Your reliable slow running shunting loco that you'd recommend...

[signalnorth]

I'm after buying new a 00 UK RTR steam outline shunter (any region and preferably flywheel fitted) and analogue  in the £150-160 price range - I'd be really interested to know of any loco that fits this criteria that you've found to be a particularly good slow reliable runner .  I'm presently shunting my very small shunting layout with a Bachman 56xx which while not a shunter of course ,performs magnificently at the work!

 

So come on then, what do you roll out for the shunting turn ? 

[The Johnster]

If I can assume from your reference to a Baccy 56xx that you have a penchant (don't worry, you can get an ointment) for GW/WR locos, their 57xx and 8750 mechs are very similar and capable of very good slow running.  The 94xx is excellent but needs a different approach on the control knob; mine is much quicker than the core-motored 57xx/8750s at any given knob position, and will start off at a lower setting as well.  Dapol/Hornby Hunslet Austerities are very good slow runners, especially for the age of the tooling, but clatter and grind a bit as older mechs often do!

 

I'm not sure about the flywheels, though.  I used to think they were excellent things and they certainly give a mech an air of being properly engineered, but at low speeds their effect is at it's minimum.  I now think that the space needed for them would be better utilised for ordinary ballast weighting.  My reasoning behind this is that it is a big ask to require a DC controlled loco to run smoothly and steadily at low speeds, because it is precisely under those conditions that everything mitigates against it being able to reliably do so.  Firstly, mechanical resistance from gears, bearings, motion, and wiper pickups is at it's maximum in proportion to the momentum of the loco, then secondly because the momentum is low any dirt at the railhead, on the wheels, or on the pickups is more likely to cause the loco to stop or fail to maintain smooth progress.  More ballast, a shortcoming of many current mechs because of the need to provide space for DCC, speakers, firebox bulbs and the like (which to be fair work well enough on DCC where 12VDC is constantly supplied), is in these circumstances going to hold the wheels down on to the track better, improving transfer of current here, and increase the loco's momentum, possibly by an infinitessimal amount but it needs all the help you can give it in these circumstances.  In fact it is my normal default to cram as much ballast inside locomotive bodies as I can while maintaining clearance for the moving bits and cab\bunker detail, and it has never resulted in worse running on my layouts!

 

I'm sure I'm doing the thing with granny and the eggs now, but good slow running and smooth stops & starts on DC layouts, even when the mechs are less than ideal (Lima?), depend on hygiene.  Railheads, wheel flanges, the backs of the wheels where the pickups bear, and the pickups themselves all need to be clean to transmit the low voltage, track needs to be laid level and smoothly joined between pieces, and flangeways need to be kept clear of crud.  I have a set of anklebiters' paintbrushes from a pound shop for this; they are brightly coloured so I don't lose them (!) and the stiff nylon bristles, useless for painting with, are just the thing to sweep your flangeways with.  I use Peco rail joiners to ensure alignment of rail and height between track pieces, but they transmit current as well which is no bad thing as a backup to the dropper feeds.

 

Free-running locos and stock that sits square on the track will play it's part as well.  My running improved noticeably when I eliminated plastic wheelsets from my layout, both in terms of the wagon rolling easier and in terms of less crud being spread around the railheads!  Check kit wagons occasionally on a mirror surface, as they can go out of true over time.

 

Granny/egg advice, keep it clean and don't overlubricate it (oo er missis).  Use the minimum amount of lube you can get away with, get rid of the 'orrible coloured grease that will eventually harden and become the opposite of a lubricant, a stifficant (I blast mine out with a rattlecan switch cleaner spray) and apply a plastic-safe fine oil with a syringe or as a droplet on the head of a pin.  Any more than the barest minimum will attract crud.  Crud is The Enemy, and must be eliminated!

Edited August 2, 2023 by The Johnster

[NBL]

The Hornby J50 is a great slow runner, as is the Planet Industrials Victory.

 

I've no experience with any other steam loco.

[Skinnylinny]

Honestly, every time I run mine, I am extremely impressed by my Hattons SECR P class. Granted, I only use it on live-frog pointwork, because of its short wheelbase, but several club members have also commented on how beautifully it runs. Suitable for 1909 to 1961, and they're adorable!

[Captain Kernow]

Planet Industrials Kerr Stuart 'Victory' 0-6-0T.

