Priory Road - North East Essex in BR days

[DavidLong]

20 hours ago, Izzy said:

Hello David,

 

I think the problem I have is that I am trying to replicate in general what occurred specifically around the Colchester/North East Essex area and I am therefore rather 'boxing myself in'. Having set myself a limit on the amount of stock I can have, which I have already reached, means I'm also trying just to work with what's available.

 

It probably needs looking at differently and your thoughts are most helpful in this respect so thank you. Indeed the reference to Ipswich in conjunction with an ongoing search for a specific image I have seen of a Hunslet 05 on the Waveny Valley branch - which I just can't seem to find again now! - has led me in a (very) roundabout way to think about early diesel shunters in the original black livery. Whether this will lead anywhere is moot, but it all provides food for thought and especially as I have examples spare which could be re-liveried.

 

Bob

 

 

 

 

As usual ,Bob, Dr Allen has the answer! In 'Diesels in East Anglia' he has two photos on the Waveney Valley line which feature the 'big' Hunslets. Both were taken in 1964 and one features D2558 light engine at Ditchingham and the other, D2559 on the Pointers sand train just outside Ditchingham. As to be expected at this date they are both in green with wasp stripes.

'First Generation Diesels in East Anglia', the Transport Treasury volume featuring the Doctor's photos has two more. Both are the sand train, one at Geldeston and the other at Ditchingham.

The latter volume has excellent reproduction of the photos but, sadly, the captions lack the intimacy of the the good Doctor's orignals in the former volume.

Incidentally, at the opening of Ipswich diesel depot in late 1959 it had six 'big' Hunslets, three 'small' Hunslets, four BR 204hp and one Drewry.

 

David

[Izzy]

3 hours ago, Nigelcliffe said:

Years ago I described in the 2mm magazine how I built a DY1 shunter (as seen on Ipswich dock photos).   B&H Enterprises body etch and very quick chassis build with minimal hand tools.    Though small locos, they have a much wider bonnet than many smaller shunters, so lots of space for motor, etc.. 

 

Both B&H and Judith Edge (much nicer etch!) have the larger class 05, though that needs a chassis with coupling rods, jack-shaft, etc.. so is a bit more work.   The Association's 03/04 chassis probably fits with a tiny bit of tweaking - the wheel spacing is the same.  

 

 

 

I do like those shots of the small & large Hunslets in their clean black livery in the docks and especially the smaller with the side skirts. Your model has often tempted me to atttempt one myself. Being of a certain age I have fond memories of my Fathers car stopped in Bridge St Ipswich during the ‘50’s/early ‘60’s while trains crossed from the docks to the lower sidings etc. and so I’ve probably seen several of the locos at the time although the memories of them are rather hazy now.

 

25 minutes ago, DavidLong said:

 

As usual ,Bob, Dr Allen has the answer! In 'Diesels in East Anglia' he has two photos on the Waveney Valley line which feature the 'big' Hunslets. Both were taken in 1964 and one features D2558 light engine at Ditchingham and the other, D2559 on the Pointers sand train just outside Ditchingham. As to be expected at this date they are both in green with wasp stripes.

'First Generation Diesels in East Anglia', the Transport Treasury volume featuring the Doctor's photos has two more. Both are the sand train, one at Geldeston and the other at Ditchingham.

The latter volume has excellent reproduction of the photos but, sadly, the captions lack the intimacy of the the good Doctor's orignals in the former volume.

Incidentally, at the opening of Ipswich diesel depot in late 1959 it had six 'big' Hunslets, three 'small' Hunslets, four BR 204hp and one Drewry.

 

David

 

I do like the earlier album. Also the comment about the 14 wagons of wet sand being a heavy load for such a small loco. Very apt as on an earlier page there is the shot of a pair of 15's taking the wagons to Ipswich from Coltishall. Oh yes ... erm another project I have features sand trains, although not using 05's, as I must try and resist the temptation to produce more locos. But that is for another time, and probably a new thread.

