4mm Scale Industrial Tank Engine - Prototype Bodyshell

[R A Watson]

I have only just found this thread but it rings all of my bells, I need two M5's for my Lee Moor layout, as that is the total fleet they used; but with an unusual mod, 4'6" gauge, this was obtained by merely fitting wider wheels with the flanges closer to the frames!

 

Kay Butler from Keykits has milled the frames from my drawings and can do more for anyone if you contact her, all I need is the body structure but up to now have been unable to source drawings.

 

Put me on the list as soon as you start one.

 

Wally

[James]

Just to add James, thank you for your very thought provoking responses, they are much appreciated by these two wayward students! And similarly to everyone else for their posts and encouragement.

 

Nice to be thought of as 'thought provoking' rather than a smart arse!

 

I can see where you're coming from with the project; I suspect my engineering background/experience and my own modelling preferences would have led me to approach it in a different way. Nothing worng with your way though - sometimes engineers aren't the most 'out of the box' thinkers!

 

I can see the small number of parts will appeal to many people - two schools of thought on kits really... Firstly they are simply a means to an end, a source for a particular wagon for your layout for example, or can be an end in themselves where the builderis doing it purely for the pleasure of building the item - I suspect yours will be more of the former, not far removed from RTR really, which I guess was your aim all along?

 

One final thing; please don't forget modellers in the wider gauges! I know we're in the minority but if we can make use of a sound starting point, so much the better!

[S.A.C Martin]

I can see the small number of parts will appeal to many people - two schools of thought on kits really... Firstly they are simply a means to an end, a source for a particular wagon for your layout for example, or can be an end in themselves where the builderis doing it purely for the pleasure of building the item - I suspect yours will be more of the former, not far removed from RTR really, which I guess was your aim all along?

 

Pretty much, although it stems from Sean and I really wanting to go on to do bigger steam engine bodyshells for RTR chassis - for example, we think we can do an all-in-one Original style Merchant Navy as a simple fit to a Hornby RTR chassis without any modification. It's also for me, given me an opportunity to examine a wide variety of w***lists on here and see if there's a particular demand for a particular type.

 

A few last examples - I bought the drawings for a 439 last week, to see if we can make a bodyshell to fit the Hornby M7 chassis as a future product. Sean is a Southern region modeller and wants to see if he can make some RTR wagons and similar for an LSWR or LBSCR based layout. The advantage in the way we're approaching this is that it's definitely volume production as opposed bespoke hand made one at a time models - if we do find we have a market, we'll pursue it, but it all depends on the reaction to the prototype bodyshell.

 

At the same time - it's definitely been fun! I'm no industrial expert at all, but I've enjoyed browsing websites, reading books and buying photographs towards this project and learning a lot along the way

 

One final thing; please don't forget modellers in the wider gauges! I know we're in the minority but if we can make use of a sound starting point, so much the better!

 

Trust me when I say this James - the first bodyshell won't necessarily look like it will, but it's definitely on the cards for a production run if we do one.

[Poor Old Bruce]

Just a further thought - aren't you aiming for the exact same market as DJH do with their starter kits?

 

Not a criticism at all though!

I take it you realise that the DJH starter kit IS a Barclay 16inch 0-4-0ST. If SACM is thinking of using the Pug chassis, High Level do a scale chassis for it.

 

Richard

 

p.s. Drawings of Barclay tanks in the model press are about as common as hens' teeth and rocking horse poo but there are some Peckett drawings about.

[James]

I take it you realise that the DJH starter kit IS a Barclay 16inch 0-4-0ST.

 

Indeed I do! Not built one but did build their 02 diesel when I was about 11 - it didn't run very well, but it was good fun and great experience!

[S.A.C Martin]

p.s. Drawings of Barclay tanks in the model press are about as common as hens' teeth and rocking horse poo but there are some Peckett drawings about.

 

Hi Richard,

 

That's pretty much what influenced our collective decision to look at an M5 - I actually wanted to do an avonside originally for another project, but having the drawings available for the M5 has satisfied our needs in making up a proof of concept prototype.

[Guest Phil]

Pretty much, although it stems from Sean and I really wanting to go on to do bigger steam engine bodyshells for RTR chassis - for example, we think we can do an all-in-one Original style Merchant Navy as a simple fit to a Hornby RTR chassis without any modification. It's also for me, given me an opportunity to examine a wide variety of w***lists on here and see if there's a particular demand for a particular type.

 

A few last examples - I bought the drawings for a 439 last week, to see if we can make a bodyshell to fit the Hornby M7 chassis as a future product. Sean is a Southern region modeller and wants to see if he can make some RTR wagons and similar for an LSWR or LBSCR based layout. The advantage in the way we're approaching this is that it's definitely volume production as opposed bespoke hand made one at a time models - if we do find we have a market, we'll pursue it, but it all depends on the reaction to the prototype bodyshell.

 

 

You are starting to make a lot of sense, and I for one would be interested to see whether you could produce a correct splashered 4F bodyshell to fit on the forthcoming Bachmann 3F chassis.

 

But that is diverging from the OP.