[31A]

I'd second the Hornby J50, and would also add the Hornby J15 - not really a shunting engine although they were sometimes used for shunting, and the best slow speed running RTR steam locos I possess.

[Flying Pig]

The Hornby Pecketts are good, albeit not flywheel fitted.

 

[Steamport Southport]

Here's where you get about fifty different answers and comments such as "My one of those was awful!" 😃

 

Trying to avoid the obvious ones that we all know are good such as Bachmann 57XX, Jinty, Hornby J50, Terrier, etc.

 

 

Heljan 1361 and 1366. Smooth as anything.

 

I know one certain YouTuber who shall remain nameless won't agree, but there are others that will.

 

This is a good, fair review. If you just want to see them run skip to near the end.

 

 

 

Another one is the Bachmann/Model Rail USA Tank.

 

 

 

Jason

[DCB]

The is realistic slow running and unrealistically slow slow running,     steam locos seldom move at less than a brisk walking pace they can coast to a gentle stop with a touch of brake but usually they start quite briskly and then coast.  They stop very quickly and extremely precisely from walking pace.

As regards locos.  We have a Heljan and a Kernow  GWR dock tank, not sure which is which the 1361 saddle tank is weighted to equal the1366pannier and they are much of a muchness but need clean track   A 57XX is much more dirt tolerant due to it's greater weight.   My favourite shunter is a Wrenn 350hp diesel shunter with 60:1 Romford gears.   To be honest it spends all its time absolutely flat out as its irritatingly slow. but it has slow and very realistic acceleration, even if I give it full power. I also have  standard Wrenn one which is entirely useless, won't run slow and will easily imitate  French TGV or maybe an Exocet and a Lima one which wont run slow or pull the skin off a rice pudding.   Two other outstanding performers both now withdrawn due to poor appearance were a Wrenn 0-6-0 chassis with a 5 pole armature and a Pannier body, again a slow starter,  and a small wheeled Wrenn 2-6-4 chassis with only2 trailing wheels a Ring Field Magnet and a  Std 3 2-6-2T body which was very realistic shunting heavy trains it often seemed as if it would't move and then surged into life, exactly  like the ful size steam locos do.          

[Right Away]

For shunting, my two Hattons P class 0-6-0T engines fitted with Zimo MX617N decoders are extremely reliable slow runners.

My Hornby A1x “Terrier” 0-6-0T engines (the later, re-tooled releases) fitted with Zimo MX617F decoders are almost as good, however one of them requires its pick-up wipers to be re-tensioned occasionally. Easily done, whip off the base keeper plate and gently tweak the wipers inwards. The “Terrier’s” wipers would benefit from being a little “springier”, but the slow running is still excellent.

[signalnorth]

Well what a comprehensive and very useful set of replies. Thank you all. I have much to consider. I concur greatly on the need for sparkling rails but funnily enough have not been too impressed with my 57xx (split chassis model to be fair) 

 

I was surprised to see a Hornby model in the suggested list , but hey its been a while since I bought one.

 

[ColinK]

23 minutes ago, signalnorth said:

 

I was surprised to see a Hornby model in the suggested list , but hey its been a while since I bought one.

 

Hornby have some great running locos, wrong type for you, but the Hornby 08 shunter is a superb slow speed runner.
 

If you can find a Model Rail magazine Sentinel, it’s a fantastic slow speed shunter, and despite only having 4 wheels it picks up well.  I’ve fitted mine with a 0-16.5 scratchbuilt body and its run for hours at exhibitions without ever stuttering. 

 

[MattR]

Bizarrely enough, my best shunter (no flywheel, DC only) is an old Dapol-version Terrier, before Hornby acquired it -- early '90s I think. It's supposed to be a Terrier sold out of service to a colliery, and thus weathered grimy black all over. It has Incredible slow speed and doesn't stop on points. I recently added some moly grease to the worm drive and it runs even better than before. I used to have a Peckett and an Andrew Barclay for shunting but I eventually sold them because I got tired of them failing on points at slow speeds. No more 0-4-0s for me.

[davknigh]

I agree with Colin K regarding the Model Rail/Dapol Sentinel and its slow running qualities. In part it is down to the split axle gearing set up which picks up like a diesel through the axle ends. This allows some vertical end play so all four wheels are in contact with the rail all the time unless your track is really rough. Worth a look are the two models of Peckett done by Hornby and the Hattons SECR P class. I should also mention the Rapido 16” Hunslet is a good runner as well. For the very best in slow speed without benefit of DCC you need to venture into the world of kits and the gearboxes produced by Chris Gibbon of HighLevel. 

