Need help working out what this was going to be?

[cypherman]

Hi all,

I picked this up today from my local model shop for a tenner. It was tested and was a very poor runner. That was sorted out with a service. It was originally a Triang M7. But has been modified and upgraded quite a bit. It looks like an upgrade kit from some where has been used. The funnel and firebox( It is a one piece casting), firebox dart, dome, steps, raised coal bunker and grills at the back window, Full cab detailing is also white metal. Plus assorted detailing are all white metal. Also has new brass buffers. and new finer scale wheels plus a new front spectacle plate with round windows. I am not sure but thought that who ever started this conversion was trying to make it into a LNER G5. Any suggestions would be gratefully received so I can finish off this upgrade.

Edited January 25 by cypherman

[The Johnster]

Looks good, I agree it's intended to be a G5.  Assuming that the ride height of the old Triang model has been sorted, which it looks as if it has, there's not a huge amount more you can do with it.  I'd advise against cutting the bolier skirts away as this will expose the highly conspicuous brass worm, which will draw further attention to itself by revolving...   Handrails and lamp irons, obviously, better coal perhaps, and it might be worth investigating whether the current Hornby keeper plate, which would provide brake and similar detail below the running plate, might be used if only cosmetically.

[Flying Pig]

With that cab it looks more like one of the NBR 0-4-4Ts

 

https://www.lner.info/locos/G/g7.php

 

[kevinlms]

Use one of the TARDIS to go back in time and ask!

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Could be G7 or G8, the two classes being very closely related, but the G7 is the one that will have survived long enough for the full LNER livery and number to be applied. (I had no idea that the G8 was the first 0-4-4T class to operate in the UK; possibly thanks to the T-H M7 this wheel arrangement has always been a 'Southern Fancy' in my mind.

 

12 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Use one of the TARDIS to go back in time and ask!

Them's Daleks. Only answer they supply is EXTERMINATE! Charming people. 😅

 

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

possibly thanks to the T-H M7 this wheel arrangement has always been a 'Southern Fancy' in my mind.

 

Quite a number of 19th Century locomotive engineers want a word.  Mr Stirling looks especially peeved.

[TinTracks]

On 23/01/2024 at 16:51, cypherman said:

I picked this up today from my local model shop for a tenner

 You done well there mate.!

 I would agree with @Flying Pig Re the cab. Also bunker rails don't look like a G5.

 If you decide to pass it on I'll be happy to give it a home😉

 Cheers, Rich

[kevinlms]

2 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Could be G7 or G8, the two classes being very closely related, but the G7 is the one that will have survived long enough for the full LNER livery and number to be applied. (I had no idea that the G8 was the first 0-4-4T class to operate in the UK; possibly thanks to the T-H M7 this wheel arrangement has always been a 'Southern Fancy' in my mind.

 

Them's Daleks. Only answer they supply is EXTERMINATE! Charming people. 😅

 

Um, I know that, what was I thinking?

 

😇

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

1 hour ago, Flying Pig said:

Quite a number of 19th Century locomotive engineers want a word.  Mr Stirling looks especially peeved.

My fixation was all on the N2 and N7 0-6-2T's working KX inner suburban as a child. That there had previously been Stirling's 0-4-4T for the GNR on the same suburban and branch  services wouldn't dawn on me for about a further decade. 

[DCB]

I always thought the Triang M7  was more like an NB 4-4-2T than anything  0-4-4T found north of the Watford Gap.
The Scots liked narrow cabs on their 0-4-4t s wi the Westiin hoose pomp reet by the cob so they cuild gi et a clout wia hommer whon et packed in,   Worst thing about the Triang M7 is it was designed for Magnadhesion to hold the front wheels down.  Without it the bogie takes a big chunk of weight and the unloaded leading wheels don't pick up very  well. On mine I made a split axle pick up bogie with Bachmann wagon wheels in a pair of brass frames with insulated spacers wired to the motor and  chassis    It still won't pull the skin of a cold coffee but it does not stall and all the wheels go round,  There aren't many RTR locos with wiper contact unpowered pick up axles ypu can say that about....

Edited January 25 by DCB

[DCB]

10 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Them's Daleks. Only answer they supply is EXTERMINATE! Charming people. 😅

 

Au Contraire, they also say "You will obey"

[melmerby]

Which lines had air brakes?