 

The biggest problem as I see it with trying to produce an RTR industrial 0-4-0 will be getting it to run well at slow speeds, and be able to haul more than a small handful of wagons. If you can pull that off with either a Barclay, Bagnall, Peckett or Avonside bodyshell I think you'll do well with sales.

[S.A.C Martin]

You are starting to make a lot of sense, and I for one would be interested to see whether you could produce a correct splashered 4F bodyshell to fit on the forthcoming Bachmann 3F chassis.

 

Mind, that'll be up to Sean - however I don't think he'll mind if I show off some of his cadwork from some other projects:

 

 

This forms the basis of a scale length E2 bodyshell (and yes, he's aware of the SEF one - he just wanted to do this as a separate trial run for his own modellling). Mind, this is an early shot and the final product was nicely polished up.

 

I'm pretty much the researcher on this one - useless with CAD But I can say I have every confidence in Sean producing some spectacular pieces

 

The biggest problem as I see it with trying to produce an RTR industrial 0-4-0 will be getting it to run well at slow speeds, and be able to haul more than a small handful of wagons. If you can pull that off with either a Barclay, Bagnall, Peckett or Avonside bodyshell I think you'll do well with sales.

 

We're not producing it RTR as such, but ready-to-plonk (nicked from a previous thread) onto an RTR chassis. If we do eventually get to the point of making our own RTR chassis - then we'll see, I think.

 

Thank you for your considered post Phil.

[60B]

Martin, I don't want to completly blow the 439 idea out of the water but the chassis was larger than the M7s. Has there been a drawing of a caley jumbo or 812 in the press? The DJH model is rough (so is the HR Barney and 439). On a modern note, what ever chassis you go for, don't forget to leave space fora decoder.

[S.A.C Martin]

Martin, I don't want to completly blow the 439 idea out of the water but the chassis was larger than the M7s.

 

That saves me checking the drawings against each other...

 

Has there been a drawing of a caley jumbo or 812 in the press? The DJH model is rough (so is the HR Barney and 439). On a modern note, what ever chassis you go for, don't forget to leave space fora decoder.

 

Chaps, just going a weeny bit off topic here

 

We haven't even had the M5 bodyshell back yet!

 

But yeah, food for thought. Always wanted an 812...

[Kits from Somerset]

I take it you realise that the DJH starter kit IS a Barclay 16inch 0-4-0ST. If SACM is thinking of using the Pug chassis, High Level do a scale chassis for it.

 

Richard

 

p.s. Drawings of Barclay tanks in the model press are about as common as hens' teeth and rocking horse poo but there are some Peckett drawings about.

 

 

Sorry NO it is a 14" one.

[Poor Old Bruce]

Sorry NO it is a 14" one.

Oops! Sorry Pardon (would put several bright red embarrassed faces in here if they were working). The 16" ones were a bit butch for small sidings anyway. Biggest problem with the DJH kit is filing the nameplates off the tank sides.

 

Richard

[60B]

Oops! Sorry Pardon (would put several bright red embarrassed faces in here if they were working). The 16" ones were a bit butch for small sidings anyway. Biggest problem with the DJH kit is filing the nameplates off the tank sides.

 

Richard

 

That and the castings are fairly rough these days.

 

Martin - Check the 439 and M7 drawings as I can't quite remember what the dimension differences are.

[Guest Max Stafford]

Not overly keen on the chassis arrangement and motor choice either.

 

Dave.

[Jamie]

 

Martin - Check the 439 and M7 drawings as I can't quite remember what the dimension differences are.

Considerable I believe.

 

 

M7 is bigger, and would take quite a cut-and-shut of body and chassis.

As one of the forum's prominent Aberdeenshire residents knows, though he'll not thank me for reminding him

[S.A.C Martin]

Considerable I believe.

 

 

M7 is bigger, and would take quite a cut-and-shut of body and chassis.

As one of the forum's prominent Aberdeenshire residents knows, though he'll not thank me for reminding him

 

Fair enough, although I should point out it was an idea to use the M7 chassis and not the M7 body...

 

But we're going off topic. If Sean and I did produce a 439, rest assured it would be to scale! It was merely an example of something we were looking at doing should this first bodyshell come out well.

 

EDIT: Just to add chaps - can we keep it firmly on the industrial prototype from now on? I'm aware I didn't help matters by posting the 439 spiel, and for that I apologise - but this is all whatnots and haveyous at the moment, I can't say or do anymore until sean and I get our first initial quote back.

[Guest Max Stafford]

You bad, bad man, Mr Wood! Just as poor Bob was coming to terms with the trauma...

 

 

Dave.

[Jamie]

Fair enough, although I should point out it was an idea to use the M7 chassis and not the M7 body...

No worries, not wanting to watch you waste your time, was all.

 

You have an interesting proposition going on here. I'm not clear what form it's going to or intended to take now, but I think you've proved precedence for the simple industrial loco kit in the Barclay, without duplicating a prototype. While I've a staunch preference for Caledonia Works produce, I think a lot of people just see 'generic' Barclays as all looking the same. The proposed Peckett is clearly different to the potential casual buyer.