 

Incidently there are very useful PDF's on the Great Eastern Railway Society website about modelling the GE in both 4mm & 2mm.  As well as listing all the kits/RTR available there is a section with shed allocations for certain years from around 1950 to 1980. It's very interesting seeing what each shed had at certain times. How classes came and went, and the numbers they had. Quite revealing as to how things changed.

 

Bob

 

 

 

[Izzy]

1 hour ago, Satan's Goldfish said:

 

Could light engine moves to/from the nearest coal and water facilities be the answer to the problem? I do like what you've done using the parcels engine for the passenger service, but does the original passenger engine really need to leave with the parcels or could a later (cement?) arrival locomotive be used to remove the parcels. Following that, a light engine move from North further into the sequence could be to move the cement wagons, run round them and shunt them into the parcels bay; passenger service arrives, the free locomotive that had shunted the cement wagons can take the coaches to their next destination and then locomotive freed at the buffers can be used to head North with the cement. 

 

Hope that makes sense!

 

Gosh, thanks for spending the time thinking that through. And yes, it does. I'm slowly gathering several ideas together, and when I can get it all straight in my head and down on paper I'll try and run them and see how things pan out. it's interesting to find that when I'm running the layout options on how to do things appear that don't show just written down. On how it affects or interacts with the fiddle/sector plate. Where some moves aren't possible because of the need for a clear road or at least some track space in it that won't foul another later move. So I don't have to touch/move/re-rail stock too much, indeed as little as possible.

 

Thanks again,

 

Bob

 

 

 

 

 

 

[queensquare]

Really enjoying the thread at the moment Bob. The only thing I would disagree with is the notion you can have too many locos. Really.......!!😀

 

Jerry

[Chris Higgs]

1 hour ago, queensquare said:

Really enjoying the thread at the moment Bob. The only thing I would disagree with is the notion you can have too many locos. Really.......!!😀

 

Jerry

 

I agree with Jerry. Anyway, one of the attractions is seeing some stock you don't just see on every other layout. So the ER EMU and the N7 is a real highlight. A Hunslet shunter (or two) would really set it apart.

 

Chris

[Izzy]

3 hours ago, queensquare said:

Really enjoying the thread at the moment Bob. The only thing I would disagree with is the notion you can have too many locos. Really.......!!😀

 

Jerry

 

Thanks Jerry,

 

Ha, yes. To many the amount of stock I have gathered together probably wouldn’t seem that much but for me it is a far more than I’ve ever had before. As I have mostly worked in scales that meant kit and scratchbuilding, P4, S, O fine, I’ve rarely had more than 3-4 locos, a couple of coaches, and perhaps two dozen or so wagons. I’ve also pretty much run out of space to store things! But the temptation to make things is always there…..

 

 

2 hours ago, Chris Higgs said:

 

I agree with Jerry. Anyway, one of the attractions is seeing some stock you don't just see on every other layout. So the ER EMU and the N7 is a real highlight. A Hunslet shunter (or two) would really set it apart.

 

Chris

 

Thanks Chris,

 

It was actually the 309 EMU's, the desire to have some, that have been the driving force behind the layout, so I'm really pleased that you and so many others like and enjoy what I have managed to put together. I have looked at a Hunslet 05, and do have a spare set of 7mm wheels, but the issue I've hit is they seem too big to fit under the footplate when up against a 2mm scale drawing seeing as how the prototypes are 3'4". So I am trying to think my way through it. Whether deepening the frames and raising the whole loco would show too much. But with a nice etch from Judith Edge available it does seem churlish not to give it a try sometime.......

 

Bob

[Jan W]

9 hours ago, Izzy said:

 

I have looked at a Hunslet 05, and do have a spare set of 7mm wheels, but the issue I've hit is they seem too big to fit under the footplate when up against a 2mm scale drawing seeing as how the prototypes are 3'4"

 

If I look at photo's it seems to me that the bonnet is wider than the wheels:

https://railphotoprints.uk/p307899532/h7561F942#h7561f942

Maybe the top of the flanges of your 7mm wheels could run inside the bonnet/footplate?

