It might be possible to drive the J25 off the centre axle, though the final drive gear and the drive carriage may be visible between the frames, at least looking from above the footplate. Getting the motor far enough back towards the cab front may entail doing some work to the bottom of the firebox, if a firebox front is provided to fit under the rear of the boiler.

 

The overall design of the LRM kit can't differ, significantly, from that of Arthur's J25 kit in which case the motor needs to sit nearly vertically within the firebox. I opted to drive the rear axle (as also recommended for Arthur's J24 kit) so as to completely hide all of the elements of the drive train from view. Provided the chassis is assembled carefully and accurately, then driving the rear axle shouldn't pose a problem.

 

If your chassis is to be built rigid, without using articulated coupling rods which does add another potential source of binding on the chassis, then provided that the rod spacing and axle spacing coincide accurately the rear axle driving should work fine.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

Edited December 5, 2017 by mikemeg

[rowanj]

Jol/Mike

 

Thanks for the t[ps.  The Mashima 1020 is a surprisingly powerful little motor and this is what I propose to use. As can be seen , the chassis etch is a lovely piece, and any problems cannot be laid at the kit design, but rather at the builder. As I'll use a Poppywood jig, I don't anticipate any problems. 

 

Jol _ I hadn't made your connection to LRM so feel free to criticize as we go.

 

John

[Jol Wilkinson]

John,

 

I am just one of the unpaid assistants of LRM, but unfortunately the best known one as I have helped out John Redrup at shows for many years.

 

The J25 came to LRM from the Connoisseurs Choice range when George Norton retired. The design may even predate George who passed away some years ago. Quite a few kits have been sold over the years with, other than a couple of RMweb members, very little feedback, either positive or negative. George's own designs have been, at least the ones I have built, quite good apart from the instructions. Like George these could be quite terse. Most have been revised, while the kits were updated with mainly cast brass, as opposed to white metal, fittings but usually retaining the original etch designs.

 

Jol

[grob1234]

One thing that I found when building my LRM J3 was that the frames seemed quite wide for OO. I don’t know if I made a mistake somewhere, but I definitely used the most narrow of the spacers provided. I found that there was very little clearance for the side play of the wheels, meaning that the locomotive struggled around even relatively slack curves. The result being I had to unsolder, remove about a mm off each spacer and remake the chassis. Not a huge deal, just something to bear in mind. I calibrate my locos to run round 3ft radius curves by the way.

 

As an aside, the DJH chassis for the A1 I’m building gives almost too much sideplay in the wheels. I wonder if there is a rule of thumb for frame width and minimum radius curve?

 

I have two D2’s in order from John, whilst exchanging emails, he mentioned that GNR kits are going really well, and that he was out of stock of several of them due to high sales. Great news for us kit builders!

 

Sorry to highjack your thread, but Jol have you a recommendation for a motor/gearbox combo for the D2? My usual preference is high level boxes. I only ask as I made a rod for my own back by trying to fit too big a motor into my J3 which has made fitting it all inside a bit of a hassle!

[rowanj]

Hijack away, Tom. The more tips that come up on loco building threads the better, as far as I'm concerned.

 

The issue of clearances is interesting, and I certainly wouldn't have thought of it in connection with the J25. I did find it an issue with the Q7, and certainly PDK B16 bogies are a challenge as lack of clearance under the cylinder block gives almost an 0=10=0 arrangement. But the etches on the J25 are thin and it's obvious which spacers to use. They are even stamped oo.

I try to build to go round Hornby 4th radius which is tighter than anyone on the layout,So it's a case of "test as you go"

John

Edited December 6, 2017 by rowanj

[rowanj]

Tender flares are always a challenge for me, so I invested in a set of bending bars, and was thinking about "hold and fold" until I read a great tip on Tony Wright's thread... A good quality butt hinge works just as well at a fraction of the cost". Has anyone tried this?

[Jol Wilkinson]

One thing that I found when building my LRM J3 was that the frames seemed quite wide for OO. I don’t know if I made a mistake somewhere, but I definitely used the most narrow of the spacers provided. I found that there was very little clearance for the side play of the wheels, meaning that the locomotive struggled around even relatively slack curves. The result being I had to unsolder, remove about a mm off each spacer and remake the chassis. Not a huge deal, just something to bear in mind. I calibrate my locos to run round 3ft radius curves by the way.