 

HTH

 

David

Edited August 3, 2023 by davknigh
Added one more engine to the list

[The Johnster]

3 hours ago, signalnorth said:

I concur greatly on the need for sparkling rails but funnily enough have not been too impressed with my 57xx (split chassis model to be fair) 

 

 

1 hour ago, davknigh said:

I agree with Colin K regarding the Model Rail/Dapol Sentinel and its slow running qualities. In part it is down to the split axle gearing set up which picks up like a diesel through the axle ends. This allows some vertical end play so all four wheels are in contact with the rail all the time unless your track is really rough.

 

Back in the day, I had several split-chassis Mainline locos, because I was impressed with the detail and finish, and was much taken with the theoretical attributes of split pickup.  Surely, my reasoning went, a loco with no wiper pickups, which are effectively brakes, should be able to run with very vestigial friction (from the bearings) to prevent slow running, and if the geartrain was any good and if a big torquey motor was provided, near perfect slow running with very smooth stops and starts should result.  With the benefit of hindsight, one can spot the problem; too many 'and ifs'.  Before one even gets to the unreliability of ML mechs and their propensity to go out of quarter and bind, or to succumb to the dreaded mazak rot, these lovely looking, well detailed, to scale, and beautifully finished models were hobbled from the start.  Though my Manor was pretty good until the quartering went out...

 

To explain why, and how this had come about, one has to consider the state of RTR in this country prior to the Airfix/Mainline revolution.  There were only three players, of which one, Trix, used an odd 3.8mm/foot scale and were expensive, another, Wrenn, was very expensive and basically offering 1960s spec HD models on the basis that they were diecast, and diecast is inherently better, isn't it, and Hornby, the old Triang.  Moulded handrails, no brake or pipe detail below the running plates, flangeless centre drivers, and in the case of Hornby, all locos and stock standing 2mm too high off the railhead so that the buffers didn't even match up with other 4mm RTR.  They were all crude and toylike, Hornby had a very original take on what colours various liveries actually were, Wrenn perpetuated the old overscale HD lining, and efforts to standardise on RTR track profiles and couplings were slow and clunky.

 

Airfix and Mainline burst upon this scene like, I dunno, something bursty, a balloon, while Lima joined in at roughly Hornby level but much better finishes.  But the modelling press had long complained of the dire standards of British RTR, and reading reviews of continental models, which were admittedly more expensive, you could see why.  Fleischmann or Rapido would sell you locos that had detail below the running plates, separate handrails, fully detailed cabs, and daylight beneath the boilers where it should be, and they ran nearly perfectly.  Afx & ML equalled this standard, but because it was realised by the trade that one would be on a hiding to nothing trying to get British modellers to pay continental prices, an economy had to be made somewhere.

 

This was in the motors and geartrains.  Early Afx had traditional open frame motors and worm/cog gearing, but soon the only game in town was the pancake motor.  There was, I recall, an attempt to describe these as 'ringfield' to equate them to the bombproof reliable HD motors (though it's worth remembering that those filled the loco cabs).  These were mounted vertically in the fireboxes or tenders of steam-outline locos and drove through rather cheap and nasty spur cog gears which tended to split if you so much as looked at them funny, because in order to get any useful haulage power the pathetically weak motors had to run at very high rpm and then be geared down to be reasonably controllable; well, that's what was supposed to happen.

 

In fact the friction of all those gears meant that a good bit of current was needed to get a load moving, at which point the loco took off like a stabbed rat straight to about scale 30mph or so, and they were pretty much uncontrollable below that.  To compound the problems and in order to give the weak motors a chance of pulling anything, traction tyres were used (they had been used successfully on the continent and still are, but the tolerances to which they are fitted to driving wheels are much finer).  Basically what was happening was that UK manufacturers, in typical British Buffalo Bill Enterprises PLC fashion, were employing continental techniques without considering that these only worked well with high quality materials machined to fine tolerances, which is expensive.

 

This meandering excursion down unpleasant memory lane finally brings us to the split chassis 57xx that signalnorth has not been impressed by; I'm not surprised, it is not an impressive model.  The ML version, which was produced by Replica for a while after Palitoy's demise, suffered from all the pancake problems outlined above.  When the model was taken on by Bachmann, they improved matters to an extent with a retooling that retained the split chassis but provided a much better can motor driving through the usual worm and idler reduction cog mech that is more or less standard issue on current RTR models; it;s a proven and effective set-up.  I have a Baccy 43xx of this sort and it is not nearly as bad as the old ML model. 