 

Jan

[Izzy]

45 minutes ago, Jan W said:

 

If I look at photo's it seems to me that the bonnet is wider than the wheels:

https://railphotoprints.uk/p307899532/h7561F942#h7561f942

Maybe the top of the flanges of your 7mm wheels could run inside the bonnet/footplate?

 

Jan

Yes, thanks Jan, it is wider and that may be a possible solution. After the interest and encouragement I have now ordered an etch to give it a go and see what results. 
 

Bob

[Sithlord75]

Does the steam passenger service have to have Mk 1s with gangways?   Could it have Suburban Mk 1s (which are significantly shorter)?  Not being familiar with the location etc, I may be well off!

[Izzy]

3 hours ago, Sithlord75 said:

Does the steam passenger service have to have Mk 1s with gangways?   Could it have Suburban Mk 1s (which are significantly shorter)?  Not being familiar with the location etc, I may be well off!

 

I have looked at that, thinking it might be another way around things, but several aspects have proved it not the answer sadly. The only (maroon) passenger coaches I currently have are half a dozen Farish Mk 1's, which are actually turning out to be more than I need. I did wonder whether some shorter Gresley/Thompson replacements could be used as well as being different, but the problem is that as well as only being mostly found on cross country branch services such as the Colchester to Cambridge one, three of the shorter length coaches, 57', 52', etc. are still too long for the loop! I often think it would have been handy if I'd made the loop a bit bigger, but this is part and parcel of the minimum space layout juggling act, trying to get that proverbial quart into a pint pot, and I think the overall balance might have been lost.

 

Thanks for the thought though Kevin, I'm very grateful to everybody for all the suggestions that have been made, it's very helpful in trying to see things from different perspectives, aspects you might be blind to.

 

Bob

 

 

Edited September 14, 2022 by Izzy
add a missed word

[Chris Higgs]

Gresley push-pull stock? Then you won't have to run-around.

 

Chris

[Izzy]

 

Some more details

 

While I try and work through all the different ideas with regard to the steam transition era sequence I have been adding a few more details. Several times I have said and thought that the layout was finished only to find that as I gazed at it more became apparent. Two of these were a few people along with some parcels/mailbags for the platform trolleys.

 

Like so much else these are aspects I tend to struggle with, not so much the making of them but rather how many and their positioning. It’s much the same with road vehicles. What I wanted to try and achieve was a situation where things wouldn’t seem too out of place at any time of the day. No one sitting on a seat reading a morning paper after the last train of the day has left kind of thing. Probably a bit daft but that’s the way I tend to think.

 

The parcels I made from chunks of plasticard filed to be as square as possible. Since most were usually either light buff coloured cardboard or wrapped in brown paper, especially in the era of the ‘60’s/’70’s, I added labels out of ink-jet decal sheet after a coat of matt paint to try and make some variation along with the sizes. The porter with the barrow and a parcel on it is one of the two figures I have added so far.

 

 

The mail bags are also a light fawn. At this time they were hessian and made in HMP workshops. Later bags were of a grey woven plastic material while today containerisation is used with little or no rail involvement as far as I know. These are strips of masking tape wrapped around bits of card with poster paint applied.

 

 

The other figure is a man outside the station waiting to be picked up, he’s obviously not getting the waiting bus which according to the blinds is going to Head Street. Perhaps he’s just used the phone box to call someone. I’ve tried to put some sketchy detail inside to represent what used to exist.

 

 

 

The figures are from Bachmann while the phone and pillar boxes are Peco.

 

Bob

 

 

[Caley Jim]

17 minutes ago, Izzy said:

.....today containerisation is used with little or no rail involvement as far as I know.

