Manning Wardle

[rapidoandy]

I know, I know! 
 

I’m fairly certain anyone who has read the various threads in this section of RMweb will know what it is and can probably even guess which loco(s) we may (or may not be) producing…

[Captain Kernow]

I would normally be extremely excited about an announcement of this kind, as this kind of light railway and ancient industrial are right up my street.

 

But I suspect that this, along with the equally exciting S160, will feature a coreless motor and a design that virtually integrates the chassis with the body, thus making anyone who wants one hostage to the choice of motor and gearing, especially if you wish to convert it to P4 or EM. **

 

I have experience of both the 16XX and the Hunslet and neither example ran well enough with my DC AMR hand-held controllers to encourage me to keep them and they were both moved on, a real pity.

 

Yet many people seem to have a good experience of running these locos (and I'm not talking about the new-fangled DCC stuff either - just on good old school DC).

 

If so, what controllers are you using?

 

I'm genuinely puzzled, unless the answer is just that I have been doubly unlucky with the examples I obtained. Neither ran consistently slowly and smoothly using an ordinary Gaugemaster controller, either.

 

The AMR hand-held was billed as a slow speed controller when they were available and as far as I can make out, they feature a small degree of feedback. Not a lot of feedback, certainly not like (say) a Gaugemaster feedback hand-held controller.

 

And yet I have used the AMR controller with perfect results on all locos I have built using Portescap motor-gearboxes. Portescaps are also coreless, so are there different types of coreless motor?

 

I've also got a Bachmann 94XX, which I understand also has a coreless motor, yet that responds very well to the AMR.

 

Or have I just been 'lucky' with the Bachmann 94XX?

 

I know I am extremely curmudgeonly when it comes to Rapido steam locos on this forum, but that emanates from genuine frustration and this post is not just another 'dig' at Rapido, but a genuine enquiry.

 

I would have at least one Hunslet and 16XX in my collection if they ran well and would also buy a 44XX, a S160 and more than one Manning Wardle, if I could be confident that they would run well enough for me and especially if converting to EM or P4 was easier.

 

Many thanks.

 

** My normal default position for an RTR loco that I really like but which doesn't run well enough, is to build a replacement chassis, with my own choice of cored motor and gearbox.

 

Edited August 12, 2023 by Captain Kernow

[Wickham Green too]

49 minutes ago, wainwright1 said:

... I think that the K type had at least four cab options to choose from, ...

... but would have gained innumerable 'customised' ( = makeshift ) variants during their lives !

[Nearholmer]

1 hour ago, wainwright1 said:

That's a little bit to think about.

The thing I’m thinking, is that some of your class identifications may not be quite right.

FY&N No.1 (later SR W1 ‘Medina’) was Q class MW1555/1902; ‘Bembridge’ was M class MW517/1875; ‘Charwelton’ is also bigger than an L, but I’m not sure exactly which class it is.

 

The SECR had two MWs I think, although I can’t find the relevant book right now. No.313 (MW767/1881) used at Folkestone (later as 225s at Meldon Quarry) was an 0-4-0ST, but I’m not sure which class; the other was, I think an L class 0-6-0ST, but don’t trust me on that.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 12, 2023 by Nearholmer

[jamieb]

I know it's unlikely but an unpainted/grey primer version would be fantastic,even if available direct from Rapido only?

[Wickham Green too]

I can lend you a Halfords rattle can !

[Wickham Green too]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

 

... The SECR had two MWs I think, although I can’t find the relevant book right now. No.313 (MW767/1881) used at Folkestone (later as 225s at Meldon Quarry) was an 0-4-0ST, but I’m not sure which class; the other was, I think an L class 0-6-0ST, but don’t trust me on that. 