 

You want really unimpressive, try the Triang Hornby 8750...

 

The current iteration of the Baccy 57xx, sharing a chassis with their 8750, dispenses with the split pickup and is in every way a modern RTR model to the standards of detail and running we expect now.  I have several of them, and a 94xx with a similar mech but a coreless motor; this runs very freely but can be controlled very finely with a bit of restraint on the knob in DC.  These models bear very little relation to the split chassis ML 57xx, which can only be a good thing...

 

The Model Rail/Dapol Sentinel shows that a well designed split chassis made carefully of high quality materials can deliver the theoretical benefits of split pickup, but it is expensive.  My Hornby W4 Peckett is a good slow performer but needs careful adjustment of the pickups, which are extremely delicate, to deliver on that.  I have no problems with it over dead frogs except a former Peco curved turnout which had a dead frog considerably longer than it's wheelbase...

[Steamport Southport]

The Sentinel is cheap as chips.

 

£99 and if you are a MR subscriber then you get a 10% discount which knocks it down to £89.10.

 

http://www.modelrailoffers.co.uk/pg/135/Project-Sentinel

 

Might pick up another one at some point seeing as 68162 was a Wrexham loco.

 

 

Jason

[The Johnster]

No new ones on eBay for that price, £120-130 not unusual for 2h though there is a 2h one for £99 just now!  Better to order direct from Model Rail then!  Tempting, as there was a blue one very similar to the Model Rail loco in NCB livery at one of the Blaengarw collieries, which is close enough for my interpretation of Rule 1... 

[SRman]

I can't disagree with any of the suggestions above. My own first thought was the USA 0-6-0T dock tank, but I have so many others that are equally good slow runners. Some are more sensitive to dirty track or imperfections if their wheelbases are too rigid, so Hornby's 08/09 and Bachmann's equivalents are all great slow speed shunters but all will hesitate if they don't like the track.

MattR's comment regarding the original Dapol Terrier also rang a bell with me. Mine have reasonably good decoders fitted and will inch along if asked to (no steam loco would probably run quite that slow in real life), aided by the sprung centre axle that, in a demo I once did at an exhibition, allowed them to negotiate a track joint with the second piece of track angled upwards to around 20 degrees from the horizontal and keep going! The down side? The yare very noisy at anything over a slow/medium speed, sounding like an angry hornet. 🤣 Put the ear muffs on and they are dead smooth.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

I have had the chance to test many of the current RTR 0-6-0T designed and introduced over the years since production went to China. Can motors, steel axle wheelsets all with wiper pick up, at least one intermediate idler gear between motor and axle, means that they all potentially run well.

 

Killer advantage time:

5 hours ago, SRman said:

...aided by the sprung centre axle...

That's the baby! The fortunate designs that have this, Bachmann 57xx and 3F (also 56xx 0-6-2T and 08 'gronk'), Hornby (ex-Dapol) J94 (also the earlier examples of the ex-Mainline N2 0-6-2T), Oxford Rail N7 (0-6-2T) by means of a rocking front axle; all show to advantage when track is less than ideal, conquering the largest dead crossings in pointwork and other defects.

 

But if the trackwork is good, then all are much alike. Test the one you fancy immediately after purchase for a couple of hours, and return for replacement if it isn't good is my suggestion. Most are, likely to get a good replacement.

 

 

[MattR]

Quote

The down side? The yare very noisy at anything over a slow/medium speed, sounding like an angry hornet.

 

This is true! Mine had a very tiny, yet irritating squeak, but the moly grease finally solved that. I'll have to run it at a higher speed and see if it makes any difference on the angry hornets.

[The Johnster]

On 03/08/2023 at 03:07, DCB said:

The is realistic slow running and unrealistically slow slow running,     steam locos seldom move at less than a brisk walking pace they can coast to a gentle stop with a touch of brake but usually they start quite briskly and then coast.  They stop very quickly and extremely precisely from walking pace.

 

Agreed, and at shows I find snail racing as unrealistic as everything whizzing around too fast...