 

As an aside, the DJH chassis for the A1 I’m building gives almost too much sideplay in the wheels. I wonder if there is a rule of thumb for frame width and minimum radius curve?

 

I have two D2’s in order from John, whilst exchanging emails, he mentioned that GNR kits are going really well, and that he was out of stock of several of them due to high sales. Great news for us kit builders!

 

Sorry to highjack your thread, but Jol have you a recommendation for a motor/gearbox combo for the D2? My usual preference is high level boxes. I only ask as I made a rod for my own back by trying to fit too big a motor into my J3 which has made fitting it all inside a bit of a hassle!

Hi Tom, 

 

I can't recommend a motormount* for the D2 as I haven't been involved with it's design (only the later LRM LNWR locos and the NER G1/LNER D23). I haven't seen the instructions but there should be a recommendation on motors, gears, wheels, etc. in the introduction.

 

Most Motor Mount suppliers provide drawing that can be overlaid on the model or scale drawing to work out what will fit. HL and LRM do so (the LRM Motor Mounts section of the Gears, Motors, etc. page has a link to a pdf download).

 

HL Motor Mounts have become the most popular, possibly because they have a wider range of "sizes" for fitting larger motors in OO chassis, where the motor can be mounted above the frames.

 

Jol

 

 

*A motor mount attaches to the motor and has bearings for the drive axle and intermediate gears (if used). It relies on the motor bearings to support the first stage worm or bevel gear. A gearbox has its own input shaft bearings and can be mounted remotely from the motor.  AGW, Sharman. Exactoscale and others have all supplied these (some are still available) but Motor Mounts are more popular as they are easier to use.

[mikemeg]

John,

 

I am just one of the unpaid assistants of LRM, but unfortunately the best known one as I have helped out John Redrup at shows for many years.

 

The J25 came to LRM from the Connoisseurs Choice range when George Norton retired. The design may even predate George who passed away some years ago. Quite a few kits have been sold over the years with, other than a couple of RMweb members, very little feedback, either positive or negative. George's own designs have been, at least the ones I have built, quite good apart from the instructions. Like George these could be quite terse. Most have been revised, while the kits were updated with mainly cast brass, as opposed to white metal, fittings but usually retaining the original etch designs.

 

Jol

 

Jol,

 

That description doesn't, entirely, do you justice. You've done a tremendous amount for LRM and your being the 'best known one' testifies to that.

 

After all it was you who tried (and succeeded) to recruit me to the 'band of helpers', for which I am extremely grateful and very happy to continue.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

Edited December 6, 2017 by mikemeg

[mikemeg]

Jol/Mike

 

Thanks for the t[ps.  The Mashima 1020 is a surprisingly powerful little motor and this is what I propose to use. As can be seen , the chassis etch is a lovely piece, and any problems cannot be laid at the kit design, but rather at the builder. As I'll use a Poppywood jig, I don't anticipate any problems. 

 

Jol _ I hadn't made your connection to LRM so feel free to criticize as we go.

 

John

 

John,

 

Bill Bedford made a posting on my thread about the Mashima 1020, pointing out that it is actually more powerful than the 1220. This because the 1020 uses neodynium (a rare earth) magnets rather than ferrous magnets.

 

So a good choice of motor.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

Edited December 6, 2017 by mikemeg

[jwealleans]

Tom,

 

‘John Coffin’ on the LNER forum draws these kits; you could ask him if he had any particular combination in mind.

[rowanj]

I'm now ready to solder up the chassis,,using the Poppywood jig. This is illustrated for those who don't know them, and is as fool-proof as such things can be. I first used it on an 8-coupled chassis, hoping I'd be able to use the same jig on a 6-coupled. In the event, the spacings didn't work on the N5, and don't on the J25, so I'm using a 6-coupled jig, Highly recommended.