The other was, in fact two ....... No.353 was Ashford Carriage Works shunter and No.752 shunted at Folkestone Harbour : 

 

353 : 'Q' class - MW1154/1890, cylinders 14'' x 20'', 3'6'' wheels, 600 gallons water - new to South Eastern, withdrawn in 1929

752 : 'K' class - MW725/1879, cylinders 12'' x 17'', 3'2'' wheels, 430 gallons water - second hand to SECR 1905, to Northfleet Wharf in 1925

[Nearholmer]

I don’t know about anyone else, but speaking as a qualified idiot, I could do with an idiot’s guide to MW classes, because I keep getting lost in cylinder dimensions when trying to work out which locos are which class …… I was about to suggest several interesting Ls, but they turn out to be M, for instance. 
 

Anyway, this one has to be worth building a layout for, because it worked at a cake factory, which I believe also had a narrow gauge railway for carrying chocolate. https://preservedbritishsteamlocomotives.com/manning-wardle-works-no-2025-winston-churchill-0-6-0st/

[RodneyS]

This is worth a look as it lists the Manning Wardle locos which ran on the Colonel Stephens railways.

https://colonelstephenssociety.co.uk/locomotive notes topics/manning wardle locos.html

[AY Mod]

18 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Anyway, this one has to be worth building a layout for,

 

Coincidentally I am, so Winnie is another on my wishlist. There may be subliminal forces at play as a few years ago @Phil Parker and I had a brew with a certain Mr. Shron not 20m from where it now stands.

[Nearholmer]

Are you doing the cake factory then, or in one of its munitions phases, or one of the other places it worked, or is it all hush-hush for now?

[AY Mod]

10 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

is it all hush-hush for now

 

It's low-key slow-progress affair on an interchangeable Earl of Dudley/Cannock Mineral Railway project which has a currently newsworthy name. A home for all sorts of this kind of thing; which happens to be a good home for internal user wagons. 🤔

[Izzy]

2 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

The AMR hand-held was billed as a slow speed controller when they were available and as far as I can make out, they feature a small degree of feedback. Not a lot of feedback, certainly not like (say) a Gaugemaster feedback hand-held controller.

 

And yet I have used the AMR controller with perfect results on all locos I have built using Portescap motor-gearboxes. Portescaps are also coreless, so are there different types of coreless motor?

 

When Portescap's first arrived and I was asked to fit them into locos I found that the AMR had feedback that was quite strong and although motors such as the larger Mashima's could accept it they didn't like it at all. The late Len Rich (owner and producer of AMR) tried to turn down the feedback for me and produce a version more suitable for use with them but found it impossible. So I made my own emitter-follower hand-helds based around the Gaugemaster controller kits they then produced which don't feature feedback as such and rely more on high gain and half-wave attributes to produce a kind of half-way house which suits all types of DC motors. Although I still have the AMR when I want to run DC locos these days I still use these controllers.

 

These days much has changed with regard to what are now know as coreless motors but which were originally were called Swiss precision or instrument motors and first arrived in around 1959 (IIRC).

These days they are produced in vast quantities but the standards vary widely between the orignal (very expensive) Swiss/German made types -  Faulhaber/Maxon/Escap etc. and those from, say, China.

 

Size also has a bearing here. Localised heating is the main feedback problem with them not having a metal core to absorb it, besides their much quicker reaction to very small current changes, and larger ones will be more capable in this respect. The general 'bigger is better' saying runs true here.

 

Here the problem is that these days makers want to try and fit the smallest motors they can. DJM for example fitted a size ( 7x16mm) which I use in 2mm but wouldn't consider capable of use in normal 4mm scale locos. So they struggle in many cases. Not their fault. Generally they suffer because people confuse 'more efficient', which they are, with 'more powerful', which size for size they are not. Less so actually in the past - why Portescap's came with spur gear gearboxes - they didn't produce the power to cope with worm gear drive, but with newer magnet designs about the same now.

 

They are however seen as 'green' because they consume less current so are being seen as the way forward similar to how LED lights are versus filament bulbs, so investment and production is being geared to their production over cored types.

 

If like me you use DCC then there is no problem with using them because the feedback frequency of DCC is much higher and so less problematic. And with the better quality decoders can be adjusted to best suit them. Sadly DC feedback is low frequency, not adjustable, and can cause excessive heating of coreless.