A Royal Mail branded DMU leaves the Royal Mail Group depot, across the WCML from University Hospital Wishaw, every evening for the south.  I'm not sure where it's destination is, but will check it on Traksy this evening.  Presumably there is a corresponding return working coming north.

 

Jim

[Izzy]

That's interesting, thanks Jim. I know much use is now made of air hubs but little about whether rail plays any significant part any longer. As with so much these days a complete turn-around from what used to be.

 

Bob

[Caley Jim]

Train 193T,  Shieldmuir Royal Mail Terminal to Warrington Royal Mail Terminal.  Dep. 17:50, Arr. 20:30.

 

Also found 190T, Willesden Prdc to Shieldmuir Royal Mail Terminal. Dep. 16:18, Arr. 22:37.  Currently (21:09) 9 minutes early approaching Penrith North lakes.

 

Will keep an eye open for any others.

[Izzy]

I was just taking a look this morning at the Hunslet 05 2mm drawings I generated to get a basic idea of how the build might be done, motor and gearing position and so on,

 

 

when look what the postman delivered.

 

 

A lovely, shiney, nickel-silver etch from Judith Edge, along with some instructions.

 

 

Only ordered the other day so really great service. There's a number of really first class suppliers around isn't there.

 

Looking at it and having a brief read of the instructions has already revealed details I was unaware of. It's going to be a nice little challenge I think, trying to live up to the quality of the etch, and adjusting things to suit my standard 2mm split frame chassis arrangements that I now use. I have found a CT DCX76 in my decoder stash with stay-alive wires fitted which is lucky considering the current lack of Zimo's at present. I think it may have come out of the maroon 309 set when I put a Zimo MX617 & stay-alive in it, because this will get a stay-alive pack as well. All my smaller locos, shunters etc have them now. A real benefit I have found.

 

Bob

[PaulCheffus]

Hi

 

I have one of these to build so I am looking forward to seeing how you tackle this.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[Izzy]

 

A Hunslet 05 in 2mm

 

Having decided to try and make one of these using the Judith Edge etch, although I haven’t done it before, I thought it might be of interest if I chart it’s construction as I go. I thought it might help me remember to mention aspects that may be of use to others that I would later forget. I don’t know if I can because once I get going on something I just tend to keep going and think about such things as taking shots when it’s too late. We’ll see, I’ll try.

 

Anyway, the first thing I did was re-read a couple of times Bryn’s very interesting and helpful thread on his super Ruston 165 build from a Judith Edge etch:

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/173643-2mm-scale-ruston-165-judith-edge-etched-kit/

 

I too am wondering how I’m going to get enough weight added to allow it to haul a reasonable amount. The Farish 03/04 have cast bodies and footplates to help here with only the cab plastic, the casting also going up to the window line inside it. And these 05’s are fractionally smaller to add to the fun, although not as small as a DY1, 02, or Bryn’s Ruston.

 

So while I awaited the arrival of the etch I dug out a scaled print I had made a few years back to muse on how it might be possible to arrange the motor and gears. As I prefer drop-in wheel-sets for a number of reasons this means using a two-stage gear arrangement, the first using a worm & wheel, the second spur gears. This commonly used design in 2mm also has the benefit that the motor can be raised above the chassis frames. Because the driving wheels will be the smallest available size of 7mm the only spur gear that can be used as the final gear is a 14t so the total reduction will be limited to that of the worm gear first stage of 30-1 as both the second stage gears will be 14t. Given that it will be powered by DCC using a CT DCX76 I have spare along with a stay-alive pack I don’t envisage any running issues. A blue Farish 04 with an association etched chassis has the same arrangement and gearing and runs quite satisfactorily.

 

Having enough spare parts in stock I was able find a spare/iffy 7x16 coreless motor (a duff Farish one out of the 2MT) along with all the gears and muffs needed to fiddle about placing them on the drawing and seeing what emerged. As I rather expected the only viable option is as I have done with my 04 & 08’s that have etched chassis, the motor facing backwards and the rear axle being the driven one. This seems to mean the gearing will protrude a bit into the cab.

