Modelling GWR 4-plk wagons in 7mm - which kit to use?

[Western Star]

Please note that this topic is concerned solely with those parts which form the sides and ends of the body - at the moment any wagon parts below the curb rail are outside the scope of this topic.

 

There are several S7 modellers whose era of interest can be loosely described as late Victorian / early Edwardian GWR...  and there is one stand-out design of open wagon from that period, a four plank wagon for which construction started in the late Victorian period and continued into the early years of the Edwardian era.  A drawing of this type of wagon can be found in GWR Wagons (pub. Tourret) and photos can be found in several other GWR wagon books ( J H Russell, pub. OPC)...  there are several relevant drawings in the NRM GWR C&W catalogue so there is reasonable reference material.

 

Discussions amongst the group of modellers suggests that there is a common desire for an etched wagon underframe and appropriate work towards a set of etch parts is underway.  Parts such as buffer stocks, bearing springs, coupling hooks (and springs) are likely to be 3D prints or lost wax castings.

 

The "elephant-in-the-room" is the wagon body - there are three suitable / appropriate / reasonable kits known to me, being:-

 

1/ WEP etch brass;

2/ Peco ex Webster polystyrene;

3/ Slaters ex Cooper-craft polystyrene.

 

The big question is this - "which kit ought to be considered as the starting point for the intended models and why?".

 

Not a trick question, maybe there is no "best" answer, just a case of seeing what others think about offerings as kits.

 

regards, Graham

[wenlock]

Interesting question Graham!

 

Wep kits are excellent, but time consuming and expensive. It would also be a shame to throw away half the etched brass components if a “fine scale alternative was in the offing”

 

I’ve no experience of the Peco/Webster kit.

 

The Slaters kits I’m quite fond of and they are at least relatively cheap!

 

Either way I’m intrigued by the idea of a fine scale “GTi” under frame, along with reading other peoples views about the topic!.

 

BW

Dave

[MarcD]

From what I have learnt recently from the GWR 4plk blog their recommendation was the Peco one. It has sprung compensation.

Marc 

[magmouse]

A question (and a project) after my own heart, Graham! Although I won't quite stick to your 'wagon parts below the curb rail are out of scope' edict, for hopefully good reasons as you will see below.

 

I haven't built the WEP 4-plank, but I have done the 2-plank, which I assume is similar in terms of the body construction. As Dave says, it is a relatively expensive option, more work, and little benefit compared to the two plastic kits. Just possibly the end T-stanchions will be sharper in brass, but it would be very marginal. One thing I didn't like about the WEP 2-plank was the positions of the side knees are marked with a half-etched line, either side of where the overlay goes. Once the overlay is in position, you are left with a little groove in the planking either side. It barely shows when painted and weathered, but it seems unnecessary. You can just about see the effect if you zoom in to the pictures of my 2-plank wagon here (scroll down a bit):

 

Having said that, I am very grateful the WEP kits exist, especially the ones for prototypes that otherwise would not be available in kit form.

 

The issues with the Slaters, ex Coopercraft wagons are mainly in the chassis, which I covered recently in my blog for those that might want to know:

 

I built the 5-plank wagon, but the chassis is common across the range. The body mouldings are excellent, and I have no reason to think it wouldn't be true for the 4-plank as well. Having not seen it, I can't say if there are any inaccuracies in the model.

 

The PECO, ex. Webster, is also very well moulded - fine, sharp detail. My main quibble with the body is the moulded-in wood grain effect, which I don't much care for. Again, it largely disappears when viewed from a distance, and in some ways is better than the sometimes too-perfect plastic mouldings model wagon bodies can be, but overall I would prefer not to have it and find my own ways to get a texture to the finish that feels right. Make your own mind up looking at the photos here:

 

A major plus of the PECO kit is it has excellent interior detailing, while the Slaters ones have no inside detailing at all. Of course, most of you wagons will be sheeted (won't they???) but you might want the odd one with a load of deals, casks, or indeed empty...

 

The PECO kit also has opening doors - fortunately with hinges much more refined that the Hornby wagons I used to load up with dried lentils from mum's kitchen jars as a boy! Glue them shut and they look fine, and they give a slightly better sense that the door is a separate thing to the wagon side sheeting than when it is all a single moulding, so a nice touch.

 

The big thing to say about the PECO kit, though, is that despite your request, you can't just disregard the chassis. The solebars and headstocks are integral to the side and end mouldings, so if you didn't want to use them, you would have the hassle and possible risk of damage of cutting them off. Making good the ends especially would be tricky, and a lot of work.

 

For me, the PECO chassis is acceptable, with excellent solebar detail - possible to reproduce in etched brass, but a lot of work. It has compensation on one axle, of all plastic construction, which might be a long term issue regarding wear and tear, but could easily be replaced with a metal structure. If I were planning your project, I would consider keeping the PECO headstocks and solebars (which have the springs included) and create new w-irons, axle-boxes and brake gear in etched and cast metal.