 

Bob

[sir douglas]

 

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

I don’t know about anyone else, but speaking as a qualified idiot, I could do with an idiot’s guide to MW classes, because I keep getting lost in cylinder dimensions when trying to work out which locos are which class …… I was about to suggest several interesting Ls, but they turn out to be M, for instance. 

 

The tables from Mark Smithers' book

Edited August 12, 2023 by sir douglas

[The Johnster]

3 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

 

But I suspect that this, along with the equally exciting S160, will feature a coreless motor and a design that virtually integrates the chassis with the body, thus making anyone who wants one hostage to the choice of motor and gearing, especially if you wish to convert it to P4 or EM. *

 

Point taken, but it is the contruction of model locos that integrate the body and chassis that prevents conversion to EM/P4 and hostage to motor/transmission, not the presence or otherwise of a core in the motor.  You were, btw, spectaculary unfortunate with your various unsatisfactory DJM 48xx; I am also not a lucky person and try to avoid products that are of this sort, like the little girl and she had a little curl/right in the middle of her forehead/and when she was good/she was very very good/but when she was bad she was 'orrid.  Locos of this design can run very well indeed, but require care in assembly, good quality components, and strict & reliable QC, perhaps not the somewhat mercurial DJ's strongest point...

 

My coreless Baccy 94xx runs more freely than my similar Baccy 57xx/8750, on a GM HH.  The thing about coreless motors and feedback controllers is a sort of semi-myth, arising during the days of Portescap motors which would fry quicker than their fuse protection if they encountered any back EMF and controller manufacturers still add the codicil of not using coreless motors with feedback to cover themselves; modern RTR mass-produced Chinese coreless cans are made of much tougher stuff, and are much cheaper to replace if you do happen to fry one! 

 

You'd be daft no to at least be aware of Izzy's warning comment, all the same, though.

Edited August 12, 2023 by The Johnster

[NZRedBaron]

Lot of industrials coming out the woodwork of late; wonder if that means we could get to see not just colliery wagons but also other internal user wagons for steel mills, docklands, other factories, and maybe even internal user 'tramway'-style coaching stock.

[wainwright1]

Studying the details, looks like some overlap between the K and L classes. So if Rapido are contemplating one of those they could possibly get two different bodies to go on one standard chassis.

[Captain Kernow]

11 hours ago, Izzy said:

 

When Portescap's first arrived and I was asked to fit them into locos I found that the AMR had feedback that was quite strong and although motors such as the larger Mashima's could accept it they didn't like it at all. The late Len Rich (owner and producer of AMR) tried to turn down the feedback for me and produce a version more suitable for use with them but found it impossible. So I made my own emitter-follower hand-helds based around the Gaugemaster controller kits they then produced which don't feature feedback as such and rely more on high gain and half-wave attributes to produce a kind of half-way house which suits all types of DC motors. Although I still have the AMR when I want to run DC locos these days I still use these controllers.

 

These days much has changed with regard to what are now know as coreless motors but which were originally were called Swiss precision or instrument motors and first arrived in around 1959 (IIRC).

These days they are produced in vast quantities but the standards vary widely between the orignal (very expensive) Swiss/German made types -  Faulhaber/Maxon/Escap etc. and those from, say, China.

 

Size also has a bearing here. Localised heating is the main feedback problem with them not having a metal core to absorb it, besides their much quicker reaction to very small current changes, and larger ones will be more capable in this respect. The general 'bigger is better' saying runs true here.

 

Here the problem is that these days makers want to try and fit the smallest motors they can. DJM for example fitted a size ( 7x16mm) which I use in 2mm but wouldn't consider capable of use in normal 4mm scale locos. So they struggle in many cases. Not their fault. Generally they suffer because people confuse 'more efficient', which they are, with 'more powerful', which size for size they are not. Less so actually in the past - why Portescap's came with spur gear gearboxes - they didn't produce the power to cope with worm gear drive, but with newer magnet designs about the same now.

 

They are however seen as 'green' because they consume less current so are being seen as the way forward similar to how LED lights are versus filament bulbs, so investment and production is being geared to their production over cored types.