 

On the real railway, everybody wants to finish the job, early if they can, and of course on running lines you have to make the booked timings.  On steam engines there is a need to get up to a decent speed fairly smartly in order to be able to ease the cut-off to conserve steam and your fireman's back, and use fuel efficiently; it's all very well blasting a hole in the sky to get away from the station, but keep it up and you'll be short of steam in a few hundred yards! 

 

Shunting is different, and it is here that very slow running may be encountered in specific circumstances.  The speed limit in yards is normally 15mph (aim for about one revolution of a pannier/Jinty/J50 driving wheel per second), and in marshalling yards this is a good working speed to aim for, but in the sort of goods yard shunting most of us indulge in, there is no point in banging the loose-shunted wagons about like that.  Firstly, you may be shunting on to roads where men are working unloading/loading wagons, or into goods sheds where there is limited clearance (I had a turn that included the 'Pontypridd Parcels', where movements into the Brunel goods shed at Ponty, still extant, were through a very tight entrance and had to be performed at a snail-racing pace.  Handsignals were relayed from inside the shed, which you could not see, by banksmen).  And, on the loco, you might be a train-length away from the action.

 

Secondly, you are reliant on handsignals from someone on the ground, and at small country goods yards that is usually the guard, on his own.  No point in moving at much more than walking pace, as he has to walk between where he has coupled/uncoupled, giving him time to apply/release handbrakes, and the turnouts which he has to operate.  I would often find myself 'walking the train in', walking in to a siding level with the leading wagon of the movement handsignalling the driver to propel the train at the speed I was walking.  Controlling a Type 4 loco 150 yards away and maybe 900tons of shunt with your middle finger barely moving induced a feeling of god-like power and control, and I always enjoyed doing it...

 

Consider a guard shunting a train out on his own in a BLT goods yard.  He has just uncoupled a wagon and sent the loco (with whatever wagons remain coupled to it) back to the point he must throw for the next move, perhaps thirty yards away, and must now pin the handbrake down to secure the wagon.  There is no point in the loco blasting a hole in the sky moving back, as it will only have to wait for him to catch up, and running is dangerous and undignified.  So the loco eases out slowly so that it does not have to wait long for him to throw the point, and handsignal the next move, probably 'walking the train in'.  At some places, points had to be held over (the lever had a foot pedal attached to it so that the guard/shunter could stand on it, the man's weight holding the turnout in position), which meant that there would be another walk for him to get to the other end of the shunt move to uncouple/couple after the move had passed over the point he had been holding over; a busy shunt took a good bit of shoe leather. Then factor in working at night or in poor visibility, or with the loco out of sight around corners or behind buildings, funfunfunfunfun!  One sometimes sees exhibition layouts where working the yard would be impossible because of the poor sightlines; consider a shunter's 'pulpit' platform in such circumstances.

 

Coupling to a wagon or cut would mean checking that the said wagon/cut was uncoupled at the correct place so that you weren't dragging unneccessary wagons out and wasting time, or interfering with men unloading/loading them.  On mileage and coal roads, these men would not be railway staff and one could not assume that they knew the score.  So this sort of work took place at what looked like a leisurely pace to an uninformed casual observer, and indeed it was pretty easy going for the loco crew, but the man on the ground was to-ing and fro-ing pretty much flat out, even in a simple two-road yard!  It might be happening with several pilot locos simultaneously at a big goods depot, but here there will be sufficient shunting staff to speed matters up.  Movements into end-loading docks, or with loaded livestock wagons, also had to be carried out very slowly and carefully, as did station pilot movements to trains carrying passengers.

 

This is the sort of work we usually represent on our models, or a version of it for carriage/NPCCS shunting.  Such a train, or indeed a part- or fully-fitted goods, needed on arrival at a yard where it is to be shunted, to have the vacuum brakes isolated on each individual wagon before proceedings can commence.  This was done by 'pulling the cords'; each vacuum cylinder had a cord attached which led through eyelets attached to the solebar on each side, the position marked by a white star on the solebar.  You pulled on it to open a pressure equalising valve in the vacuum cylinder so that the piston dropped under it's own weight, there being no vacuum to hold it up, releasing the brakes.  Doing this on a fully-fitted 60-wagon express freight took some time, probably about 30 seconds per cylinder, which comes to half an hour; so much for express delivery!  Sometimes the cord was missing or it broke, meaning that you had to go under the wagon to pull the valve lever yourself.  Going under wagons was always hazardous and it was wise to assure yourself that your loco crew were aware that you were in this vulnerable position; you leaned the shunting pole against the wagon. 

