Oxford Rail announces - OO gauge GWR Dean Goods

[brian777999]

So does the motor!

Maybe Oxford found it was too highly specified (=expensive) for the price they were selling it at?

The whole motor/flywheels/bracket/coupler arrangement has been changed.

 

Keith

 

For better or for worse ?

[melmerby]

For better or for worse ?

Sounds like it's worse.

 

Now do I go and buy a discounted early lined loco and shove the engine part under 2475?

That would release a chassis to go under something else.

I've one of the (Airfix)/Mainline/Hornby jobs with the dreadful oversize 3 pole pancake (or should that be pan-cac ?) in the tender.

Will it fit? (without too much surgery!)

 

Keith

[coachmann]

Using the Oxford chassis under something else needs some very careful thought not to mention surgery to remove the underside of the boiler on which the whole motor assembly rests.

Edited May 9, 2018 by coachmann

[melmerby]

Using the Oxford chassis under something else needs some very careful thought not to mention surgery to remove the underside of the boiler on which the whole motor assembly rests.

Yes, the Hornby model has a complete boiler/firebox moulding, which normally only contains a metal plug as a weight.

I removed the one in mine and replaced it with lead in the boiler, leaving room in the firebox for a decoder.

I've thought about a better motor bogie for the tender but never got far.

 

Keith

[coachmann]

Yes, the Hornby model has a complete boiler/firebox moulding, which normally only contains a metal plug as a weight.

I removed the one in mine and replaced it with lead in the boiler, leaving room in the firebox for a decoder.

I've thought about a better motor bogie for the tender but never got far.

The Hornby Dean also has a darn good firebox shape, which i wanted! But these pesky bodies are fetching good prices.

[john dew]

 

Hattons Help Desk Assisant was surprisingly unhelpful.....claimed to have no influence with Oxford and offered me a 4 pound discount on my next purchase. Two subsequent emails have not even been acknowledged. If anyone could let me know the email address of someone relatively senior at Hattons I would be very grateful  Otherwise this is a sad end to a 25 year relationship during which I have purchased approx 40 locos from them.  I find it hard to believe they intend to be so churlish.......I rather regret I no longer live on the Wirral......I would be hammering on the door at Widnes!

 

I am both relieved and happy to report that my faith has been restored in Hattons hitherto excellent customer service. I have now heard again from the Help Desk. Their buyer has spoken to Oxford and arranged for my chassis to be exchanged.

 

Very happy in Vancouver

 

John

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Edwardian]

Using the Oxford chassis under something else needs some very careful thought not to mention surgery to remove the underside of the boiler on which the whole motor assembly rests.

 

Indeed.  The boiler diameters are slightly different.

 

It might be the product of a perverse nature, but the revelation concerning the later single fly wheel chassis is making me think again about whether it is possible to produce the ultimate RTR conversion; Oxford's 2309 into a model of, well, 2309!

 

I reckon almost everything on the loco would need to be changed - wheels down from 5'2" to 5', new running plate the correct width, new steps, splashers, smokebox, smokebox door, chimney boiler, firebox, cab etc!

 

I think I'd end up retaining only the engine block/motor/gears and chassis (and most of the tender)!

 

On the other hand, developing the skills to make the Finney kit becomes more and more appealing.  Had I but world enough and time!

 

Perhaps if they hit the bargain bucket I'll have a go with Oxford's.

[melmerby]

Using the Oxford chassis under something else needs some very careful thought not to mention surgery to remove the underside of the boiler on which the whole motor assembly rests.

Indeed.  The boiler diameters are slightly different.

 

Looks like time to contemplate that powered tender again.

The loco part looks really good considering it is a design from near on 40 years ago.

 

Keith

Edited May 10, 2018 by melmerby

[coachmann]

Indeed.  The boiler diameters are slightly different.

 

It might be the product of a perverse nature, but the revelation concerning the later single fly wheel chassis is making me think again about whether it is possible to produce the ultimate RTR conversion; Oxford's 2309 into a model of, well, 2309!

 

I reckon almost everything on the loco would need to be changed - wheels down from 5'2" to 5', new running plate the correct width, new steps, splashers, smokebox, smokebox door, chimney boiler, firebox, cab etc!

 

I think I'd end up retaining only the engine block/motor/gears and chassis (and most of the tender)!