 

If like me you use DCC then there is no problem with using them because the feedback frequency of DCC is much higher and so less problematic. And with the better quality decoders can be adjusted to best suit them. Sadly DC feedback is low frequency, not adjustable, and can cause excessive heating of coreless.

 

Bob

Thanks Bob, that's a very understandable explanation for an electronic dimwit like me.

 

All of my layouts now feature the option to easily switch between AMR and normal Gaugemaster DC controllers (literally the flick of a switch), so I can select the most appropriate controller for the loco in question.

 

I think I agree with The Johnster's explanation that I have been 'spectacularly unlucky' when it comes to the examples of DJM and Rapido locos that I have tried.

 

But that doesn't answer the complaint of the spectacularly difficult choices faced by the P4 or EM modeller, seeking to convert a Rapido steam loco to their chosen gauge - either do a re-wheeling job with the chassis still in place in the bodyshell (not necessarily easy) or completely dismantle the loco (body and chassis) and literally re-build parts of the body components, to arrive at a body, under which you can put your replacement chassis.

 

At least Rapido don't try to sell us steam locos that are effectively running on motor bogies, like the late (and not lamented by me) DJ Models.

 

[PatC]

This is really great news. An MW saddle tank is an inspired choice. Personally I'd like the K or old Class I but if it turns out to be an L, or whatever, it will still be incredibly useful for all sorts of light railway projects that I have in mind. I'm not one for making rash promises but I can see me acquiring a couple of these, may be three, whatever version is produced. Time to start selling off surplus stock to generate cash me thinks. Thank you Rapido.

[finelines]

Ringing Rock. 
 

Roger

[Rich Uncle Skeleton]

2 hours ago, finelines said:

Ringing Rock. 
 

Roger

This and the ones on Brill are for me the quintessential light railway MW. The latter would match not only Metropolitan wagons and Wisbech coach Rapido have, but also the Met 4-4-0 that someone will make sooner rather than later.

[Izzy]

3 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

Thanks Bob, that's a very understandable explanation for an electronic dimwit like me.

 

All of my layouts now feature the option to easily switch between AMR and normal Gaugemaster DC controllers (literally the flick of a switch), so I can select the most appropriate controller for the loco in question.

 

 

Thanks Tim, glad it's been of help and interest. Being able to switch controllers is rather reminiscent of the Pentroller, the controller designed and produced by Stewart Hine which had this ability built-in, to control and adjust the level of feedback or switch it off. I've never had one myself.

 

My interest in this thread and what is presumed the intent by Rapido to produce I/K/L MW's in 4mm is that I have built (scratchbuilt) examples of both the I and L class in 7mm so have an understanding of the task facing Rapido in doing them in 4mm. They are not big locos by any means, so trying to produce them at all let alone satisfy all the wants and needs of buyers, easy to dis-assemble, DCC and sound options etc. will be a tall order. That they have done the J70 tram and others that all run well suggest they have the neccesary skills but it will be a challange. For example I have used 16x30 Mashima cans in mine, and after recent re-builds now use HL 60-1 gearboxes (originally 80-1 home brew ones made well before HL came on the scene) to enable sound fitting. The size of motors I used suggest those 7x16 coreless I mentioned earlier would be the equivalent size to use in 4mm ..........

 

I have posted shots here-abouts and done a small thread on the latter but here is a shot of each anyway.

 

 

 

Like many loco classes these got 'improved' over the years with subsequent builds. So all the 6-coupled I/K/L/M look similar in general but were subjected to specification changes which alongside alterations many got in later years by one means or another mean they all have subtle, or not so subtle, differences, ad-hoc cabs etc.

 

Bob

[finelines]

I just bought an Orchid ready to the second anniversary of Sharon’s death. When my kit for a Manning Wardle F class wasn’t as successful as we would like she asked what’s wrong with it and I said it’s not Ringing Rock. For the remainder of our Marriage she asked when I was going to do do it, an RTR one would make a wonderful 3rd Anniversary gift. A quintessential Manning Wardle!
 

Roger

[AMJ]

Had a nice ride behind Sir B this afternoon and some more photos taken from safe locations.

[Compound2632]

What are the dates for the L class?