Shouldered bearings fitment.

[Jeepy]

Hello, 

 

I'm starting to build a few Cambrian Models 4mm wagon kits, (First time for me!) I have purchased a few packs of Alan Gibson 8 spoke wheelsets with bearings, in the Cambrian instructions they say to fit the bearings 'flush', does this mean 'sinking' the shoulder into the back of the plastic chassis part or installing the bearing so the shoulder is on top but the main part of the bearing is in the hole please? 

I'm asking because when I eventually attempt to fit the wheelsets will they 'spread the chassis parts out of true if the bearings are installed with the shoulders protruding? I hope this makes sense! 

Many thanks, 

 

Jim. 

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, Jeepy said:

Hello, 

 

I'm starting to build a few Cambrian Models 4mm wagon kits, (First time for me!) I have purchased a few packs of Alan Gibson 8 spoke wheelsets with bearings, in the Cambrian instructions they say to fit the bearings 'flush', does this mean 'sinking' the shoulder into the back of the plastic chassis part or installing the bearing so the shoulder is on top but the main part of the bearing is in the hole please? 

I'm asking because when I eventually attempt to fit the wheelsets will they 'spread the chassis parts out of true if the bearings are installed with the shoulders protruding? I hope this makes sense! 

Many thanks, 

 

Jim. 

 

Might it be worth addressing the question directly to Cambrian - I believe that they have a contact form / email address?

 

CJI.

[Barclay]

In general with plastic kits if you consider the bearing as a top hat then the hat bit goes in the hole and the brim sits flat on the back of the axleguard. If the axleguards look a little splayed then you can lightly countersink the back of the axleguard or use the brimless bearings that are available, which go right into the hole. Sometimes the hole in the plastic needs drilling out to take the full depth of the bearing, or you can file off the end of the bearing to make it fit the hole. 

[Quarryscapes]

Cambrian models kits were intended to be built with flangeless bearings. Try some not glued in with the wheelset and see if the solebars splay out at all when dry fitted.

[Chas Levin]

Hello, I've found - with the wagons I've built so far - that there are a few factors that affect possible splaying, including the bearings of course (and whether they're flush) but also including the axle length and of course the back-to-back measurements for the axle-boxes, because in both of these dimensions, a fraction of a mm can make a crucial difference. The only way I've found is - as a couple of others have suggested - to do a dry run, using all three or four of your hands to hold the wheelsets in place between the sides (!).

I did try on early builds fixing one solebar+axlebox in place vertically, only to find that a tiny amount of splay was unavoidable (but invisible from normal viewing angles) and having fixed one side truly vertically, the other would have to accommodate all the splay, which is when I swapped to doing a full dry run to check.

On occasion, dealing with a kit where the sides were quite close but the wheels I wanted to use were on a slightly longer axle, I've also resorted to removing the wheels and using them on a slightly shorter axle.

Hope this helps...

[Jeepy]

34 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Might it be worth addressing the question directly to Cambrian - I believe that they have a contact form / email address?

 

CJI.

Ah yes! It might well be, thank you, I shall do so to confirm either way, Cambrian themselves recommend the Alan Gibson wheelsets for the kits so they should know! Good suggestion..... By the way I shall be ordering the waterslide transfers from your good self in due course, not until March though I believe, it'll probably take me at least that long to build them anyway he! He! 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

[Jeepy]

8 minutes ago, Chas Levin said:

Hello, I've found - with the wagons I've built so far - that there are a few factors that affect possible splaying, including the bearings of course (and whether they're flush) but also including the axle length and of course the back-to-back measurements for the axle-boxes, because in both of these dimensions, a fraction of a mm can make a crucial difference. The only way I've found is - as a couple of others have suggested - to do a dry run, using all three or four of your hands to hold the wheelsets in place between the sides (!).

I did try on early builds fixing one solebar+axlebox in place vertically, only to find that a tiny amount of splay was unavoidable (but invisible from normal viewing angles) and having fixed one side truly vertically, the other would have to accommodate all the splay, which is when I swapped to doing a full dry run to check.

On occasion, dealing with a kit where the sides were quite close but the wheels I wanted to use were on a slightly longer axle, I've also resorted to removing the wheels and using them on a slightly shorter axle.

Hope this helps...

Thank you, a dry run with all Four of my hands it will be then! Thank you for your comments on your experiences, 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

[Chas Levin]

1 minute ago, Jeepy said:

Thank you, a dry run with all Four of my hands it will be then! Thank you for your comments on your experiences, 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

Hi Jim, I should have said, copious use of rubber bands, hair clips, blutak and similar things can supplement the hands... 😄

[Jeepy]

1 minute ago, Chas Levin said:

Hi Jim, I should have said, copious use of rubber bands, hair clips, blutak and similar things can supplement the hands... 😄

Yes, I think that may well be the case! 😆, thank you! 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

[Jeepy]

1 hour ago, Chas Levin said:

Hi Jim, I should have said, copious use of rubber bands, hair clips, blutak and similar things can supplement the hands... 😄

I have sent an email to Cambrian, will let you know what they suggest...... 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

 

I'm not sure why you were quoted again in this post Chas..... My incompetence I guess! 😆. 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Jeepy

[Jeepy]

Hello, 

 

I have recieved a swift and comprehensive reply to my email, apparently when the instructions were written by the previous owner long ago there were fewer choices so it's an ambiguity that needs looking at so I'm told but if you're using 'top hat' bearings the shoulder should sit on top and the type without shoulders should go in flush, great service from a nice chap called Graham 👍. 