[ArthurK]

At the risk of being shouted down my ideas of industrial tanks tend to be somewhat smaller than many of those discussed. I tend to think of industrials as smal locos such as the 0-4-0ST. In the good(?) old days "Centre Models" produced a number of these but they have long since vanished.

I was persuaded to buy one of these, the RSH 0-6-0ST and whereas the body was straightforward I ditched the underframe completely and replaced it with a scratchbuilt one instead. I do not know of any RTR chassis that would fit the bill so it is probably down to kit or scratch build. There a number of smaller suppliers who do have kits for industrial locos (E.G HighLevel) but these are often aimed at the experienced builder.

 

However I offer my RSH 0-4-0ST as what comes to mind when I think industrials. The Hunslet 0-6-0ST is to my eyes a big engine! However I would go for a Kitson 0-6-0 PT as used by the Consett Iron Company.

[S.A.C Martin]

At the risk of being shouted down my ideas of industrial tanks tend to be somewhat smaller than many of those discussed. I tend to think of industrials as smal locos such as the 0-4-0ST. In the good(?) old days "Centre Models" produced a number of these but they have long since vanished.

I was persuaded to buy one of these, the RSH 0-6-0ST and whereas the body was straightforward I ditched the underframe completely and replaced it with a scratchbuilt one instead. I do not know of any RTR chassis that would fit the bill so it is probably down to kit or scratch build. There a number of smaller suppliers who do have kits for industrial locos (E.G HighLevel) but these are often aimed at the experienced builder.

 

However I offer my RSH 0-4-0ST as what comes to mind when I think industrials. The Hunslet 0-6-0ST is to my eyes a big engine! However I would go for a Kitson 0-6-0 PT as used by the Consett Iron Company.

 

Arthur, thats a fab little engine and pretty much what Sean and I are aiming for in terms of overall look and size

 

Thank you for posting that, it's a lovely model and has given me food for thought on a livery for the prototype bodyshell.

[ArthurK]

Arthur, thats a fab little engine and pretty much what Sean and I are aiming for in terms of overall look and size

 

Thank you for posting that, it's a lovely model and has given me food for thought on a livery for the prototype bodyshell.

 

And it waddles along just like the real thing!

[jukebox]

However I offer my RSH 0-4-0ST as what comes to mind when I think industrials. The Hunslet 0-6-0ST is to my eyes a big engine! However I would go for a Kitson 0-6-0 PT as used by the Consett Iron Company.

 

 

Top effort, Arthur! Loads of character.

[Adam]

At the risk of being shouted down my ideas of industrial tanks tend to be somewhat smaller than many of those discussed. I tend to think of industrials as small locos such as the 0-4-0ST. In the good(?) old days "Centre Models" produced a number of these but they have long since vanished.

 

I was persuaded to buy one of these, the RSH 0-4-0ST and whereas the body was straightforward I ditched the underframe completely and replaced it with a scratchbuilt one instead. I do not know of any RTR chassis that would fit the bill so it is probably down to kit or scratch build. There a number of smaller suppliers who do have kits for industrial locos (E.G High Level) but these are often aimed at the experienced builder.

 

It's an interesting gap in perception isn't it? A Hunslet Austerity is a big engine of course - BR rated it 4F, so is the Kitson long boiler, which wasn't remotely dwarfed by the former. Different sorts of industrials did different jobs, a distinction lost on a lot of modellers - I blame all those garish Tri-ang/Hornby tank engines.

 

Most of the discussion here, however, has revolved around 0-4-0s even smaller than the RSH 14" - notably the Peckett M5 alluded to above...

 

I'd dispute the 'High Level' = experienced builder btw for two very good reasons: 1. All the parts fit as designed; 2. The transmission is designed in, which saves a newbie one of the more difficult elements (getting the transmission in is often effectively kit design rather than kit building)*. A patient new comer to etched brass sould certainly build one, but that's by the by. A Hunslet Austerity is a big engine of course - BR rated it 4F, so is the Kitson long boiler, which wasn't remotely dwarfed by the former.

 

* A glance at the Hachette 'Scotsman thread reveals an enormous amount of ingenuity - and developing skill - from several people plainly unfamiliar with kit building.

 

Adam

[James]

I'd dispute the 'High Level' = experienced builder btw for two very good reasons: 1. All the parts fit as designed; 2. The transmission is designed in, which saves a newbie one of the more difficult elements (getting the transmission in is often effectively kit design rather than kit building)*. A patient new comer to etched brass sould certainly build one, but that's by the by.

 

I'd say the main pre-requisite (sp?) would be the ability to solder neatly and know how to clean joints afterwards. Other than that, just an ability to take care and follow HLK's excellent instructions and you should be fine.

[Guest Max Stafford]

I'd say the main pre-requisite (sp?) would be the ability to solder neatly and know how to clean joints afterwards. Other than that, just an ability to take care and follow HLK's excellent instructions and you should be fine.

 

I agree entirely with James' comments about the High Level gearboxes. They are the best engineered and designed boxes I have ever encountered. As long as you take your time and think about what you're doing you will finish up with a beautifully smooth and quiet transmission, even if like me when I did my J27, you've never done one before.

I really can't praise Chris's product enough!

 

Dave.