 

To a casual observer, there often seems to be nothing happening for long unexplained periods on a traditional railway, but it's like a swan, all calm and serene where you can see it but paddling like mad just below the surface.  For this reason, in order to realistically represent shunting of this sort, it is important to have locos that can run slowly and smoothly under complete control, and this is a big ask at the low voltages used for DC operation.  Modern RTR is pretty good in general, not to say it couldn't be further improved.  It applies to current era operation as well, as MGR operation requires electronically stable running a 1.4mph while unloading or loading takes place.  Another example is weighbridge work, where at some modernised collieries the practice was to propel the wagons over the bridge at a very slow speed, barely moving, while the bridge bounced around and the weighbridge clerk go do that voodoo that he do so well (I have memories of this being done at Nantgarw, and being impressed by the skill involved.  Of course, if you got it wrong, you had to stop and reposition the wagon and everybody shouted rude things at you.  IIRC Hafodyrynys featured this trick as well, and possibly Llanharan).  At older collieries the wagons were stopped individually on the bridge, which had to settle before the weight could be noted, and this was also done at very low speed to achieve the precision needed with heavy cuts of loose-coupled wagons, especially loaded ones.  The more precisely you could stop the wagon on the bridge, the less time it took to settle, and everbody got to get off for the next cup of tea earlier.  This needs a powerful loco with a strong brake to keep precise control of the wagons, more so than is just needed to pull them, and at my colliery a B2 Peckett or Hunslet 18" Austerity do it, with a W4 Peckett doing the movements under the loaders.

Edited August 4, 2023 by The Johnster

[Neil]

On 02/08/2023 at 22:12, 31A said:

I'd second the Hornby J50, and would also add the Hornby J15 - not really a shunting engine although they were sometimes used for shunting, and the best slow speed running RTR steam locos I possess.

 

Another vote for the J50 but it's not quite as slow and smooth as the Heljan 02 'Tango'.

[cypherman]

Hi,

I have a couple of Dapol/Hornby Terriers  and J94's that shunt really well. These are the engines that I mean.

Edited August 4, 2023 by cypherman

[Captain Kernow]

On 03/08/2023 at 03:07, DCB said:

The is realistic slow running and unrealistically slow slow running,     steam locos seldom move at less than a brisk walking pace they can coast to a gentle stop with a touch of brake but usually they start quite briskly and then coast.  They stop very quickly and extremely precisely from walking pace.

This is quite true.

 

Crews usually wanted to get the shunting job done, so that they can get back to the bothy for their game of cards and the next brew, or to get back to depot to book off, so there was no interminable creeping along.

 

I think that this was a problem for some steam crews when diesel shunters were first introduced.

 

But the ability to run consistently slowly and creep along through all quadrants of the wheels is important, as it ensures complete controllability of the loco, especially when accelerating and decelerating.

 

As for slow, reliable running with RTR locos, I find all manufacturers to be a mixed bag, with many inconsistencies between manufacturers and also between the products of the same manufacturer, even between identical models from the same manufacturer.

 

I've seen examples of Bachmann 64XX panniers, where one is nice and smooth and the other has an annoying tight spot. The same with two Hornby Pugs and also two Hornby Pecketts.

 

I have had no good experiences with smooth running as regards Rapido products and all such products have eventually been sent back or otherwise disposed of. The same applies for the Hattons/DJ Models 14XX, where I haven't been able to find a single example that runs as I would wish it. My one example in good running order was given a Perseverance chassis and the same will apply to another one I recently acquired.

 

On the other hand, I've had good experiences with recent Dapol RTR releases, such as the B4 0-4-0T and also the Heljan 05 diesel shunter.

 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

On 02/08/2023 at 19:41, signalnorth said:

So come on then, what do you roll out for the shunting turn ? 

In answer to the direct question, Hornby's J50. It's a lovely job with ample traction out of the box because like the prototype it is heavy; and it is the right one for KX area at end of steam.The other regular shunters are Hornby's J94,  Bach 57xx and Jinty and J52 on the Bach 57xx mechanism. All do well.

 

Of course the item I am waiting for is Accurascale's J67 and J69, both of which put in appearances. Let's all concentrate and focus on projecting the thought waves: sprung centre axle,sprung centre axle,sprung centre axle,sprung centre axle,