 

 

I looked at using small 2.3mm muffs for the non-driven axles so I can get the first stage wormwheel down as low as possible. The clearance between the worm wheel and a 1/8” muff is minimal when the second reduction comprises 14t:14t so every fraction helps.

 

Here is a comparison between a couple of 2.3’s, a 3mm, and an1/8”(3.15mm).

 

 

I’m undecided at the moment as to whether I will use the frames alone with PB axle bushes, sweat them onto some 1/64” brass for an added bit of weight, or perhaps just make new thicker ones. Either course would use ¼” K&S brass strip as it’s the right depth overall. 1/32” is 0.8mm and a decent thickness. Another advantage is the mk5 wheels use steel axles so just providing slots for them to run in and be able to drop them out is viable. I’m tending to lean that way now. There would of course be a simple keeper plate type strip of the kind I normally use.

 

I also intend to put a stay-alive pack in there, with the decoder sitting above it or the motor, again as I’ve done before. Worryingly this doesn’t appear to leave much space in which to tuck slabs of lead sheet so I’m going to have to think this all through very carefully and quite possibly change where things go. Weight is a key ingredient to decent running in this scale I have found, more so than in others although it’s always important, and why so much time and effort is spent on it, with others preferring solid brass milled chassis etc. in this respect.

 

I did have the idea before the etch arrived that it might be possible to use the etched chassis kit for the Farish 03/04. But this soon proved a no go as of course they are 1:148 where as the etch is 2mm/1:152. Silly me. But the relative dimensions would have been out whatever anyway even if the same scale it soon became clear. However comparing the chassis sides with a home made 03/04 chassis I’d built for test purposes did ring alarm bells regarding the clearance for the fly-cranks, the 05’s being much nearer the wheels. With the need to use oversized wheels I worried there wouldn’t be any. Basic appraisal reveals it’s a close run thing, being around 0.5mm, so something I’ll have to keep an eye on.

 

Here’s a shot of an etched chassis side alongside a brass strip one I drilled to Farish dimensions. You can see the error difference as well as the different flycrank axle positions.

 

 

I’m now cutting the main parts out of the etch to do dry runs of them, how they fit together, where I might need to make changes to suit a scale the etch wasn’t primarily designed for, where to fit chassis spacers, body fixing points and so forth. I’m also studying all the photos and other info I can find to get a clear understanding of the variations between the locos, there being several.

 

There was of course the most obvious one in that the first batch, D2550-D2573 were quite different to the later one D2574-D2618, the latter having larger wheels, bigger cabs and so on. Indeed this etch is specifically for the first batch including those sold originally for industrial use before those for BR were made. They were only found in East Anglia – those made for BR, while the later batch never worked there. The Heljan 4mm & 7mm models are of this later type. But there are variations even within the first batch. Different access hatches on the bonnet top, different sized bonnets due to larger fuel tanks, different front step positions. So I need to nail down all these and any others I’ve missed so far and choose a particular loco to make. At present D2554 seems to be the lead candidate. Now probably better known as the only 05 to get blue livery being transferred to the IOW in the mid ‘60’s and still surviving there today in working order. My reason for considering it is that it was located at Parkeston quay for most of it’s existence prior to the IOW move and I’ve also seen online shots of it opposite Colchester power signal box in 1961.

