MDO & MDV 21 Ton Mineral Wagons, by Accurascale

[Dunsignalling]

3 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

Hi Paul,

 

The exclamation mark is an indication of my ignorance (!).

 

I did know about the prototype being 3. 1.5" but had forgotten and have been used to manufacturered wheelsets being 12mm only, this fooling myself into thinking that this was the norm.

 

Thank you for putting me right on this, but in the case of these wagons, without wholesale rebuilding of the brake gear (which partially defeats the object of buying an RTR wagon), the only viable option here is to use the (slightly) smaller diameter wheels.

 

I'm not totally persuaded, though, that the difference in diameter is that obvious, it amounts to a reduction in 0.75" in radius, particularly in a wagon that's running on the layout.

 

Wagon wheels from Bachmann and Hornby are 12.5mm diameter over treads. 

 

Counterintuitively, it's what we traditionally think of as "scale" wheels (Jackson/Romford, Gibson etc.) that are 12mm. Quite why, I've never really fathomed, but suspect the reason lies way back in the early days of 4mm scale and became formalised (fossilised?) within the old BRMSB specifications.

 

My guess is the tread diameter was reduced to balance out over-deep flanges for clearance reasons.

 

Width, and gauge, of course, are different cans of worms altogether.

 

John

Edited January 13, 2022 by Dunsignalling
words in wrong order

[Wickham Green too]

25 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

...... (Jackson/Romford, Gibson etc.) that are 12mm. ......

But NEVER believe what it says on the tin ......AWAYS MEASURE wheels - whether rolling stock or loco - before committing to installation !

[Dunsignalling]

5 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

But NEVER believe what it says on the tin ......AWAYS MEASURE wheels - whether rolling stock or loco - before committing to installation !

TBH, I've been handling carriage and wagon wheels so long that I can tell the size as soon as I pick them up.

 

I can even tell 14mm apart from 14.2mm by feel on a good day!  Incidentally, it's mainly the RTR brands that get that right, too!

 

Axle length is something I always check though.

 

John

Edited January 13, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[Nick-L]

6 hours ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

Whilst the thrust of your argument is valid, the whole point of this particular can of worms is that the original wheels aren't to the "standard" spec of 12.5mm x 26mm x 2mm thereby putting another obstruction in the way of a straightforward conversion.

Not all P4 modellers compensate RTR wagons, many just swap the wheelsets without any further issues, as indeed do I in EM, so in this respect Bachmann/Hornby et al are a simpler conversion.

I doubt anybody is buying these wagons to junk the majority if not all of the chassis and replace it with a more scale alternative, because, niotwithstanding the wheelset issues and their knock on effect, it's a good, well detailed underframe, although not perfect.

 

Mike.

Totally agree. And furthermore, they were advertised and sold as “Designed for easy conversion to P4 and EM gauges” with clearly specified dimensions associated with the wheelsets suggesting this was the case (“26 mm over pin points”).

[Accurascale Fran]

6 minutes ago, Nick-L said:

Totally agree. And furthermore, they were advertised and sold as “Designed for easy conversion to P4 and EM gauges” with clearly specified dimensions associated with the wheelsets suggesting this was the case (“26 mm over pin points”).

 

Hi Nick,

 

We have held our hands up over this and have put provisions in place to ensure future models are not affected in this way, while putting a team who have finescale experience in place to ensure we do not have this issue again going forward and also no longer advising that the models are easy to convert until there is confidence that there is again. We got this one wrong, and we are sorry for that. We learn and do better in future.

 

If you are unhappy with your order please email us direct to discuss: sales@accurascale.co.uk

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

[Captain Kernow]

3 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

But NEVER believe what it says on the tin ......AWAYS MEASURE wheels - whether rolling stock or loco - before committing to installation !

 

3 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

TBH, I've been handling carriage and wagon wheels so long that I can tell the size as soon as I pick them up.

 

I can even tell 14mm apart from 14.2mm by feel on a good day!  Incidentally, it's mainly the RTR brands that get that right, too!

 

Axle length is something I always check though.

Well, this is all very interesting, isn't it?

 

In general terms, I cannot dispute the advice given by Wickham Green, especially if the recipient is a beginner at this game.

 

But like John (Dunsignalling), I have been doing this for long enough to recognise the difference between wheel types.

 

I also think it's not unreasonable to assume that any reputable manufacturer will abide by what he or she says it does 'on the tin', so if I have had good experience of any given make of wheel, I think it's fair enough for me to assume that the specialist manufacturer of such replacement wheels (eg. Exactoscale, Maygib etc.) knows what they are doing.