Thank you all for your replies, very helpful and appreciated...... I should've contacted Cambrian in the first place! 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Jeepy

[cctransuk]

4 hours ago, Jeepy said:

Hello, 

 

I have recieved a swift and comprehensive reply to my email, apparently when the instructions were written by the previous owner long ago there were fewer choices so it's an ambiguity that needs looking at so I'm told but if you're using 'top hat' bearings the shoulder should sit on top and the type without shoulders should go in flush, great service from a nice chap called Graham 👍. 

Thank you all for your replies, very helpful and appreciated...... I should've contacted Cambrian in the first place! 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

 

Hmm - that seems to be self-contradictory!

 

A flangeless bearing is a flanged bearing without the flange - that is self-evident.

 

So - with a flanged bearing fitted with the flange proud of the inside face of the axleguard, the widest diameter of the bearing cone will be proud of the axleguard face by the thickness of the flange - agreed?

 

But - with an unflanged bearing fitted flush, the widest diameter of the bearing cone will be flush with the axleguard face - also agreed?

 

So - unless the vino is seriously compromising my reasoning - the length between pinpoints in each case differs by twice the thickness of the bearing flange!

 

This assumes - of course - that the depth of the bearing cones is the same in each case.

 

I have long ago concluded that the only wise course of action is the four-handed, dry assembly struggle - with all the associated bad language!!

 

CJI.

[57xx]

Some I will attach one solebar with just two small spots of glue at each end. Enough to hold in place while dry fitting the other side and checking for splay. It's easy enough to cut off again if the solebars need packing with microstrip to space them apart. Saves remembering where you left your 3rd and 4th hands.

[Jeepy]

55 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Hmm - that seems to be self-contradictory!

 

A flangeless bearing is a flanged bearing without the flange - that is self-evident.

 

So - with a flanged bearing fitted with the flange proud of the inside face of the axleguard, the widest diameter of the bearing cone will be proud of the axleguard face by the thickness of the flange - agreed?

 

But - with an unflanged bearing fitted flush, the widest diameter of the bearing cone will be flush with the axleguard face - also agreed?

 

So - unless the vino is seriously compromising my reasoning - the length between pinpoints in each case differs by twice the thickness of the bearing flange!

 

This assumes - of course - that the depth of the bearing cones is the same in each case.

 

I have long ago concluded that the only wise course of action is the four-handed, dry assembly struggle - with all the associated bad language!!

 

CJI.

Hello, 

Yes, I can understand what you are saying I think!..... Without examining the bearing in close up, perhaps with a magnifier of some sort, I guess that would be a good assumption that the cone starts decreasing in diameter immediately from the top surface of the shoulder, and if a bearing's cone without a shoulder starts decreasing immediately too that does stand to reason that it would shorten the distance between the Two bearings...... Out of interest I may actually examine it, you've got me thinking now! 

I've just finished painting the various parts on the sprues and I'm waiting for my order of dummy coupling hooks from Wizard, (I intend to use DG couplings) then I will commence assembly but I have certainly taken note of Chas's and your suggestion of attempting a dry assembly first with the shouldered bearings installed, I'm enjoying the learning curve although it does seem to be quite a long one! Thank you for your input, 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

[cctransuk]

3 minutes ago, 57xx said:

Some I will attach one solebar with just two small spots of glue at each end. Enough to hold in place while dry fitting the other side and checking for splay. It's easy enough to cut off again if the solebars need packing with microstrip to space them apart. Saves remembering where you left your 3rd and 4th hands.

 

I prefer to set the bearings further into the axleguards if necessary; packing out the solebars destroys the correct relationship between solebar and body.

 

CJI.

[Jeepy]

5 minutes ago, 57xx said:

Some I will attach one solebar with just two small spots of glue at each end. Enough to hold in place while dry fitting the other side and checking for splay. It's easy enough to cut off again if the solebars need packing with microstrip to space them apart. Saves remembering where you left your 3rd and 4th hands.

That's interesting, thank you, 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

[Jeepy]

2 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

I prefer to set the bearings further into the axleguards if necessary; packing out the solebars destroys the correct relationship between solebar and body.

 

CJI.

Understood, thank you! 

 

I suppose if the 'W' iron assembly was attached on one side in the correct position with a small amount of Blu-Tak that would work too so it didn't fall off while I'm holding the other side just to assess the fit with a wheelset in place, interesting times coming up! Although I do believe in what Graham at Cambrian suggests I will attempt a dry run somehow to confirm, thank you, 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

 

 

[57xx]

On 25/01/2023 at 22:52, cctransuk said:

 

I prefer to set the bearings further into the axleguards if necessary; packing out the solebars destroys the correct relationship between solebar and body.