 

https://railphotoprints.uk/p307899532

 

That it lived in the area is good enough for me though as most of the others were at Ipswich, Lowestoft, Yarmouth (all for the docks again), and Norwich. D2550/D2551/D2552 were also at Parkeston alongside it, the difference being these first three had the ten manholes on the bonnet top while all the rest had just two larger central ones. I quite like the idea of the latter ones with the 10 manholes marking them out as a bit different. So any of these four might eventually get the nod

 

What I have decided is that it will be in the original plain black livery. As it’s primary use will be in the steam transition era sequence this will fit nicely, and especially as I have found shots of these 05’s in it as late as 1962 although the shot mentioned of D2554 seems to show it by then in the later green livery. I think I can live with the disparity and especially as by ‘61’ the workings I want to primarily portray had ceased. I also have 03/04’s and 08’s in both the green and blue liveries so it will set it apart.

 

So, that’s where I am at present. To be honest I find that usually with kit or scratch building, sorting out what you’re going to do, and how, along with prototype research, is often the biggest and longest part of the process. The actual build being fairly quick - relatively. Well, hopefully!

 

Bob

[Caley Jim]

Rather than us a 14/14 M.04 gearing, could you not use a 14/20 M.03 pairing?  that would give you a wee bit lower gearing, but also allow the motor to be a tad lower, as that pairing has slightly closer centres?

 

Just a thought,

 

Jim

[Bryn]

Bob,

 

This really is going to be an interesting read, I have every confidence you'll make a nice job of this kit by @Michael Edge. 

 

The flycranks are a total nightmare to get right on such small locomotives. In the end I had to radius the rear of mine to clear the flanges of the drivers. I attach a zoomed in image for reference.

 

 

I left mine to float along the axle in the frames and they are centred by the rods once the crank pin washers are installed.

 

Keep up the great work, this build is really up my street 👍 

[Chris Higgs]

> I looked at using small 2.3mm muffs for the non-driven axles so I can get the first stage wormwheel down as low as possible. The clearance between the worm wheel and a 1/8” muff is minimal when the second reduction comprises 14t:14t so every fraction helps.

 

Its possible to mill/file a small slot in the 1/8" or 3mm muffs if you want to clear the wormwheel in this configuration.

 

Chris

[Izzy]

10 hours ago, Caley Jim said:

Rather than us a 14/14 M.04 gearing, could you not use a 14/20 M.03 pairing?  that would give you a wee bit lower gearing, but also allow the motor to be a tad lower, as that pairing has slightly closer centres?

 

Just a thought,

 

Jim

It’s a good one. Thanks for reminding me because although I don’t have any in stock I did wonder about using M.03’s. Then the etch dropped through the door and it went clean out of my head…old age is my stock excuse these days! As a shop 3 goody bag will be winging my way tomorrow thanks to the great service from the shopkeeper I’ll carry on with the M.04’s for now. My one concern is whether the smaller tooth depth would cope with the leeway needed with the drop-in wheel approach. I normally take the centres measurement, half each PCD + clearance value, and then add a bit to allow for any errors in drilling the holes. 

 

10 hours ago, Bryn said:

Bob,

 

This really is going to be an interesting read, I have every confidence you'll make a nice job of this kit by @Michael Edge. 

 

The flycranks are a total nightmare to get right on such small locomotives. In the end I had to radius the rear of mine to clear the flanges of the drivers. I attach a zoomed in image for reference.

 

 

I left mine to float along the axle in the frames and they are centred by the rods once the crank pin washers are installed.

 

Keep up the great work, this build is really up my street 👍 

 

Thanks for the shot. Oh that’s er, tight. Fag paper clearance comes to mind. A bit like clearance amounts with outside valve gear and P4 locos - let’s not go there…..           Yes, solid rods have many advantages like this, I long ago abandoned pivoting/hinged rods even with sprung/compensated chassis. The 05’s are supposed to pivot around the crankpins so I guess a bit more soldering will be involved. They look very fine, perhaps too much so for my taste. I do wonder if I will have to do a ‘cut & shut’ job on some association sets to generate some more robust ones. I’ve just done two sets like this for my converted Farish 03 & 04. 
 

There’s three sets of fly cranks for different throws of the 4mm wheels that can be used. Working out which to use with the 7mm mk5’s on the way will be interesting. This is of course all part of the fun, the challenge, as I’m sure you already know!

