Starting out in loco kit building

[Mark]

I agree with the sentiments about not opening the holes out on coupling rods. To function properly they need to be as tight as you can get away with. There is nothing worse that a model with the drive on the rear axle and 90 degrees of cumulative slop between the rear and front axle.

 

A little trick I use to clean of surplus solder is to make a series of scrapers from scrap etch from the same kit. The logic behind this is that the scrap brass has the same hardness as the model and will therefore not scratch the surface whilst removing surplus solder.

 

If you are careful with soldering, there should not be too much solder to remove and the real trick is to keep everything as clean as possible whilst you are working and make sure the two pieces to be joined are clean. It pays sometimes to tin the parts being joined first as you will need to get less heat into the joint when you solder the parts together.

 

I think a good starting point would be to get one of Chris Gibbons chassis kits and assemble that. They are well thought out and will go together well. If you buy a less well designed one it may put you off etched kits in general.

 

The only other thing is to obtain a set of bending bars or improvised bending bars. When you bend 90 degree bends, it is a good idea to clamp the material along its entire length and make bend in one go. If you use pliers, there is always a risk that you will distort the material which could result in a non square chassis or body.

 

Regards

 

Mark Humphrys

[bertiedog]

On the scrapers for brass, try harder brass sheet to make them, the clockmakers plate brass is harder than grades used for etching, and with a knife edge filed on, will cut solder, but not the etched sheet. Old brass door kick plates are harder, and also you can make small scrapers from rail section, nickel silver, just a bit harder than brass.

Old screwdrivers made in mild steel can be "honed" to a polished finish to make scrapers that do not mark, use 5000 grit paper.

 

Still better is not to put too much on anyway!

[bertiedog]

On the curves, five feet is practical, without trickery, like a rear bogie, or hinged frame, the eight wheels will not need flangeless drivers, as the rear bogie problem completely overtakes the issue long before flanges would be considered for removal.

 

It will need the frame thinned down around the rear wheels to get clearances even at 5 feet, a working radial pony setup would restrict it to P4 standards, scale curves only.

 

I have built many of these in kit form for customers, they look fantastic with a long coal train behind them, my favourite was not from a kit, but a special I built with heavy haulage in mind, milled solid brass chassis and partly milled body, all corners filled with lead, 7 pole custom motor based on Robert Lindsay's skewed slot ringfield designs, star wound as well. and with a 40:1 Muffets gearbox, all wheels sprung, fully ballraced, including driving and pony wheels, OO scale 16.5.mm, fully detailed body, lathe turned iron wheels from Beeson, split framed for pickup, flywheel drive....weighed a ton......The first axle was more stiffly sprung, others normal, with the front bogie fitted with compensation bars to the front axle. This ensured steady rock and roll free running over less than even track.

 

It was demonstrated at a London NMRA convention in the early 1970's, pulling happily over 100 US boxcars...sold on sight to the then owner of Fulgarex for a very healthy sum, I regretted it going afterwards, and I now have another underway at the moment to finally replace it..

Re-drawn from copyright lapsed blueprint.

Stephen

[Horsetan]

Bertiedog:

 

How many of the models you built over the years are still in existence? If you've built them as described above, I'd expect nothing less than 100% survival rate ....and that they'd all still be working!

[bertiedog]

Not all built like that tank, a one off, yes hundreds, in the main kits, and re builds, no idea how many are around..

Stephen.

[Metropolitan]

Nope. Don't agree with any of the above. We are talking, I think, about an absolute beginner here I believe. Once again the so called experts/pro's display their vested interests in making out that the job is harder and more complicated than it actually is and expect nothing less than perfection from day one! Perfection is not necessary to enjoy the process of learning to build kit built loco's. And the most important result is for the loco to be a runner. To make out that building a kit is a science to be taken seriously does nothing to further the hobby other than raising a few ego's. Forget all the nonsense about 'engineering' and have fun!

 

 

 

The most disheartening thing is to spend days on building a model loco only to find it won't run. I stand by my advice to a beginner to make life as easy as possible for your initial build re the chassis. ie: Markits self quartering wheels and plenty of play in the crank pin holes. A meaty 50w iron and powewrflow flux. Sandpaper to clean up, which contrary to the above, does not scratch brass enough to make any difference once painted and will save a fortune in ruined files.

[bertiedog]

Well, Powerflux and a hot iron were in use so alls right with everything?

 

Please remember these tips are not aimed just at the poster, but for general help to all the forum readers, there may be beginners, more competent modellers and model experts reading the replies, you simply can't make comments that fits all, only offer straight forward advice from very long experience, in my case 50 years of soldering, electrical, electronics, models, and scientific equipment.

 

• I taught soldering for several years, it is extremely easy when you know how, and I did say "use sandpaper", emery cloth leaves micro grit grains on the brass surface, which can mix with the solder when melted.,

 

• Production abrasive paper is the 3m type, generic grey Aluminium Oxide paper, which does not shed large particles, it is designed to disintegrate as you sand a surface., the remaining dust will blow away. Fine glass sandpaper is totally safe for cleaning brass and removing solder.