That would narrow it down.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

9 hours ago, DCB said:

It still won't pull the skin of a cold coffee but it does not stall and all the wheels go round,  There aren't many RTR locos with wiper contact unpowered pick up axles you can say that about....

Although relatively recently Bachmann have managed a pair of 0-4-4T (MR 1P, NER G5) in just this format, and thanks to a better construction layout, (lots of metal forward, light weight construction rear of the coupled axles) they balance within the coupled wheelbase resulting in stable traction.

This effectively makes all previous RTR OO 0-4-4T obsolete...

[cypherman]

Hi all,

This loco has no problem with the weight distribution. As I said earlier the smokebox and chimney are a one piece caste metal block that runs back into the boiler. It stops just in front of the worm and motor. I have been studying pictures from all the various G class 0-4-4s and they are all some what different. The main bugbear I can see is the type and  position of the safety valves. Most of the G class engines have the valves on the top of the dome or a raised dais in the usual spot in front of the cab.. The model has a strange lever like fitting. Makes me think it should have a brass cover similar to the G6. But it definitely is not a G6. It looks very much like a G7 except for the safety valves which are again on top of the dome.. The original M7 dome has been removed and a White metal dome has replaced it without safety valves. Pictures are in order. G1,G6 and G7. Also the G1 appears in this picture to be domeless. The search goes on.

[DCB]

The G7 is posed like LMS Royal Scots used to be so the narrow  |Cab (Tender in the Scots) is not obvious.  The cab bunker is several inches narrower than the tanks.  LNER is central on the tank in the photo. (its the only G7 photo I know of they only lasted until 1933.      I believe the M7 (BR designation)  was the only "Drummind Type" 0-4-4T with a "Full width Cab"  Drummond built narrow cab 4-4-0s as well before changing to full width cabs during the T 9 production run.    The NB had progressed to 4-4-2Ts by the time they went to full width cabs.

[cypherman]

1 hour ago, DCB said:

The G7 is posed like LMS Royal Scots used to be so the narrow  |Cab (Tender in the Scots) is not obvious.  The cab bunker is several inches narrower than the tanks.  LNER is central on the tank in the photo. (its the only G7 photo I know of they only lasted until 1933.      I believe the M7 (BR designation)  was the only "Drummind Type" 0-4-4T with a "Full width Cab"  Drummond built narrow cab 4-4-0s as well before changing to full width cabs during the T 9 production run.    The NB had progressed to 4-4-2Ts by the time they went to full width cabs.

Hi DCB,

Now that you mention it You can see where the tanks are wider than the cab. Thanks for that bit of info. This proving bit more complicated than the E7 0-6-2 tank I made from another M7. I might have to finish this an engine resembling a G5. Though not exactly one.

[cypherman]

23 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Um, I know that, what was I thinking?

 

😇

Bring the Daleks . My Cybermen are waiting........💣

[Steamport Southport]

On 25/01/2024 at 13:08, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Could be G7 or G8, the two classes being very closely related, but the G7 is the one that will have survived long enough for the full LNER livery and number to be applied. (I had no idea that the G8 was the first 0-4-4T class to operate in the UK; possibly thanks to the T-H M7 this wheel arrangement has always been a 'Southern Fancy' in my mind.

 

Them's Daleks. Only answer they supply is EXTERMINATE! Charming people. 😅

 

 

The Swindon, Marlborough and Andover Railway got there first!

 

Later part of the M&SWJR and then GWR (a company that didn't really bother with 0-4-4Ts as the 0-4-2Ts were more than adequate). This is actually a Fairlie and bends!

 

 

 

Jason

[DCB]

37 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

The Swindon, Marlborough and Andover Railway got there first!

 

Later part of the M&SWJR and then GWR (a company that didn't really bother with 0-4-4Ts as the 0-4-2Ts were more than adequate). This is actually a Fairlie and bends!