 

CJI.

That makes the assumptio that the solebars are correct in the first place, which isnt always the case. For the sake of 0.1mm shim either side, I can't say I'd notice. That said, where it is feasible, I have also sunken bearings in deeper on a few kits.

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

 

 

My method of ensuring the the solebars of plastic kits are are 23mm apart, which is the correct distance for flush fitting bearings, and ensures the axles are parallel. Slightly countersinking the inner face of the axlebox before fitting to ensure flushness is recommended.

Sometimes, (calling Cambrian and old Ratio!), the solebars are too wide when fitted in their intended positions so packing out is required.

 

Mike.

 

Mike.

[Enterprisingwestern]

On 25/01/2023 at 22:26, cctransuk said:

 

Hmm - that seems to be self-contradictory!

 

A flangeless bearing is a flanged bearing without the flange - that is self-evident.

 

So - with a flanged bearing fitted with the flange proud of the inside face of the axleguard, the widest diameter of the bearing cone will be proud of the axleguard face by the thickness of the flange - agreed?

 

But - with an unflanged bearing fitted flush, the widest diameter of the bearing cone will be flush with the axleguard face - also agreed?

 

So - unless the vino is seriously compromising my reasoning - the length between pinpoints in each case differs by twice the thickness of the bearing flange!

 

This assumes - of course - that the depth of the bearing cones is the same in each case.

 

I have long ago concluded that the only wise course of action is the four-handed, dry assembly struggle - with all the associated bad language!!

 

CJI.

 

On 25/01/2023 at 23:50, Jeepy said:

Hello, 

Yes, I can understand what you are saying I think!..... Without examining the bearing in close up, perhaps with a magnifier of some sort, I guess that would be a good assumption that the cone starts decreasing in diameter immediately from the top surface of the shoulder, and if a bearing's cone without a shoulder starts decreasing immediately too that does stand to reason that it would shorten the distance between the Two bearings...... Out of interest I may actually examine it, you've got me thinking now! 

I've just finished painting the various parts on the sprues and I'm waiting for my order of dummy coupling hooks from Wizard, (I intend to use DG couplings) then I will commence assembly but I have certainly taken note of Chas's and your suggestion of attempting a dry assembly first with the shouldered bearings installed, I'm enjoying the learning curve although it does seem to be quite a long one! Thank you for your input, 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

 

Flanged and flangeless bearings are exactly the same bearing, 2.25mm in length with the cone being in the same place, (well at least all of mine are), the "hat rim" obviously being left off the latter.

So as long as the face of the bearing is flush it doesn't matter which one you use.

 

Mike.

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, 57xx said:

That makes the assumptio that the solebars are correct in the first place, which isnt always the case. For the sake of 0.1mm shim either side, I can't say I'd notice. That said, where it is feasible, I have also sunken bearings in deeper on a few kits.

 

A splay of 0.1mm. per axleguard would scarcely be detectable, surely?

 

CJI.

[Enterprisingwestern]

1 minute ago, cctransuk said:

 

A splay of 0.1mm. per axleguard would scarcely be detectable, surely?

 

CJI.

 

I'd take that every time!

 

Mike.

[cctransuk]

12 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

 

Flanged and flangeless bearings are exactly the same bearing, 2.25mm in length with the cone being in the same place, (well at least all of mine are), the "hat rim" obviously being left off the latter.

So as long as the face of the bearing is flush it doesn't matter which one you use.

 

Mike.

 

That was the OP's point - how do you interpret 'flush'?

 

Cambrian's response seems to indicate that 'flush' for a plain bearings means the face of the bearing is flush with the face of the axleguard, but 'flush' for a flanged bearing means with the flange proud of the axleguard face.

 

CJI.

[Enterprisingwestern]

31 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

That was the OP's point - how do you interpret 'flush'?

 

Cambrian's response seems to indicate that 'flush' for a plain bearings means the face of the bearing is flush with the face of the axleguard, but 'flush' for a flanged bearing means with the flange proud of the axleguard face.

 

CJI.

 

To make a top hat bearing flush you have to countersink the inner face of the axlebox, not necessary with flangeless.

 

Mike.

[Jeepy]

19 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

That was the OP's point - how do you interpret 'flush'?

 

Cambrian's response seems to indicate that 'flush' for a plain bearings means the face of the bearing is flush with the face of the axleguard, but 'flush' for a flanged bearing means with the flange proud of the axleguard face.

 

CJI.

That's exactly what I was trying to convey, after asking the gentleman at Cambrian he said the 'flange' is designed to sit on top so that is what I'm going with and we'll see what happens! 

I've fitted the bearings but haven't got around to fixing/fiddling with the completed sole bars/W irons yet, work and shopping etc! Thank you for your input everyone, I shall post my conclusion here.......just to add, after fitting the bearings I managed to lose one of the tiny axle boxes which pinged off into oblivion whilst cutting it off the sprue, it won't affect fitting the sole bar assemblies though, I've asked Cambrian about ordering another sprue with those on, 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim.