Jump to content
 

Rapido Port of Par Bagnall 0-4-0ST (OO Gauge)


AY Mod
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, RapidoCorbs said:

Taking into account the specification, design, capability, and the fact it exists in RTR at all, I think it's pretty cool.

 

We decided that a blanking plug for the bufferbeam was an acceptable compromise for those who wanted to remove the TLs, and such a component will not add to the assembly or manufacturing cost as it is so minor. Screw-in replaceable diecast bufferbeams* were not.

 

*they need to be diecast to keep the overall weight up as the cab and tank need to be plastic

Certainly a disappointing solution, but it is what it is.  I’ve never seen a satisfactory fit on a plug in section before, but at least in this case with a plain red bufferbeam it won’t be too difficult to skim with filler and repaint the whole thing.

 

Certainly won’t stop me ordering one

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
7 hours ago, The Fatadder said:

Certainly a disappointing solution, but it is what it is.  I’ve never seen a satisfactory fit on a plug in section before, but at least in this case with a plain red bufferbeam it won’t be too difficult to skim with filler and repaint the whole thing.

 

Certainly won’t stop me ordering one

Actually, Rich, I think that filling in the gap around a plug-in piece of buffer beam in a totally neat way (ie. so that when painted over, you wouldn't know it was there), without damaging rivet detail and with the presence of the buffers so close, is actually a very difficult job.

 

What would be much easier would be to replace the whole buffer beam, which would probably also involve replacing the buffers as well.

 

Perhaps Corbs has the answer in his own power, in his life outside of Rapido, by marketing a replacement buffer beam, either etched or 3-D printed?

 

Come to think of it, perhaps a whole range of replacement buffer beams beckons for the enterprising individual...

 

I agree that the decision to produce the model in the first place is indeed 'cool'. What's not cool, in my irrelevant opinion, is the provision of horrible big holes in buffer beams. To that extent, Bachmann, Dapol, Heljan etc. are also guilty of this.

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Actually, Rich, I think that filling in the gap around a plug-in piece of buffer beam in a totally neat way (ie. so that when painted over, you wouldn't know it was there), without damaging rivet detail and with the presence of the buffers so close, is actually a very difficult job.

 

What would be much easier would be to replace the whole buffer beam, which would probably also involve replacing the buffers as well.

 

Perhaps Corbs has the answer in his own power, in his life outside of Rapido, by marketing a replacement buffer beam, either etched or 3-D printed?

 

Come to think of it, perhaps a whole range of replacement buffer beams beckons for the enterprising individual...

 

I agree that the decision to produce the model in the first place is indeed 'cool'. What's not cool, in my irrelevant opinion, is the provision of horrible big holes in buffer beams. To that extent, Bachmann, Dapol, Heljan etc. are also guilty of this.

 

 

What can be difficult about smearing a little Milliput, using an improvised miniature palette knife made from an offcut of etch sheet edging, and rubbing it down when hard with a fibreglass stick?

 

The bufferbeam is cast mazak, so there is no danger of removing rivets with the mild abrasive action of the fibreglass stick.

 

I have undertaken this operation many times, with no problem whatsoever - it's called modelling.

 

CJI.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Just now, cctransuk said:

 

What can be difficult about smearing a little Milliput, using an improvised miniature palette knife made from an offcut of etch sheet edging, and rubbing it down when hard with a fibreglass stick?

 

The bufferbeam is cast mazak, so there is no danger of removing rivets with the mild abrasive action of the fibreglass stick.

 

I have undertaken this operation many times, with no problem whatsoever - it's called modelling.

 

CJI.

As you are aware, John, I am no stranger to 'modelling!'.

 

Admittedly I have only filling one in on plastic but I don't use fibreglass sticks any more, to prevent the tiny particles being accidentally picked up by pets.

 

The last time I did it was last summer on John Farmer's Heljan Class 14, which was a bit fraught in terms of trying not to damage the surroundings.

 

If the Dapol Hawthorn Leslie comes with a cast buffer beam, I shall certainly be having another go.

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

What can be difficult about smearing a little Milliput, using an improvised miniature palette knife made from an offcut of etch sheet edging, and rubbing it down when hard with a fibreglass stick?

 

The bufferbeam is cast mazak, so there is no danger of removing rivets with the mild abrasive action of the fibreglass stick.

 

I have undertaken this operation many times, with no problem whatsoever - it's called modelling.