 

My faith in the manufacturers of such replacement wheels is borne out by the fact that both Alan Gibson and Exactoscale P4 3-hole disc wheels are both 12.5mm in diameter, just like Maygib.

 

It was my ineptitude that was responsible for me complacently assuming that they were 12mm.

 

Interestingly, I do always measure loco wheel diameters though, 'just to be on the safe side'.

 

That said, the Accurascale 3-hole disc wheels that came with my MDOs measure at 11.8mm in diameter.

 

If we put the discussion about axle lengths to one side (and I appreciate that Fran has given us an honest explanation about that, which is completely fine with me), the fact that their 3-hole disc wheels are slightly under-size coupled with the fact that the brake shoes are (commendably) close to the wheels means that any attempt to install actual 12.5mm wheels is going to be a challenge, unless you completely dismantle and re-build the brake gear.

 

You can see how my mind was working prior to this series of posts, can't you? I assumed wrongly that all the P4 wagon wheels were 12mm and didn't bat an eyelid when the Black Beetle ones measured at exactly that as well.

 

As it turns out, the fact that the BB wheels are 12mm has enabled me to produce a happily rolling chassis for my MDOs. It seems likely, given that all other options work out at 12.5mm, that I am going to have to leave them in there. This won't concern me unduly, as the lack of holes isn't particularly apparent (not to me, anyway).

 

On the other hand, if Black Beetle wheels were available at 12mm and with 3 holes, then that would be even better, but I doubt that this will turn out to be the case.

 

Edited January 13, 2022 by Captain Kernow

[Captain Kernow]

9 hours ago, BR traction instructor said:

As a P4 modeller wanting a particular wagon type to run happily and fit visually amongst my other P4 freight stock I would first examine the options of providing it/them with a sprung underframe. Sometimes a complete replacement for the RTR underframe (Rumney route) would be best and sometimes a DIY conversion based on using Bill Bedford style sprung W irons and rescuing some of the RTR detailing would be the way. On the grounds of how much a RTR manufacturer would have to charge per wagon and the low numbers that he would consequently sell, I wouldn’t expect to buy RTR wagons with the work already done. Simply fitting P4 wheelsets under a RTR wagon and hoping for some play in the axle does not suggest/guarantee good running and is only a partial solution.

I can't agree with your implication that replacing the underframe or doing a conversion using sprung W irons is the only way to convert an RTR wagon to P4.

 

Although you are a P4 modeller, BRTI, I don't know if you are a member of the Scalefour Society? If you are, you may have seen my article in Scalefour News 221, where I described the conversion of a Bachmann 16t mineral wagon to P4 in well under an hour, which included the fitting of pin point bearings and additional lead weight.

 

I deliberately did not fit springing or compensation to that wagon and generally haven't done so to most P4 freight stock that I have converted in recent years.

 

I have converted enough wagons now to know that the following factors are completely sufficient to ensure that the wagon runs well and remains on the track:

 

- the track must be good, laid correctly to gauge, correct flangeway clearances and good top alignment

 

- the wagon being converted as 'rigid' must sit squarely on all four wheels, with no rocking

 

- the wheels must rotate freely(!)

 

- the RTR wagon will probably need additional weight

 

When I started modelling in P4 nearly 20 years ago (and I still model in OO as well), I used to always install compensation or springing in all rolling stock, whether kit-built or RTR conversion.

 

But apart from the fact that I have simply found compensation or springing to be unnecessary to ensure good road holding (provided the above factors are observed, which in my case I believe they are), there is an additional, more pragmatic reason for not fitting a replacement etched chassis or BB W irons etc. to every wagon and that is the time it all takes.

 

Justin's chassis are superb, his are certainly one of the best such products out there, if not the best (and I have some in my 'to do' pile), but if the amount of modelling time you have at your disposal is limited, then we each have to make a pragmatic choice between building the best possible wagon (or whatever) or actually getting a few wagons finished and ready for use on the layout, which is also taking up your limited modelling time.

 

Despite being retired and in my 60s, I do not have as much time for my hobby as I perhaps thought I would have. 'Life' happens and other commitments have to take precedence.

 

So the choice (for me) is quite simple - do I accept a less sophisticated end product, in the interests of actually 'finishing stuff' or do I keep to the standards that I always aimed for when I was younger and had more years ahead of me?

 

For others, taking the more involved route and building the highly detailed etched kit is the only way to go and that is entirely fair enough. Each to their own, as they say.