 

 

 

Jason

The most modern 0-4-4T to run in England, outside Walschaerts valve gear no less.   The SMA Fitters never got the hang of Walschaerts gear, Haynes never did a workshop manual and even the blokes at Swindon GWR had never seen anything like it (Its regular turn was Swindon Junction GWR to Marlborough /Andover so  it never worked properly and when it did it was a white elephant.   As we know Swindon later adopted Walschaerts gear  in a big way on Railmotors, , Like Festiniog railway Taliesin(?)  4 had a swivelling power bogie and I don't know of any other standard gauge single Fairlies so possibly ywas the first standard gauge twin bogie loco and BR adopted twin bogies for most locomotives so it was a real trailbreaker and in 00 it should be easy to get round 1st radius curves.    I think we should all try to build one  before Bachmann do an RTR version.    It was scrapped but in a parallel universe it could have been sold and re used by a light railway,

[kevinlms]

12 hours ago, cypherman said:

Hi all,

This loco has no problem with the weight distribution. As I said earlier the smokebox and chimney are a one piece caste metal block that runs back into the boiler. It stops just in front of the worm and motor. I have been studying pictures from all the various G class 0-4-4s and they are all some what different. The main bugbear I can see is the type and  position of the safety valves. Most of the G class engines have the valves on the top of the dome or a raised dais in the usual spot in front of the cab.. The model has a strange lever like fitting. Makes me think it should have a brass cover similar to the G6. But it definitely is not a G6. It looks very much like a G7 except for the safety valves which are again on top of the dome.. The original M7 dome has been removed and a White metal dome has replaced it without safety valves. Pictures are in order. G1,G6 and G7. Also the G1 appears in this picture to be domeless. The search goes on.

So where did the middle one carry it's water - the capacity must have been low.

[DCB]

Not my sphere of expertise but is not the middle one a BTP   Back Tank Passenger with the water under the coal behind the cab    Many tank locos have water tanks under the  coal space, just as tenders have coal over the water tank.  The GWR 7220   2-8-2T was a pretty extreme example.    On the other hand GWR 57XX locos had bunkers holding 4 tons of coal where other railways locos held 1 ton  Poor old Thomas the Tank's prototype (E2) only held 1 ton which made them useless for their intended passenger duties.    The earliest saddle tank locos were built to get more adhesion weight over the driving wheels  (Norris Lickey Banker) and the back tank avoided the problem of reduced adhesion when the water kevel got low  

[Darryl Tooley]

On 23/01/2024 at 16:51, cypherman said:

It looks like an upgrade kit from some where has been used.

Probably this one:

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/324623456372

 

Which has been used here:

 

https://sremg.org.uk/model/muz_04.html

 

The builder, I believe, is an active RMWebber.

 

The LNER type that your model most resembles is the G9 class, Reid's development of the Drummond engines that became LNER class G8.  The push-pull gear, exactly right for an M7, is wrong for this class, but one suspects that the conversion was done by someone more concerned with getting weight over the front end than strict prototypical accuracy.

 

D

 

 

[relaxinghobby]

To make it into a G5 replace the wheels with 20 mm Markets and axle adapter bushes. This will give it the smaller 5 foot drivers of the G5 and lower the over high footplate of the old Tri-ang Hornby model.

 

I think Markets also do a fatter axle for fitting into the T-H chassis blocks.

[Flying Pig]

5 hours ago, relaxinghobby said:

To make it into a G5 replace the wheels with 20 mm Markets and axle adapter bushes. This will give it the smaller 5 foot drivers of the G5 and lower the over high footplate of the old Tri-ang Hornby model.

 

I think Markets also do a fatter axle for fitting into the T-H chassis blocks.

 

The cab shape is so unmistakeably Scottish that even being overwidth it suggests the NBR type much more strongly than a Worsdell design. Overall the model doesn't really say G5 very effectively and imo would be happier pretending to be an NBR than an NER loco.

 

 If you wanted to work on the body, the simplest thing would be to add a layer of plastic sheet to widen the tanks and then round off the top edges.  The dome could also be replaced (it's quite untidily fitted) with a more typical "Drummond" design.  But then you would need to repaint and honestly I think the model is probaly best left as it is.

[cypherman]

8 hours ago, Darryl Tooley said:

Probably this one:

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/324623456372

 

Which has been used here:

 

https://sremg.org.uk/model/muz_04.html

 

The builder, I believe, is an active RMWebber.

 

The LNER type that your model most resembles is the G9 class, Reid's development of the Drummond engines that became LNER class G8.  The push-pull gear, exactly right for an M7, is wrong for this class, but one suspects that the conversion was done by someone more concerned with getting weight over the front end than strict prototypical accuracy.

 

D

 

 

Hi Daryl,

Yes it looks like any of the first 3 engines in the second set of pictures. I would really like to see a front end view and a rear view of those engines.