 

CJI.

 

 

Given to whom you're responding to John, that's a harsh response. 

 

Tim, as well you know, is an accomplished modeller. 

 

Rob

 

 

Edited by NHY 581
  • Agree 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Captain Kernow said:

As you are aware, John, I am no stranger to 'modelling!'.

 

Admittedly I have only filling one in on plastic but I don't use fibreglass sticks any more, to prevent the tiny particles being accidentally picked up by pets.

 

The last time I did it was last summer on John Farmer's Heljan Class 14, which was a bit fraught in terms of trying not to damage the surroundings.

 

If the Dapol Hawthorn Leslie comes with a cast buffer beam, I shall certainly be having another go.

 

Funnily enough, it was the Heljan DH Type 1 that I was thinking of when I wrote my post - though I have undertaken the same or similar operations on many models. I use Peco / Hornby Dublo Simplex couplers, so there is often a need to wholly or partially fill coupler cut-outs in kit bufferbeams.

 

If the fibreglass stick is verboten, I find a miniature chisel, such as the Tamiya ones, is effective at smoothing wet Milliput, and for scraping off any dried surplus. My narrowest chisel is, I think, 1mm. in width, and can easily work around rivets on mazak, whitemetal or plastic.

 

CJI.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NHY 581 said:

 

 

Given to whom you're responding to John, that's a harsh response. 

 

Tim, as well you know, is an accomplished modeller. 

 

Rob

 

 

 

I am well aware of Tim's excellent accomplishments, and I apologise for any offence taken.

 

Perhaps I was a little taken aback that such a minor task as making-good around a provided infill piece should have warranted the level of disapprobation directed at the designers of the model in question.

 

John Isherwood.

  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I have used Deluxe Materials Perfect Plastic Putty to fill fine holes on models including the bunker line on the Rapido/Model Rail 16xx and buffer beam infills on the Hornby Sentinel and the Bachmann Class 03's with good effect.

 

https://deluxematerials.co.uk/products/perfect-plastic-putty

 

Easy to clean up as well with no sanding involved.

 

Must admit I am not planning on doing this on my pair of Bagnell's when they eventually arrive.

 

I would imagine the aftermarket boys such as RT Models will produce an etched buffer beam overlay to help those not intent on using tension lock couplings.

 

 Cheers,

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
13 hours ago, cctransuk said:

I am well aware of Tim's excellent accomplishments, and I apologise for any offence taken.

 

Perhaps I was a little taken aback that such a minor task as making-good around a provided infill piece should have warranted the level of disapprobation directed at the designers of the model in question.

Not a problem!

 

I agree that it should be a minor task, although I am a relative newcomer to the very small chisels that you mention, having only bought one example, comparatively recently. I shall also give the DeLuxe putty a go as well a seeking to obtain more examples of chisels, as they are undoubtedly useful.

 

I am, perhaps, just expressing my irritation at the fact that such jobs should be necessary, although users of the type of coupling that rely on such holes may well have a different opinion.

 

Also, as a member of a minority group within the hobby (ie. as a part-time P4 modeller who likes shunting), just buying a new toy and then enjoying it straight away is something that isn't really that straight forward:

 

- Will it run well enough to shunt with it?

- can it be converted to the wider gauge?

- what other jobs will be necessary to make it ready for use on the layout?

 

Previous disappointments of much-heralded RTR releases have now reduced my expectations. Those of you who know me will know the identity of the various culprits...

 

If, on the other hand, I am building a loco kit, that I am more prepared for the work involved and some of the potential pitfalls (and solutions).

 

Sorry to appear negative, the fact that Rapido is actually doing a model like this is something to be celebrated, of course.

 

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Not a problem!

 

I agree that it should be a minor task, although I am a relative newcomer to the very small chisels that you mention, having only bought one example, comparatively recently. I shall also give the DeLuxe putty a go as well a seeking to obtain more examples of chisels, as they are undoubtedly useful.

 

I am, perhaps, just expressing my irritation at the fact that such jobs should be necessary, although users of the type of coupling that rely on such holes may well have a different opinion.

 

Also, as a member of a minority group within the hobby (ie. as a part-time P4 modeller who likes shunting), just buying a new toy and then enjoying it straight away is something that isn't really that straight forward:

 

- Will it run well enough to shunt with it?

- can it be converted to the wider gauge?