 

• Normally files are not needed to remove solder, they pick up lead in the teeth grooves and then need constant cleaning, this was covered by suggesting brass scrapers or polished steel scrapers to remove any excess.

 

I simply do not know what vested interest I have except to help a modeler with a problem that should not be affecting the enjoyment of assembling a kit..It is pretty certain it is the lead free solder behind the problem..

 

Stephen.

[Jol Wilkinson]

Nope. Don't agree with any of the above. We are talking, I think, about an absolute beginner here I believe. Once again the so called experts/pro's display their vested interests in making out that the job is harder and more complicated than it actually is and expect nothing less than perfection from day one! Perfection is not necessary to enjoy the process of learning to build kit built loco's. And the most important result is for the loco to be a runner. To make out that building a kit is a science to be taken seriously does nothing to further the hobby other than raising a few ego's. Forget all the nonsense about 'engineering' and have fun!

 

 

 

The most disheartening thing is to spend days on building a model loco only to find it won't run. I stand by my advice to a beginner to make life as easy as possible for your initial build re the chassis. ie: Markits self quartering wheels and plenty of play in the crank pin holes. A meaty 50w iron and powewrflow flux. Sandpaper to clean up, which contrary to the above, does not scratch brass enough to make any difference once painted and will save a fortune in ruined files.

 

John,

 

As you say, we are talking about offering guidance to someone who is new to loco building.

 

So why do you insist on providing bad advice, as most of us see it? I accept that Bertiedog is inclined to get a bit "heavy" with his advice, but there are simple techniques that have been proven over a good few years. Your approach seems to accept that problems which are likely to be encountered can be overcome by bodging. In my experience, that's just as likely to lead to a badly running loco and even if your approach works, you won't learn how to do it better next time.

 

Perhaps it might be better to ignore the postings on this thread and read Iain Rice's books on Etched loco and 4mm chassis construction, look at the RMWeb threads where someone is building a kit and visit shows where you can talk to the demonstrators.

 

Jol

[micklner]

Rather pointless to comment other than if you bodge from the start you will never learn how to do anything other bodge.

I dont claim to be an expert or kid myself that I am . I have numerous mistakes over the years and learnt from them.

Reference to sandpaper etc is just nonsense and of no help to anybody a starter to kit building or otherwise. All it will do is create a very expensive mistake and a poor to very poor result.

[bertiedog]

To show the other side of the coin, this loco was assembled with Frys lead free tin based solder, it runs OK for me, but it was with Baker's Fluid flux, which helps the lead free solder get an initial grip and transfer heat faster to the brass. Lead free needs a lot more heat to work..

 

[Kempenfelt]

The way I remove excess solder is using solderwick. I don't think it's been mentioned here yet but effectively its a braded copper (bit like the electrical pick ups on a scalextric car!) which you rest on the solder, re-apply flux and the soldering iron and the solderwick should absorb the excess solder!

 

It should be quick an easy, just don't hold the iron on the joint for too long! Worst comes to the worst you can still use one of the already mentioned alternatives if necessary.

 

I'd just like to add that I still class myself as a novice and am still building my first chassis. I actually use a 25w iron, liquid flux, tip tinner, solderwick and a fiberglass brush (for preping the brass as well as cleaning up afterwards) and not a lot else. A nice flat piece of wood, paxolin or glass should be used to solder on. My main bit of advice is to keep the tip of the iron clean and the job and you should be well away!

 

I've started with a High Level Jinty chassis and you can see my efforts on my WB thread. Like Mark I would recomend a High Level kit as a good starting point.

 

Just give it a go and like many before me have said, just enjoy yourself! Worst comes to the worst you make a mistake, talk to someone about it, learn from your mistakes and have another go! It is good fun I promise you and very rewarding!

 

Good luck and best wishes!

 

Paul

 

 

[craigwelsh]

We could do with the negative rating button for some of Met's posts in this thread!

 

Again someone here who started with liquid 12% phosphoric acid flux and i've been using it since though i've switched from Carrs 183 (it was actually cored solder) to Eileens and use 145 for smaller detail as it leaves less of a fillet.

 

I use the solder removal braid Paul mentioned if i've managed to flood something (I did use the stuff for Scalextric braids too actually!) though I try to avoid using too much solder to start. I normally only need to put the item in an Ultrasonic bath to make sure the flux is out of the nooks though a beginner would be fine with the tap. Powerflow is awful stuff - avoid!