 

On the other hand, developing the skills to make the Finney kit becomes more and more appealing.  Had I but world enough and time!

 

Perhaps if they hit the bargain bucket I'll have a go with Oxford's.

I haven't been paying attention and so is the width over the footplate too wide or too narrow for 2538 please?  I reduced the splashers except those on the cabside. I would need to etch something before attacking the moulded ones. The thing that hurts my eyes is the firebox bustle. I would replace it with a whole Hornby firebox if an inexpensive loco body could be obtained.

[melmerby]

Reading all that has gone before, it seems that Oxford have again snatched defeat from the jaws of victory

 

Keith

[Edwardian]

I haven't been paying attention and so is the width over the footplate too wide or too narrow for 2538 please?  I reduced the splashers except those on the cabside. I would need to etch something before attacking the moulded ones. The thing that hurts my eyes is the firebox bustle. I would replace it with a whole Hornby firebox if an inexpensive loco body could be obtained.

 

Coach, you, I think, used one of the later improved versions, so a much better place to start (although there appears a risk of less impressive innards - hence my musings).  

 

The footplate width is specific to the earlier lots (of which 2309 was a member), so not necessarily a problem for your prototype.  To be quite frank I cannot retain the numbers with the narrower footplates in my addled brain, so I'd have to check my notes. 

 

Wheel diameter is another issue specific to me, because for my period they were probably without the tyres that subsequently made them up to 5'2" (IIRC).  It's not necessary to replace the Oxford wheels in order to accommodate cut down splashers, as you have demonstrated. 

 

Thus, a lot of my problems with 2309 would stem from the fact that Oxford's model of it is essentially a pre-Grouping livery applied to a Grouping onward condition model representing a different series of engines.  So I have all those issues as well as the well-documented errors with cab, fire-box, wash out plugs, non-radial hand-rails, splasher size etc, many, but not all, of which are corrected on the version you used.  For a model of 2309, the model of 2309 is a really bad place from which to start!

 

If I were making a post-Grouping condition model, I'd seriously consider the Mainline/Hornby body.  I have one and it's really quite a good basis for a bit of detailing.  The splashers are also over-scale, but not by nearly so much as Oxford's.  In fact, the Mainline/Hornby splashers split the difference between the prototype size and the Oxford size - so they're midway between. 

 

I think the tricky bit is likely to be marrying the Mainline/Hornby boiler to the cast portion of the Oxford boiler, as the latter is a little greater in diameter. I think it's slightly over-scale, though offhand I can't recall if the Mainline one is fractionally under-scale too. IIRC, it's about a mm difference in diameter, but I don't recall.  I suspect that if you could find a cosmetically satisfactory solution to mating the boiler sections, you'd be onto a winner with the older body.

 

As I understand you, you would simply insert the firebox portion.  That is more of an option where working off the improved body, and avoiding replacing the boiler barrel would make life a heck of a lot simpler.  If you also used the Mainline/Hornby cab and splashers (but with the Oxford backhead), that might help by avoiding the really oversized remaining rear splashers, because the huge splashers (with their absurdly placed riveting) was not one of the issues corrected on the Locomotion and late series Oxford models.

 

If you try it, good luck and please post the results.

Edited May 10, 2018 by Edwardian

[Brassey]

Is the Tender filler correct on these?  It is correct for the earlier GWR fully lined version (pre WW1) but in later years (i.e. BR) it would have had a separate filler and scoop fountain dome which looks completely different.

[Brassey]

The footplate width is specific to the earlier lots (of which 2309 was a member), so not necessarily a problem for your prototype.  To be quite frank I cannot retain the numbers with the narrower footplates in my addled brain, so I'd have to check my notes. 

 

 

 

According to the Martin Finney instructions, the narrow footplate ceased at 2450 so Coach is OK with the wider footplate though it would have had fluted rods when built but these were probably replaced by plain ones later.

 

For 2309, in addition to the narrow footplate, it would also have had a straight reversing lever.  I am currently building 2306 in such a fashion which is why I've looked into this.

 

 

Edit: to add pic.  Note also balance weights on all wheels

Edited May 13, 2018 by Brassey

[Edwardian]

According to the Martin Finney instructions, the narrow footplate ceased at 2450 so Coach is OK with the wider footplate though it would have had fluted rods when built but these were probably replaced by plain ones later.