- what other jobs will be necessary to make it ready for use on the layout?

 

Previous disappointments of much-heralded RTR releases have now reduced my expectations. Those of you who know me will know the identity of the various culprits...

 

If, on the other hand, I am building a loco kit, that I am more prepared for the work involved and some of the potential pitfalls (and solutions).

 

Sorry to appear negative, the fact that Rapido is actually doing a model like this is something to be celebrated, of course.

 

Indeed it is and I have one on order myself, through my favourite retailer.

 

With regard to couplings, my quibble is not with the need to provide the opening for the tension-lock coupling but the fact that the couplings on many recent products (not just locos and not just by Rapido) project much, much further in front of the buffers than they should. Even on 1st radius curves this shouldn't be necessary and the resulting huge gap between vehicles means that we have regressed to the bad old days of the 1950s and 1960s. I'd be interested to know why it isn't possible to arrange the coupling so that on minimum radius curves the loop projects just enough to prevent the buffer heads touching.

Edited by St Enodoc
  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • RMweb Gold
9 hours ago, RapidoCorbs said:

 

 

Thanks for posting Corbs.

 

Looks great. 

 

What I'm really interested in is their slow speed running ananin particular, an ability to come to a gradual halt and start. In my eyes, it's essential for a small industrial loco to perform smoothly at slow speed. 

 

Rob. 

 

 

  • Agree 4
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 26/01/2024 at 12:17, Fair Oak Junction said:

They look to be running smooth as silk even at this stage. Can't wait for them

With respect to you and Corbs, simply running at some considerable speed to some music reminiscent of an Ealing Comedy is no real test of how well a mechanism performs at slow speed, in other words for shunting purposes. I've had a number of (now returned) RTR locos that ran well enough at a scale 70 mph but were absolutely hopeless at shunting, even after running in.

 

12 minutes ago, NHY 581 said:

Thanks for posting Corbs.

 

Looks great. 

I agree on both counts!

 

12 minutes ago, NHY 581 said:

What I'm really interested in is their slow speed running ananin particular, an ability to come to a gradual halt and start. In my eyes, it's essential for a small industrial loco to perform smoothly at slow speed. 

Well said, Rob, exactly what I was getting at above.

 

And.... it has to do this on normal DC control as well, using nothing more fancy than a normal Gaugemaster handheld controller, never mind your trickery performed by DCC artistes...

 

 

Edited by Captain Kernow
  • Agree 1
  • Round of applause 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I know it's a test bed which is receiving further development. The sample shows that everything fits and moves, other operation aspects will follow.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
20 minutes ago, Fair Oak Junction said:

Well, I never mentioned slow speed running. My comment was based purely on the speed shown and I stand by my statement.

On 26/01/2024 at 12:17, Fair Oak Junction said:

They look to be running smooth as silk even at this stage.

 

Well, indeed you didn't, but you did say 'smooth as silk', so I beg to please indulge my impertinent fantasy that such a phrase could be described as including the lower speed ranges. I did watch the whole video, hoping to see a slow speed piece...

 

24 minutes ago, Fair Oak Junction said:

I'll try to refrain from positivity in the future, revert to my natural sceptic self 👍

I've learnt over the years to have low expectations, that way the disappointment is not so crushing...

 

Low expectations with regard to slow speed running on DC control is what I now have with regard to the steam outline products from certain manufacturers.

 

I still have this nagging doubt that modern mechanisms in these locos are now somehow being designed for DCC operation, not DC, (which is, after all, the old fashioned way, the way of the past and not something that one has any right to associate with the white heat of technology...)

 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

This is just a load test really. On the flat oval test track we've had it pulling somewhere in the region of 30 Rapido wagons. The EP in the video is running on DC, I don't think it has the PCB installed and is just hardwired to the motor. 

Lots of testing is ongoing....

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 hours ago, RapidoCorbs said:

This is just a load test really. On the flat oval test track we've had it pulling somewhere in the region of 30 Rapido wagons. The EP in the video is running on DC, I don't think it has the PCB installed and is just hardwired to the motor. 

Lots of testing is ongoing....

Did I say that I liked the music?

 

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
14 minutes ago, Fredo said:

Hi,

Looking forward to the twins. Is the 60’s version suitable for say 1959-1961?
Thanks Fred

 

It should be for 1960 and 61 as the photo references we have used have been narrowed down to between 1960 and 1967.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...