 

I also don't see why you want to replace the buffers - both Slaters and PECO kits come with turned brass guides and steel heads, with springing mechanisms (Slaters are a coil spring internal to the buffer, and PECO uses a spring wire across the body behind the buffers, which also springs the coupling hook). Unless you are seeking to represent a different type?

 

Overall, my vote would be (and has been for my own stock) the PECO kit. It is a fair bit more expensive, but worth it in my view. I was happy with the Slaters kit for my 5-plank build, once the chassis issues were sorted. If the lack of interior detail doesn't matter to you, and you still want to pursue a complete new underframe in metal, the Slaters kit is cheaper and easier for your project since you don't have to do surgery on the side and end mouldings.

 

I hope that helps - let us know what you decide!

 

Nick.

 

PS Are you going to make grease axle boxes as an option? A source of those would be really useful.

 

 

 

 

[Western Star]

On 26/01/2023 at 19:13, MarcD said:

From what I have learnt recently from the GWR 4plk blog their recommendation was the Peco one.

Marc, what is the "4plk blog"?  Please provide a link or reference...  or at least describe the pros and cons.

 

thank you, Graham

[57xx]

On 01/02/2023 at 20:25, Western Star said:

Marc, what is the "4plk blog"?  Please provide a link or reference...  or at least describe the pros and cons.

 

thank you, Graham

 

Graham, it's Nick's (Magmouse) blog, as link to in the post above.

[MarcD]

Hi Graham,

apoligies for not seeing you post. As Ric said its Nick's blog.

 

Marc

[Western Star]

All,

 

Thank you for your contributions to this topic, whilst there has been no cut-n-dry decision as yet the information offered here - thank you Nick - has bolstered our confidence in being able to make a decision that is in line with our original ideas.

 

Turning to Nick's post about his experiences, I have to agree with Nick that we "ignore the underframe at our peril" for both the Peco and Coopercraft kits present challenges in regard to mounting a plastic injection moulded body on an etched underframe.  For example:-

 

* the prototype wagon has end stanchions which extend below the body and which are affixed to the headstock - both kits have (most of) the stanchion as part of the end moulding;

 

* the prototype wagon has side knees which bend under the curb rail and are fixed to the front face of the solebar - both kits have part of the side knees moulded on the face of the solebar;

 

* the prototype wagon has door hinge plates which are attached to hinges which are fixed to the front face of the curb rail - both kits reflect this design (which is good if the moulded curb rail remains attaached to the side moulding).

 

Addressing the concerns (above) probably requires removing detail from a moulding...  re-instating the plank lines... re-instating the removed detail,  noting that 3D prints might be required for the side knees.

 

 

Not mentioned by Nick is the question of door width and the locations of the knees / hinges for research shows that the Coopercraft kit is not accurate in those respects - note that no measurements have been made of a Peco side as yet.  We have access to four drawings of GWR 4-plk wagons, dated from early 1880s to late 1890s - we do not know (yet) if our most recent drawing (by date) is the last drawing issued for these wagons.  Drawing 11939 of late 1890s has these measurements:-

 

The relevant dimensions from dwg 11939 in imperial (scale 1:1) and metric (scale 1:43.5):-

1/ internal dimensions
* length 15'6" / 108.5mm;
* width 7'1" / 49.6mm;
* height 2'4" / 16.3mm.

2/ external dimensions
* length 16'0" / 112mm;
* width 7'6" / 52.5mm;
* height 2'7" / 18.08mm.

3/ door details
* width on face 5'1" / 35.6mm;
* hinge centres 4'5" / 30.9mm;
* side knee centres 5'6" / 38.5mm;
* hinge width 2 1/2" / 1.46mm.

Side sheeting 2 1/2" / 1.46mm.
End sheeting 3" / 1.75mm.

Second, Cooper craft body (assembled)
1/ internal dimensions
* length 108.2mm;
* width 50.2mm;
* height 16.2mm.

2/ external dimensions
* length over sheeting 111.5mm;
* width over sheeting 53.4mm;
* height including curb rail 17.7mm

3/ door details
* width on face 33.3mm;
* hinge centres 30.4mm;
* side knee centres 36.7mm;
* hinge width 1.45mm.

Side sheeting 1.57mm.
End sheeting 1.75mm.

Comparison given as a delta, negative means model is under size.
1/ internal dimensions
* length -0.3mm;
* width +0.6mm;
* height -0.1mm.

2/ external dimensions
* length over sheeting -0.5mm;
* width over sheeting +0.9mm;
* height including curb rail -0.4mm.

3/ door details
* width on face -2.3mm;
* hinge centres -0.5mm;
* side knee centres -1.8mm;
* hinge width -0.1mm.

Side sheeting +1.3mm.
End sheeting 0mm.