 

For 2309, in addition to the narrow footplate, it would also have had a straight reversing lever.  I am currently building 2306 in such a fashion which is why I've looked into this.

 

2322_Dean_Goods_rlever.jpg

 

Edit: to add pic.  Note also balance weights on all wheels

 

Agreed.

 

Good point about the balance weights.

 

Apart for the general mistakes and the difference between the series, Oxford's tooling is really for a later condition loco than the 2309 guise.  This is most obvious from the smokebox door and chimney type and position, but another giveaway is the presence of what I take to be strengthening plates to the base of the firebox.  These are found on the preserved 2516 and tend to be seen generally on post-Grouping condition locos, though varying from engine to engine.  Your picture nicely illustrates the lack of such external plating on an earlier condition loco. 

 

This is the condition of 2309 was what Oxford was claiming to represent.

[phil_sutters]

Agreed.

 

Good point about the balance weights.

 

Apart for the general mistakes and the difference between the series, Oxford's tooling is really for a later condition loco than the 2309 guise.  This is most obvious from the smokebox door and chimney type and position, but another giveaway is the presence of what I take to be strengthening plates to the base of the firebox.  These are found on the preserved 2516 and tend to be seen generally on post-Grouping condition locos, though varying from engine to engine.  Your picture nicely illustrates the lack of such external plating on an earlier condition loco. 

 

This is the condition of 2309 was what Oxford was claiming to represent.

I don't know whether it helps, but I have increased the density of this photo to try to make the details clearer.

 

Edited May 14, 2018 by phil_sutters

[Edwardian]

I don't know whether it helps, but I have increased the density of this photo to try to make the details clearer.

Dean goods multiplied 2.jpg

 

Brilliant Phil, that's really helpful

[phil_sutters]

Brilliant Phil, that's really helpful

I have just noticed how high the tender is stacked!

[Compound2632]

I have just noticed how high the tender is stacked!

 

It's one of the Mainline ones with the big Ringfield motor in the tender.

[Garethp8873]

Seems I have come to a hiccup in my plan to turn my GWR Dean Goods from 2475 into 2386. The tender is a of a riveted example... Anyone have any ideas on how I can make the tender of 2474 take on a riveted look? If not then I need to go back to the drawing board with this one...

 

[BWsTrains]

Seems I have come to a hiccup in my plan to turn my GWR Dean Goods from 2475 into 2386. The tender is a of a riveted example... Anyone have any ideas on how I can make the tender of 2474 take on a riveted look? If not then I need to go back to the drawing board with this one...

 

Am I mistaken or is that dome still a bright shiny brass in 1938? Look at the reflection on it. The later GWR Oxford Dean has a painted one.

 

Colin

[melmerby]

Am I mistaken or is that dome still a bright shiny brass in 1938? Look at the reflection on it. The later GWR Oxford Dean has a painted one.

 

Colin

Looking at photos of various Deans, those with Brass domes always look as if they are a lighter colour than the boiler.

That one looks the same so it might just be a nicely polished green one!

 

The chimney is also not copper capped.

 

Keith

[coachmann]

A brass polished dome in the 1930's? I dont think so. I doubt any crew would relish having a Dean Goods for a shift and I cannot imagine anyone being keen enough to scrape the green paint off  just to be ridiculed by the other men on shed. 

 

As for creating rivets on a plastic tender, a simple method is to use a dart (point sharpened) and a ruler. Stick the dart into the plastic to create dimples. It is surprisingly effective and the dimples reflect light much like rivets. I did it on whitemetal kits (smokeboxes and other parts) many years ago.

[Brassey]

Those axle box springs are also a different shape to the earlier ones on the Oxford tender.  247 Developments sell some like that.

[Coppercap]

Am I mistaken or is that dome still a bright shiny brass in 1938? Look at the reflection on it. The later GWR Oxford Dean has a painted one.

 

Colin

No, it's just painted by an expert using the best quality green paint to be had.

[Darwinian]

Seems I have come to a hiccup in my plan to turn my GWR Dean Goods from 2475 into 2386. The tender is a of a riveted example... Anyone have any ideas on how I can make the tender of 2474 take on a riveted look? If not then I need to go back to the drawing board with this.

 

Archer river transfers are what you need. Cut out and applied in strips. The backing on them is so thin it is all but invisible once painted over.