Scaleable LMS Tank Locomotives

[47137]

I have indulged in a rake of Rivarossi H0 gauge LMS coaches, which are built to a scale of around 1:82.

 

With a 1:76 scale model of a large locomotive, they look terribly wrong . . . 

 

. . . but with a 1:76 scale model of a small locomotive, they don't look at all bad:

 

Even the buffer heights match up with the Mainline J72:

 

As it happens, the LNER built two classes of tank locomotive - J72 and J73 - where the more powerful locomotive looked much like a scaled-up version of the less powerful one. Did the LMS do the same, or inherit something similar from a pre-grouping company?

 

In other words, is there a pair of LMS tank locomotives which scale in a similar sort of way?

 

I would be especially interested in cases where the smaller locomotive has appeared in the catalogue of a RTR manufacturer!

 

- Richard.

[sandwich station]

_{The Bachman Midland 1F 0-6-0 tank is a small loco and the Midland 3F 0-6-0 Jinty looks similar but a bit larger.}

[Dunsignalling]

_{The Bachman Midland 1F 0-6-0 tank is a small loco and the Midland 3F 0-6-0 Jinty looks similar but a bit larger.}

When I put the two together, I was surprised how much larger..........

[Zunnan]

The forthcoming 'Coal Tank' from Bachmann would be a good candidate, it is quite a delicately proportioned locomotive like the Midland 1F. Alternatively some of the smaller tender locomotives might not look too large with these coaches, the Midland 3F probably being the best bet.

[sandwich station]

When I put the two together, I was surprised how much larger..........

 

Yes, it is a noticeable difference.

 

 

I think what Richard wants to do is say take the 1F and turn it into a 3F, so it matches the size of the coaches better.

[Nearholmer]

Didn't rivalrous I make a similarly weird scale "Royal Scot", and Lima a nominally H0 4F tender engine?

 

K

[woodenhead]

They did do a Royal Scot, it was Lima who did the 4F in HO along with a 33.

[47137]

Yes, it is a noticeable difference.

 

 

I think what Richard wants to do is say take the 1F and turn it into a 3F, so it matches the size of the coaches better.

Yes this is what I want to do. Find a smaller locomotive which is about 10% smaller in its major dimensions than a similar (larger) locomotive. So if the wheel diameters, the wheelbase dimensions and the boiler diameter of a 3F are all proportionately larger than those of a 1F, this would give me a big head start. I might end up only changing the chimney and the number and being very happy.

 

A 1:76 model of a small tank locomotive which scales correctly to "something larger" at a scale between 1:82 and 1:87 would be ideal. The J72 in the photos is old and a non-runner nowadays, so I'd really like to start again.

 

I have a Bachmann 'Salty' which is a good runner. If this was the donor chassis then it has 4 ft diameter wheels (14mm at 1:87) and the wheelbase is 5ft 5in + 5ft 5in (19 + 19 mm).

 

Maybe I should wait for the Bachmann 1F to arrive in the shops and then measure it?

 

The coal tank looks very tempting as a model in its own right, and a suitably narrow footplate too - I don't think I'd have the heart to chop it around.

 

- Richard.

 

Edited for simplicity.

[sandwich station]

I have both, so will take a pic later so you can see the difference.

[sandwich station]

It's not until you get them side by side that you can see how similar they are but also how dissimilar they are in ways as well.

 

[47137]

Yesterday afternoon I picked up a Triang R52 3F body in very rough condition, but enough to take measurements. And afterwards, I ordered up a new Bachmann model of '1725' - so I'm committed to something, even if it's merely a new 00 loco! (1725 seems to be selling out from the major outlets here). Differences I can see:

 

Lip on the back of the bunker

Strips and panel on cab roof

Locations of water fillers

Dome (very different)

Chimney

 

 

So if I changed some or all of these, and I can find a way to lower the body of the 1F so the buffers are 1 mm or so lower, I might make a representation of a 1:82 or so "3F". Not a finescale model; but possibly not so bad. The main deciding factor is the width - I read somewhere, the width of the Bachmann 1F is 32 mm and if this is the case, it will match up with the Rivarossi coaches.

 

It's also a bit uncanny how well the Bachmann 3F compares to the Triang moulding after so many years.

 

- Richard.

[sandwich station]

Yes the 1F is around 32mm and the 3F around 34mm.

 

 

The Triang Jinty was a good representation for it's time and even the Hornby upgraded one is not bad as well (although both of these suffer from the body sitting to high on the chassis) but put it along side the Bachman one and you will very easily see they are from different times.

[47137]

I have my Bachmann 1F:

 

I am sure a conversion is possible, but I want to start with the wheels. The Fowler 3F had 4ft 7 in wheels, this would be 17 mm in 1:82 scale.

 

Looking at the side profile of the model, the wheelbase and the overall length equate to a 1:83 scale 3F, and the body sits at the right height above the wheel centres. The proportions of the side tanks, boiler and firebox look right for a 3F too. The chimney is the right style but needs to be shorter. Fitting 17 mm wheels would bring the buffers down but still not quite into line with the ones on the coaches.

 

- Richard.