For now I am accepting the deltas in body width / body length as deviations that were introduced during assembly (because the sides/ends are mitred and there is no positive location for the joins).

 

 

The major concern here is that the deltas for the door width / hinges / knees are not compatible with an underframe that has been designed using a GWR drawing (11939).  A member of the group who are looking at building accurate models of the prototype to S7 track standards has started along the route of cut-n-shut for a set of Coopercraft sides, this is looking promising - the jury is out pending photos of re-worked mouldings after a coat of primer.

raham

 

 

regards, G

[41516]

24 minutes ago, Western Star said:

note that no measurements have been made of a Peco side as yet. 

 

I happen to have one in the swaps pile - Give me a little time and I'll measure everything else up. 

 

 

EDIT - here we go

 

Peco (assembled)
1/ internal dimensions
* length 108.17mm;
* width 49.7mm;
* height 16.25mm.

2/ external dimensions
* length over sheeting 111.51mm;
* width over sheeting 52.8mm;
* height including curb rail 18.09mm

3/ door details
* width on face 35.35mm;
* hinge centres 29.47mm;
* side knee centres 38.06mm;
* hinge width 1.32mm.

Side sheeting 1.5mm.
End sheeting 1.54mm.

 

 

Edited February 8, 2023 by 41516
Measurements added

[magmouse]

Thanks Graham for the additional info, and filling in some more detail on what you are aiming for. Thanks too @41516 for providing those measurements.

 

It's interesting to see how inaccurate the Coopercraft door measurements are - the Peco one is much better in that regard. The question of overall length and width is, as you noted Graham - subject to the assembly of the mitred joints. I find the lack of a positive location a frustration with quite a few kits.

 

At this point, it looks like the Peco kit is the way to go, retaining the sole bars and headstocks and so bypassing the difficulties with those. You might then choose to replace the door hinges with something a little more refined.

 

The only major possible downside is the faux woodgrain in the side and end sheeting - it will depend on your feelings about that. It may be possible to skim some filler into the texture if it offended you, but I haven't tried.

 

The other query I have that you might be able to help with is the side doors, which are a separate moulding on the Peco model. They have a chamfer on the edges, and on the side sheeting where it meets the door, preventing the door going inwards. Is this prototypical? It is largely invisible, but can be seen from above as the crack between the door and side sheeting is at an angle.

 

Nick.

[41516]

1 minute ago, magmouse said:

They have a chamfer on the edges, and on the side sheeting where it meets the door

 

The inside door measurement is 34.39mm, so ~1mm less on the inside than outside, it it helps the discussion.

[Western Star]

13 minutes ago, 41516 said:

 

The inside door measurement is 34.39mm, so ~1mm less on the inside than outside, it it helps the discussion.

 

Thank you "41516", your contribution relieves me from having to find a model shop that stocks the Peco kits.

 

There are five people in the group of S7 modellers who are working towards the same end of a decent body on an accurate underframe, only two of that number are contributers to RM Web (AFAIK).  Please can I copy your information about the Peco kit to the other members of the group?

 

regards, Graham

 

 

 

[41516]

Absolutely, I posted to expand the knowledge base available to anyone interested.  Link or copy as you see fit.

[Western Star]

21 minutes ago, magmouse said:

The other query I have that you might be able to help with is the side doors, which are a separate moulding on the Peco model. They have a chamfer on the edges, and on the side sheeting where it meets the door, preventing the door going inwards. Is this prototypical?

Nick @magmouse, the Peco kit is correct for GWR open wagons.  Whilst not included in my post of prototype dimensions the GWR GA dwgs. include the internal door width annoted as "5' 0" in clear".

 

regards, Graham

[magmouse]

1 minute ago, Western Star said:

Nick @magmouse, the Peco kit is correct for GWR open wagons.  Whilst not included in my post of prototype dimensions the GWR GA dwgs. include the internal door width annoted as "5' 0" in clear".

 

regards, Graham

 

Thanks - that's good to know.

 

Nick.

[Compound2632]

Hum. Having built or rebuilt a good few of the 4 mm Coopercraft 4-planks and one ABS, I'm yet more resolute in my determination to resist the instruction I was given to take up S7...

 

All good stuff and informative for all scales!

[magmouse]

28 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Coopercraft 4-planks and one ABS, I'm yet more resolute in my determination to resist the instruction I was given to take up S7...

But one or two O gauge wagons can’t hurt, right? You know, just for display purposes…

 

…

 

And the Slater’s D299 is a pretty decent kit…
 

…

 

And they do lots of other nice MR stuff…

 

…

 

And it doesn’t have to be S7. Finescale is just fine. To start with, anyway…

 

…

 

If you did start in 7mm scale, you could stop at any time. Sure you could…

 

…

 

…

 

Nick, your friendly local pusher.

[Compound2632]

10 hours ago, magmouse said:

Nick, your friendly local pusher.

 

Get thee behind me, appropriately-named O-Gauger.