 

9 hours ago, Chris Higgs said:

> I looked at using small 2.3mm muffs for the non-driven axles so I can get the first stage wormwheel down as low as possible. The clearance between the worm wheel and a 1/8” muff is minimal when the second reduction comprises 14t:14t so every fraction helps.

 

Its possible to mill/file a small slot in the 1/8" or 3mm muffs if you want to clear the wormwheel in this configuration.

 

Chris

 

Yes, I’ve done this in the past, Delrin is very tolerant of this kind of thing isn’t it, thankfully. Much better so than Tufnol  although the latter does have the advantage of not melting….  I thought about the 2.3’s so I could lower the front spacer a bit more if needed although I’m not sure how well they would cope with a 1mm cross hole drilled through their middle. I like to do this with driven wheels and lock them with a drop of cryno to stop any possible shifting and loss of quartering but of course don’t bother with (bogie/tender) carry wheels. 
 

regards all,

 

Bob

[Nigelcliffe]

A few thoughts and observations on the 05.   

When I built my 02, I used a solid square brass bar in the chassis between the frames to put the weight low down. 
Slotted to clear axles (so drop-out wheels can work), and I used a milling machine to cut clearances for gears, but a simpler solution with saw/file would also work. Or can build the solid brass up in four layers of 1/16th brass, fretting each to shape to clear gears/muffs in each layer. 
The solid brass needs insulating from the frames, which is either the old-stand-by of thin paper, or I did it by using thin PCB for the frames with bearing bushes for each axle.   PCB meant that the frame was only electrically "live" in the area near the wheels, it was gapped at the ends where the frame screws went into the spacer (hidden behind the body steps).   

 

Flycranks.  In 4mm and 2mm I'm now copying Farish's approach on the 03/04.  The crank is not on a through-axle connecting each side (no quartering), and the crank bearing is very very sloppy (one of my recent 4mm locos is something like a 2.8mm axle in a 3.2mm hole).   Some of my locos have used half-axles on the crank, with a free running tube to keep the axles "in line" with each other, but allowing the independent movement.    The crankpin to coupling rod is sensibly sized for running and low slop.   With rigid rods, this works fine, the rod will lift and push the crank around as required.  

 

Another alternative for flycranks is to copy the High Level kits "Illusodrive".   Gear the crank shaft from the driven axle with spur gears and don't fit any crankpins between rods and crank (crank pin washers/nuts are good to add to the illusion).   The crank is therefore gear driven, and the rods just waggle around in fresh air next to them.  

 

 

- Nigel

[Caley Jim]

8 hours ago, Izzy said:

 My one concern is whether the smaller tooth depth would cope with the leeway needed with the drop-in wheel approach. I normally take the centres measurement, half each PCD + clearance value, and then add a bit to allow for any errors in drilling the holes. 

 

Provide the driven axle doesn't have any leeway to drop there should be no problem.  I don't know how you arrange your keeper plate, but a little packing in the right place might be needed.

 

8 hours ago, Izzy said:

There’s three sets of fly cranks for different throws of the 4mm wheels that can be used. Working out which to use with the 7mm mk5’s on the way will be interesting. This is of course all part of the fun, the challenge, as I’m sure you already know!

As far as I am aware all the Mk5 wheels have the same crank throw as before, 2mm, but Nigel might correct me on that.

 

Jim

[Nigelcliffe]

24 minutes ago, Caley Jim said:

As far as I am aware all the Mk5 wheels have the same crank throw as before, 2mm, but Nigel might correct me on that.

 

The standard throw is 2mm for wheels from 8.5mm dia upwards, the smaller wheels are reduced.  7.5 and 8mm wheels are 1.75mm.   The 7.0mm wheel is 1.5mm.   (Custom sizes/throws are possible, as are custom spokes/balance weights, etc.. they'd be special orders.  ).  

 

- Nigel