 

The bushes for the axles were far too big for the holes in the etched chassis sides. This is often the case, but I've never had to use the broach to the extent I did here, to the point that I was worried I'd twist the chassis or remove so much that the hole would result in the joint breaking. So after 1, I chickened out and substituted bearings from my spares box. I've filed back the insides on the centre and rear pair while the motor position is still to be decided, and also filed a small amount from the top hat to help the chassis go round corners. Next job is to solder the spacers.

[ArthurK]

Hijack away, Tom. The more tips that come up on loco building threads the better, as far as I'm concerned.

 

The issue of clearances is interesting, and I certainly wouldn't have thought of it in connection with the J25. I did find it an issue with the Q7, and certainly PDK B16 bogies are a challenge as lack of clearance under the cylinder block gives almost an 0=10=0 arrangement. But the etches on the J25 are thin and it's obvious which spacers to use. They are even stamped oo.

I try to build to go round Hornby 4th radius which is tighter than anyone on the layout,So it's a case of "test as you go"

John

 

The standards that I use for width over the frames are:-

 

OO 12.5mm

EM 15.0mm

18.83 16.0mm

 

Each group of spacers (the three above are provided) are clearly labelled as to gauge.

 

ArthurK

[Jol Wilkinson]

Tom,

‘John Coffin’ on the LNER forum draws these kits; you could ask him if he had any particular combination in mind.

The first LRM GNR/LNER kits he drew were under the instruction of the late Malcolm Crawley, ex Doncaster Apprentice, experienced EM gauge modeller, close friend of George Norton and, although a Yorkshireman, a real gentleman.

 

You could ask him via the LNER Forum, or contact John Redrup at LRM though the website.

[Rob Pulham]

and, although a Yorkshireman, a real gentleman.

 

 

 

 Go on Jol,  I will be the first Yorkshireman to bite. Why would being a Yorkshireman make him less likely to be a gentleman?

[chris p bacon]

 Go on Jol,  I will be the first Yorkshireman to bite. Why would being a Yorkshireman make him less likely to be a gentleman?

 

You can always tell a Yorkshireman. . . . .Just not a lot. . .

 

[grob1234]

Thank you all for the interesting responses on frame width and motor mounts/gearboxes.

 

I decided to get the calipers out, and measure some frames. The outside frame to outside frame measurement on the DJH C1 and A1 are both 11.3mm, so like I suspected on the narrow side. The J3 comes out at 12.8, after my modification of filing down the spacers. This modified measurement compares quite nicely to ArthurK's 12.5mm measurement for OO frames. I'd probably go for something closer to 12mm on reflection, given that I like to fit insulating washers to all wheels, as I want my locomotives to be able to run DCC if required, and therefore all wheels are insulated.

 

Having finally got the motor inside my J3, I am fairly confident that a D2 could handle a decent motor, due to the way the splashers come up to the bottom of the boiler, meaning I can take more off the inside of the boiler to make room for the motor etc. I usually have a play about with templates from the HL website, but was a little over ambitious with the J3!

[rowanj]

The chassis went together as expected and sits squarely with the wheels revolving freely. I measured the spacers, albeit without callipers another , and it came out at12mm. The tophat bearings probably add another 1mm. The chassis goes around the Hornby 4th radius without a problem. Somewhere, I have a 3ed radius and I'll try to remember to put it through that when the rods are fitted , just out of interest,

 

I'm going to assemble the moto/gearbox combo next and trial fit the footplate/boiler/firebox before doing any more work on the chassis. There is still one more spacer to fit underneath when I see where everything goes.

 

Comments from Yorkshiremen, Gentlemen or otherwise, always welcome. Other counties/countries likewise.

 

John (on Tyneside) so my county is now just an Urban sprawl. Northumberland if pushed.

[grob1234]

That's my favorite bit of construction - getting the chassis up and running then installing and testing the motor/gearbox.

[rowanj]

What was I worried about? The 1020 is a lovely fit with the High Level Compact+. The inner parts of the axle bearings on both the chassis and the gearbox needed to be filed flush to get the gearbox to sit in the frames, which is a good test of how well they were soldered in the first place. The gearbox has a couple of options for screwing in the motor, and I needed to remove the "cross-piece" version to allow the motor to lean back sufficiently, Other than this, and the usual wish that I had a third hand to get the various bits into the gearbox and stay there when the next piece goes in, the High Level product was its' usual excellent self. I hope the picture with the boiler plonked on top shows how much room I was eventually left with to play with. The drive should be invisible once  I'm finished.

