OO gauge GWR Mogul and Prairie

[cctransuk]

8 hours ago, The Johnster said:

 

Back in the day, more than 5 decades ago, one of the advantages of kit chassis and mechs was that you could choose the gearing, and the introduction of foldup gearboxes made the meshing more reliable on the higher ratios.  I always favoured 40:1 on such models but would go to 50:1 for shunting and mineral work.  That was when the standard RTR ratio was an insane 18:1, and decent slow running with smooth starting and stopping was next to impossible to produce in an RTR model without replacing the gears, which was a fairly major undertaking involving the replacement of the wheels, axles, and motor as well.

 

Then, 40 or so years ago, two things happened, fairly close to each other but quite coincidental, and we are still affected by their aftermath.  The first was that the default RTR mech became a pancake motor driving through plastic spur gears because the motors were gutless and had to run at stupid speeds to develop any useful power for haulage, and even then rubber traction tyres were common.  This was done in order to hide the motors in fireboxes and preserve daylight visibility beneath boilers, which was in itself A Good Thing, but a backward step in performance; decent slow running and smooth stop/starting was no longer next to impossible, it was fully impossible.  It was a low point, thankfully we are past it.

 

But that didn't matter because the next development was DCC.  This is undoubtedly A Very Good Thing if you can afford it, because it delivers fully 12vdc to your track at all times and then to your locomotive, though not the motor directl, which makes decent slow running and smooth stop/starting much easier.  You have to be able to afford it, though, and some of us, myself included, can't.  Short of overthrowing the capitalist system (and we haven't got anything that has been proven to work to replace it with) and introducing something that provides both efficient creation and truly fair and equable distribution, of wealth, we peasants have to learn to live with this.  Fortunately the manufacturers take pity on us and continue to produce DC mechs, so presumably there are enough of us of the lower orders to make this worth their while.  I am grateful for this.

 

During the late 90s and early noughties, most of our manufacturers stopped manufacturing and contracted that activity out to the Chinese, and this proved a very successful move.  The Chinese are very good at assmbing multi-part models that are highly detailed and to scale, and have access to cheap, powerful, and reliable can motors, so they made mechs with these motors driving through idler wheels to the final cog, usually at a motor shaft to driven axle ratio of 38:1, not far off my old-time fave, 40:1.  On clean well-laid track with a clean-wheeled loco with clean pickups that has been set up properly, modern product DC performance is pretty good, and we've chucked the traction tyres.  A Good Thing.  Modern product DCC performance is superb, and comes with whistles and bells, literally, but I still can't afford it. 

 

Pretty good DC is all very well, but no excuse not to try and do better, and one way this might be achieved would be with higher gear ratios, but realistic top speeds might need faster motors; not sure of the availability of these, or the result of upping the track voltage to, say, 15dc to achieve this.  Higher gear ratios might be self-defeating if they significantly increase gearing friction.  There may be other ways to improve DC performance, such as better controllers.  The only significant development in DC controller technology in the last 40 years has been the recent introduction of NFC control from smartphones; the core inner workings of a DC controller remain the same.  The answer may be a combination of methods, but I rather doubt that anyone is currently actively seeking them...

 

Starting a DC loco smoothly and controllably is a big ask, always was.  We are requiring the motor to overcome inertia and rolling r esistance at the very time when the voltage is at it's lowest and dirt at the track/wheel or wheel/pickup interface along with the braking effect of the pickup wipers will be able to exert their greatest proportional effect on the motor.  I occasionally express a desire for a DC stayalive, and flywheels, but both of these devices will be at their least effective in the start-from-rest situation.  Where do we go to improve DC slow and start/stop performance?

 

FWIW I think that for now we are back to upping gear ratios and perhaps current by about 25%, 50:1 and 16vdc.  But that might affect the top speed of some locos, and while it is all very well for me with my short BLT where nothing needs to run at more than about a scale 40mph and most movements are at scale 15mph or less to suggest such a course of action, it may not suit those who like to run expresses at realistic speeds.  Tony Wright, for example, complains that his RTR ECML pacifics cannot achieve realistic speeds and loads, i.e, 90mph+ with 14 bogies on level track, while his kit-builds can, so higher gearing might work.  Tony is an above average modeller, though, and famous for fettling mechs, so it might not work as well for us lumpen proletarians.

 

My view is that, in the long term, a completely different method of controlling model trains will emerge, with a power source and control device correctly situated on the loco but controlled by NFC and servos, but this will not happen in my lifetime, so, until the lottery enables me to go for DCC across the fleet, I'll just have to bodge along the best I can.  I'd like to try higher gearing and voltages, though.

 

 

 

For what it's worth, the KISS principle works for me. My garage-sized roundy-roundy permits full length trains - 10 to 12 coaches - and moderately high speeds.