 

 

Edited January 13, 2022 by Captain Kernow

[Captain Kernow]

9 hours ago, BR traction instructor said:

Those P4 modellers wanting RTR manufacturers to produce more wagon types (and not view it as not worth the hassle) have to be prepared to do the modelling required/view the RTR wagon as a starting point for a great looking and running P4 wagon

Well, yes, there is always going to be some element of 'modelling' involved in converting any RTR vehicle to P4 (or EM), I think we just differ in opinion on how far you need to go, in order to achieve what you are looking for.

 

9 hours ago, BR traction instructor said:

otherwise sticking to modelling in ‘OO’ gauge is probably best

Well, I'm not sure I am ever comfortable with P4 modellers making statements of this nature.

 

I am hopeful that you didn't mean it as such, but that kind of statement can be interpreted as somewhat arrogant and dismissive, 'P4 elitism' perhaps, a mindset which I am sure the Scalefour Society themselves would wish to distance themselves from.

 

[Dunsignalling]

A quick measuring session (digital caliper) on wagon wheels, randomly selected but all unused:

 

Alan Gibson:   12.04 

Romford:         12.21

Hornby:            12.52

Keen Maygib:  12.55

Bachmann:      12.61

 

John

Edited January 13, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[BR traction instructor]

52 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Well, yes, there is always going to be some element of 'modelling' involved in converting any RTR vehicle to P4 (or EM), I think we just differ in opinion on how far you need to go, in order to achieve what you are looking for.

 

Well, I'm not sure I am ever comfortable with P4 modellers making statements of this nature.

 

I am hopeful that you didn't mean it as such, but that kind of statement can be interpreted as somewhat arrogant and dismissive, 'P4 elitism' perhaps, a mindset which I am sure the Scalefour Society themselves would wish to distance themselves from.

 

The intention of my post is exactly as you interpreted it…there is always likely to be a considerable degree of modelling required to attain excellent running in P4. I would like to see an ever increasing number of modellers switch to P4 but their expectations of the degree of modelling required have to be realistic.

 

BeRTIe

Edited January 13, 2022 by BR traction instructor

[Captain Kernow]

40 minutes ago, BR traction instructor said:

there is always likely to be a considerable degree of modelling required to attain excellent running in P4

Indeed, although happily rather less than was the case 50 years ago.

 

I would also argue that you can also go to considerable lengths to achieve excellent running in OO (or EM) as well, given the fact that the running characteristics of so many RTR locos (especially some of the larger players) is so variable and inconsistent.

 

[Captain Kernow]

Whichever way we look at this, I am grateful to and supportive of Accurascale for 'raising the bar' in 4mm scale RTR.

 

I don't think that any other RTR manufacturer (except SLW) are even considering the needs of EM and P4 modellers when they produce rolling stock (and why should they, given the fact that EM and P4 customers form a very small percentage of overall numbers?).

 

[Wickham Green too]

2 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

.... I also think it's not unreasonable to assume that any reputable manufacturer will abide by what he or she says it does 'on the tin', ......

Though I generalised in my statement about checking diameters, my particular thoughts - having converted my MDOs without any great difficulty - was not specifically directed at wagon wheels. My major bugbear in the diameter field is a certain carrying wheel used under many a locomotive in the south of England that should be 3'1'' diameter : a certain well known manufacturer offers 3'0'' as the closest available but these measure 11.8mm and have chunky-looking nowhere-near-scrapping-size ( 1.4mm ) tyres so look totally ridiculous ; the same manufacturer's nominal 3'2'' wheel measures 12.4mm which is well nigh perfect for this application. ( the 1.1mm tyres look far better too )

 

 

 

Now - how are we going to get back on topic ? ............ ah, yes - anyone who's of the "buy Accurascale MDOs and bin the chassis to replace them with something else" school of thought, might as well start off with el-cheapo 21T bodies from Dapol.

[Michael Hodgson]

2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

A quick measuring session (digital caliper) on wagon wheels, randomly selected but all unused:

 

Alan Gibson:   12.04 

Romford:         12.21

Hornby:            12.52

Keen Maygib:  12.55

Bachmann:      12.61

 

John

Don't forget wheels on the prototype wouldn't all be the same size, over time their diameters would reduce through wear. 