 

The next stage will see the footplate started along with the tender chassis and footplate. On this loco, as Mike pointed out, I want to get the loco and tender aligned correctly in true NER fashion.

 

John

 

[mikemeg]

What was I worried about? The 1020 is a lovely fit with the High Level Compact+. The inner parts of the axle bearings on both the chassis and the gearbox needed to be filed flush to get the gearbox to sit in the frames, which is a good test of how well they were soldered in the first place. The gearbox has a couple of options for screwing in the motor, and I needed to remove the "cross-piece" version to allow the motor to lean back sufficiently, Other than this, and the usual wish that I had a third hand to get the various bits into the gearbox and stay there when the next piece goes in, the High Level product was its' usual excellent self. I hope the picture with the boiler plonked on top shows how much room I was eventually left with to play with. The drive should be invisible once  I'm finished.

 

The next stage will see the footplate started along with the tender chassis and footplate. On this loco, as Mike pointed out, I want to get the loco and tender aligned correctly in true NER fashion.

 

John

 

Looking good John. Looks like that motor/gearbox combination, driving on the rear axle, is the way to go.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[Jol Wilkinson]

 Go on Jol,  I will be the first Yorkshireman to bite. Why would being a Yorkshireman make him less likely to be a gentleman?

Rob,

 

a delayed reply, as we have been away on a visit to Lincoln.

 

All I can say is that you obviously never met my father, a native of Pately Bridge. Like his brother in law, one of my Yorkshire uncles, he was a little too "blunt" to aspire to the title of "Gentleman" but were probably a good Yorkshire man.

 

As a child of a Yorkshire father and Aberdonian mother, I am able to take the fabled Yorkshire trait of "carefulness " with money to new heights, or so my wife believes.

 

Jol

[Horsetan]

....As a child of a Yorkshire father and Aberdonian mother, I am able to take the fabled Yorkshire trait of "carefulness " with money to new heights, or so my wife believes....

You should consider moving to live in Golders Green, or Stamford Hill.... You'll fit right in! #oyvey

[Jol Wilkinson]

You should consider moving to live in Golders Green, or Stamford Hill.... You'll fit right in! #oyvey

 

Thanks, Ivan.

 

I lived in North Finchley for several years (just up the road from Golders Green, for those who don't know Lunnon). I would much rather stay in Suffolk.

 

Jol

[rowanj]

Slow but steady progress on the LRM J25. The tender sub-frame is a bit of a puzzle. I intended to use the "fold-up" version, and duly folded it up and soldered in the axle bushes. However, it is too wide to accommodate either Gibson or Hornby wheels. I even re-folded it again with the etch "outside" to see if this gave clearance, but to no avail. So, I resorted to using the alternative option in the kit. If you think I am either kidding or just made a cock-up, see the photo where I overlaid the OO spacer on the fold-up chassis.

 

In any event, I now have a running tender sub-chassis. The tender-loco height is not quite right, but can be easily adjusted. Thanks for that tip, Mike.

 

The loco footplate has the drawgear fitted. This, like the buffer beams, come as 2 parts which solder together. I assume this is just for strength.  The instructions suggest that they and the valances are built as a sub-assembly and then fitted to the footplate. I'm not clear why this is the recommended method, but I'm inclined to fit the drawgear and buffer beam to the footplate and the solder the valance between them.

 

Thu photo of the footplate on the cab-floor shows how liittle space there is for the rear wheels. Clearly, I'm going to have to remove some metal to avoid a short, at least on the live side, But there is not much metal to play with, so I'm wondering if I should build the cab and cab floor first to give a bit more strength and stability before any cutting and filing.

 

This isn't meant to be carping - nothing so far means I cant progress. But I wonder if OO was perhaps an anathema to the original kit designer. Those who knew George  Norton will have an idea.

 

John