 

Power is basic DC, controlled by homemade walkabouts, based on cheap-as-chips variable voltage regulator circuits, obtained from Aliexpress.

 

Slow speed control is perfectly adequate - yard shunting and cautious backing onto trains can be undertaken in a prototypical manner.

 

Both RTR and kitbuilt locos perform in this way, and top speeds are, in the main, prototypical. That said, some Bachmann locos could do with an extra 10mph, as could a few kitbuilt mixed traffic locos with gearbox ratios that are, with hindsight, a little on the high side.

 

I now use, exclusively, Mitsumi motors - which are slower revving than the norm - and do not need the higher ratio gearsets; lesson learned for future builds.

 

So - I for one am convinced that traditional, simple DC control can deliver excellent running and haulage ability, provided that motors are matched to appropriate gearboxes - sophisticated electronics are NOT required.

 

John Isherwood.

Edited February 9 by cctransuk

[Steamport Southport]

Psst. Looking for gear....

 

High Level, you can pick what size and ratio you want!

 

https://www.highlevelkits.co.uk/gearboxes

 

Motors and gearboxes have moved on a bit from X04s and those Scalextric things....

 

 

 

Jason

[Nile]

Well at least one type has the correct smokebox door.

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Psst. Looking for gear....

 

High Level, you can pick what size and ratio you want!

 

https://www.highlevelkits.co.uk/gearboxes

 

Motors and gearboxes have moved on a bit from X04s and those Scalextric things....

 

 

 

Jason

 

Indeed - I use nothing else!

 

However, using Mitsumi motors, I've found that it's advisable to use a lower ratio than with, say, Mashima motors.

 

John Isherwood.

[Craigw]

7 hours ago, Nile said:

Well at least one type has the correct smokebox door.

 

 

Nile, 

Does the tender still have the C1925 heavy springs or have they retooled to include the earlier (correct) spring?

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[Miss Prism]

Dapol's tender has later springs. I don't think they ever planned to do the earlier light spring. 

[Miss Prism]

Why didn't the Moguls have steam heating pipes? (Or am I missing something obvious?)

 

[Hal Nail]

36 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

Why didn't the Moguls have steam heating pipes? (Or am I missing something obvious?)

 

The Heljan tender does!

Not sure I've ever seen the rear end of a real one.

 

Edit: rail online 5379 has one on the tender (also 5385 shows one). Presumably they weren't expected to work backwards.

https://www.rail-online.co.uk/p404170585/ec4655398

 

Edited February 10 by Hal Nail

[Steamport Southport]

34 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

Why didn't the Moguls have steam heating pipes? (Or am I missing something obvious?)

 

 

Weren't expected to work tender first?

 

I assume the tender has one.

 

 

Jason

[Miss Prism]

5322's cab has the steam heating valve and pipe.

 

Just seems a bit odd the fronts of the Moguls weren't steam-piped.

 

[The Johnster]

Perhaps there was something in the way that prevented putting a steam heat pipe there, but I can't imagine what it would be, why it was not present on the very similar front ends of the large prairies, or why the pipe could not have been jiggled around it.  Other GW tender locos had steamheat provision at the front, so it couldn't have been just an aversion to tender-first working while providing steam heating.

 

OTOH, sometimes the GW was just wierd, and did things for no apparent reason because it 'just did' and nobody told it not to.  We never got to the bottom of the left- and right-handed ventilators on the 4-coach 57' non-gangwayed Colletts as modelled by Hornby, did we?  Didn't happen on the similar 5-coach sets for Bristol and South Wales. My own theory is that it was a deliberate policy to puzzle modellers a century later...

[Harlequin]

I meant to post some photos of 5350 here, but I posted them in ANTB instead. Here's the link:

 

I said in that post that my smartphone was doing funny things with the colours but I think I was mistaken. It's Dapol doing funny things!

 

Have a look at this:

 

5350 new batch top left, 6336 first batch bottom right.

 

This difference in colour of the "black" parts is real - 5350 is very obviously dark blue-grey. That's true of all her "black" parts, wheel centres, tender, etc.

 

[gwrrob]

A good excuse to have a filthy mogul me thinks.😉

[St Enodoc]

8 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

5322's cab has the steam heating valve and pipe.

 

Just seems a bit odd the fronts of the Moguls weren't steam-piped.

 

In later years steam pipes were removed in summer. Perhaps that's what happened here (pure guesswork).

[Steamport Southport]

1 minute ago, St Enodoc said:

In later years steam pipes were removed in summer. Perhaps that's what happened here (pure guesswork).

 

The bags were. But the attachment would still be bolted onto the buffer beam and the pipe runs would be there.

 

7325 has acquired one in preservation days.