[BR traction instructor]

15 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

Though I generalised in my statement about checking diameters, my particular thoughts - having converted my MDOs without any great difficulty - was not specifically directed at wagon wheels. My major bugbear in the diameter field is a certain carrying wheel used under many a locomotive in the south of England that should be 3'1'' diameter : a certain well known manufacturer offers 3'0'' as the closest available but these measure 11.8mm and have chunky-looking nowhere-near-scrapping-size ( 1.4mm ) tyres so look totally ridiculous ; the same manufacturer's nominal 3'2'' wheel measures 12.4mm which is well nigh perfect for this application. ( the 1.1mm tyres look far better too )

 

 

 

Now - how are we going to get back on topic ? ............ ah, yes - anyone who's of the "buy Accurascale MDOs and bin the chassis to replace them with something else" school of thought, might as well start off with el-cheapo 21T bodies from Dapol.

A route that I’ve used previously in P4 was to order e.g. bodies only from Parkside and etched underframes from Rumney. This still leaves wheels and buffers but keeps the overall cost reasonable. It would need to be a very intricate and dimensionally superb new RTR wagon that was used as a donor in a project such as this.

 

BeRTIe

Edited January 13, 2022 by BR traction instructor

[Enterprisingwestern]

1 hour ago, BR traction instructor said:

A route that I’ve used previously in P4 was to order e.g. bodies only from Parkside and etched underframes from Rumney. This still leaves wheels and buffers but keeps the overall cost reasonable. It would need to be a very intricate and dimensionally superb new RTR wagon that was used as a donor in a project such as this.

 

BeRTIe

 

The problem being is that to build a decent sized rake of, say, 30 wagons, takes a considerable investment in both time and money, whereas if the original model has built in adaptability then the project becomes more manageable and achievable.

This is not another dig at Accurascale, but is relevant to all manufacturers of all types of rolling stock.

 

Mike.

[McC]

24 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

This is not another dig at Accurascale, but is relevant to all manufacturers of all types of rolling stock.

 

Couldn't agree more Mike, and has Fran stated above, this wagon isn't the perfect candidate for that, although we did include additional brake gear for conversion in the MDV packs, and have brought on additional team members (now 14 of us mad people) to standardise where things should be and sustain and grow our prolific output. The EM and P4 wheel sets are packed and ready for the Deltic, for example, and will be hitting these shores alongside the loco in the next number of weeks. 

Edited January 13, 2022 by McC

[Enterprisingwestern]

23 minutes ago, McC said:

The EM and P4 wheel sets are packed and ready for the Deltic, for example, and will be hitting these shores alongside the loco in the next number of weeks. 

 

Slight thread drift, who needs to contact who with regard to including these in the delivery?

 

Mikje.

[Accurascale Fran]

2 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

Slight thread drift, who needs to contact who with regard to including these in the delivery?

 

Mikje.

Hi Mike,

 

They will be sold as separate items and available for purchase on the website in the coming weeks.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

[rembrow]

I received my replacement couplings during the week, but the shipment was one pack short. I sent an e-mail to Accurascale support yesterday, not expecting anything till the working week, however received a response from Patrick, within the hour, and details of a new order for the extra pack, at no cost. Today the pack has been posted to me, that is some response. Many thanks to Accurascale.

 

[WillC91]

Would these wagons have ever strayed as far as the southern region in the 60’s, either as part of mixed coal wagon rakes, or more uniform formations? Im unable to find any photos showing they did. Trying to justify another Accurascale purchase!

[Fat Controller]

41 minutes ago, WillC91 said:

Would these wagons have ever strayed as far as the southern region in the 60’s, either as part of mixed coal wagon rakes, or more uniform formations? Im unable to find any photos showing they did. Trying to justify another Accurascale purchase!

There is a photo of Minfit B312825,, taken at Chichester in 1969, in 'BR Standard Freight Wagons- a pictorial survey' by David Larkin. I have seen other photos of both vac-fitted and unfitted ones. 

 

[hmrspaul]

Certainly at  Feltham https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/brmdv/e35ea2e0e

 

Paul

[Dunsignalling]

18 hours ago, WillC91 said:

Would these wagons have ever strayed as far as the southern region in the 60’s, either as part of mixed coal wagon rakes, or more uniform formations? Im unable to find any photos showing they did. Trying to justify another Accurascale purchase!

I can't lay hands on the exact reference, but there's a published photo of a single Dia.1/107 wagon in the goods yard at Axminster.  AFAIK, there weren't block coal workings in that neck of the woods.

 

The location seems to have been a regular haunt of the renowned photographer A.E. West, so it's probably one of his.

 

John

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

Were some of these wagons originally built without tare weight or wheelbase branding  on the rhs of the body as per the model?, I can see that the data panel covered it over on later wagons, but the photo's I have found show it as present on all wagons.

 

Mike.