 

https://preservedbritishsteamlocomotives.com/7325-ex-9303/

 

 

Jason

[Ian Hargrave]

15 hours ago, gwrrob said:

A good excuse to have a filthy mogul me thinks.😉

I don’t believe I ever saw what was under the filth in any case.Unless of course in one of the late Peter W Gray’s photographs.That would be one taken at NA in BR.green.

[Hal Nail]

17 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Other GW tender locos had steamheat provision at the front

I'm totally confused by this discussion! I've flipped quickly through Google images and grabbed one of my GWR steam books and none of the Bulldogs, Granges, Halls, Castles and Kings I've come across had steam heat pipes on the front buffer beam. More often than not the coupling is hooked up on that side.

 

Am I missing something?

[Miss Prism]

Collett Goods had steam pipes at the front.
 

[Craigw]

I just had a look at the cab front etches on my Mitchell 43XX kit. They measure at a little over 5mm for the early cab and a little over 4mm for the later version of the cab. This follows with the 3" difference that I think was noted earlier. The earlier Dapol body measure around 5mm which suggests it has a roof profile that is similar to the early locos (not the later it is meant to be ) and thus that would mean the early Dapol loco possibly measure close to 6mm at the cab centreline which would make it too tall. 

 

If anybody else feels like looking at this or can check via a GA this might be the reason the roofline does not look quite right.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[Harlequin]

2 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

I don’t believe I ever saw what was under the filth in any case.Unless of course in one of the late Peter W Gray’s photographs.That would be one taken at NA in BR.green.

 

I know BR didn't give its inherited steam locos much love but the GWR had pride in it's creations. It's not so easy to use a grime overcoat to hide painting errors on models from that era.

 

Models are most commonly supplied in ex-works condition. That's why coach roofs are white and the copper and brass in the cab gleams. It's always been up to us to weather it down to the desired extent. So either Dapol have got the ex-works black wrong or they are telling us that black was really grey on this loco.

 

Furthermore, I think we can legitimately expect our models not to violently change colour when we photograph them. Just look at @gwrrob's photos if you want a real shock!

 

I'm not happy about this - not sure I can live with it or find a reasonable way to mitigate it.

 

[Ian Hargrave]

15 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

 

I know BR didn't give its inherited steam locos much love but the GWR had pride in it's creations. It's not so easy to use a grime overcoat to hide painting errors on models from that era.

 

Models are most commonly supplied in ex-works condition. That's why coach roofs are white and the copper and brass in the cab gleams. It's always been up to us to weather it down to the desired extent. So either Dapol have got the ex-works black wrong or they are telling us that black was really grey on this loco.

 

Furthermore, I think we can legitimately expect our models not to violently change colour when we photograph them. Just look at @gwrrob's photos if you want a real shock!

 

I'm not happy about this - not sure I can live with it or find a reasonable way to mitigate it.

 

I’m therefore in a quandary about a black e/c version .The only guides I have atm are images on Kernow & Rails websites. 

[Harlequin]

4 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

I’m therefore in a quandary about a black e/c version .The only guides I have atm are images on Kernow & Rails websites. 

Well, as per your advice to me, you need to see one "in the flesh", if you can. But I would certainly suggest not judging it standalone - you need to have another loco of similar livery alongside.

🙂

[gwrrob]

18 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

I’m therefore in a quandary about a black e/c version .The only guides I have atm are images on Kernow & Rails websites. 

 

[57xx]

39 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

 

I know BR didn't give its inherited steam locos much love but the GWR had pride in it's creations. It's not so easy to use a grime overcoat to hide painting errors on models from that era.

 

Models are most commonly supplied in ex-works condition. That's why coach roofs are white and the copper and brass in the cab gleams. It's always been up to us to weather it down to the desired extent. So either Dapol have got the ex-works black wrong or they are telling us that black was really grey on this loco.

 

Furthermore, I think we can legitimately expect our models not to violently change colour when we photograph them. Just look at @gwrrob's photos if you want a real shock!

 

I'm not happy about this - not sure I can live with it or find a reasonable way to mitigate it.

 

 

I agree it would have been better as black (unless there is evidence it wasn't black). A/C got applauded for the weathered smokebox on the Manor though, if this was an attempt to follow that, the execution failed. Would a lick of black paint be the simple solution? The black bits are usually the easiest to paint.

[Ian Hargrave]

18 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

Well, as per your advice to me, you need to see one "in the flesh", if you can. But I would certainly suggest not judging it standalone - you need to have another loco of similar livery alongside.

🙂

In fact I did attempt to do so yesterday at Doncaster but the only examples ….there weren’t many…..were boxed and given the crowded circumstances I felt I could hardly ask for a view straight out of the box.