 

I have built many of these in kit form for customers, they look fantastic with a long coal train behind them, my favourite was not from a kit, but a special I built with heavy haulage in mind, milled solid brass chassis and partly milled body, all corners filled with lead, 7 pole custom motor based on Robert Lindsay's skewed slot ringfield designs, star wound as well. and with a 40:1 Muffets gearbox, all wheels sprung, fully ballraced, including driving and pony wheels, OO scale 16.5.mm, fully detailed body, lathe turned iron wheels from Beeson, split framed for pickup, flywheel drive....weighed a ton......The first axle was more stiffly sprung, others normal, with the front bogie fitted with compensation bars to the front axle. This ensured steady rock and roll free running over less than even track.

 

It was demonstrated at a London NMRA convention in the early 1970's, pulling happily over 100 US boxcars...sold on sight to the then owner of Fulgarex for a very healthy sum, I regretted it going afterwards, and I now have another underway at the moment to finally replace it..

Stephen

Could we see some pictures of that? I'd also be curious what radii you think the 42xx (one of these without the radial) would be ok with. Is the new 72xx in P4 now?

[halfwit]

I use a 3 sided scraper and a fibreglass brush to remove excess solder. Using a brush gently takes a while but does the job. Its worth wearing latex or similar gloves though and working on a sheet of paper to control the fibre fall-out! The best way though is not to use too much solder in the first place.

[bertiedog]

Again someone here who started with liquid 12% phosphoric acid flux and i've been using it since though i've switched from Carrs 183 (it was actually cored solder) to Eileens and use 145 for smaller detail as it leaves less of a fillet.

 

I use the solder removal braid Paul mentioned if i've managed to flood something (I did use the stuff for Scalextric braids too actually!) though I try to avoid using too much solder to start. I normally only need to put the item in an Ultrasonic bath to make sure the flux is out of the nooks though a beginner would be fine with the tap. Powerflow is awful stuff - avoid!

 

Could we see some pictures of that? I'd also be curious what radii you think the 42xx (one of these without the radial) would be ok with. Is the new 72xx in P4 now?

 

Erhh... forty years ago, no pictures or negs surviving now, the model went to Switzerland, Fulgarex's owner Count Giansanti Coluzzi bought it.

 

It was partly built to test what it could go around and managed 5 foot before the rear wheel had not got enough side play. It was a truck, anyway, not copying the radial slides etc, In 18 mm or P4 then the limit would be prototype curves only, the drivers have no sideplay worth speaking about. with scale frames

 

OO 16.6mm was better, the frames were solid brass, about 13mm, with the frame behind the drivers under the bunker reduced to about 12mm. (if memory serves me right).

 

The plan before the sale came along was to convert to P4, the Beeson wheels could have been re-profiled. By Beeson, I mean the masters were his, they were cast in iron by Stuart Turner at Henley, as a special in their baked resin and sand moulding process.

 

They were kits for the 282, K's and Cotswold I believe from memory, K's could manage about 4 foot or so, but the Cotswold about 5 foot.

 

All these at low speed could be forced to run on a tighter curve running light, but under load the rear wheels eventually come off. Cotswold did a 280 42XX as well, I have one of these 280 Cotswold chassis on the bench at the moment, again solid brass. The K's chassis was next to useless in this case as supplied, they bowed badly, correctable, but a nasty problem.

 

I remember a customers 7200 than rocked back and forth so much the wheels could ride over the rail on any corner. or point, and most do not like any Peco points under the biggest radius.

 

This would be radically different with the PKD kit and modern wheels, and at a guess it would take 4 foot curves easily and perhaps a bit more, but 3 feet radius would need frame attention to it's width in my opinion to go that tight..

 

A 42xx does not have as much of a problem, they go around 3 foot radius and might squeeze to a bit more, the lack of the radial axle makes all the difference.

[John_Hughes]

Oh dear - it's sad to see that this thread is becoming a little heated! The fact surely is that over the years most of us have developed techniques that we are comfortable with and that produce results we're happy to accept; they suit us - others may not get on so well with them. Cats can be skinned in a variety of ways!

 

That said, the really great advantage of Markits and Romford loco wheels (and Slaters in 7mm) is that you can take them on and off a few times without bu**ering up your work; and in use they don't slip on the axle and mess up the quartering either. Ergo they're particularly well-suited to someone just starting out; of course, they're not perfect - but few things are in this world!

[Brinkly]

I don't think this has been mentioned before, I had a quick read of the thread, but have you considered purchasing the Right Track DVDs part 1 & 2? I bought the two disks last year for £33.74, which is still the price of the disks as of today. They really are worth the money if you are doing it for the first time.

 

Regards,

 

Nick

[Metropolitan]

Some further suggestions for beginners advice re the chassis:

 

 

- Build it rigid. Don't compensate or spring the chassis. A rigid chassis runs much better anyway as long as you weight the loco properly. Thats why no RTR's are compensated.

 

- On your 2-8-0 split the coupling rods into two pairs each side rather than four single sections. With the Markits wheels the difficulty of quartering an eight coupled doesn't arise.

 

-Make sure you washer out any sideplay on the leading driving axle to avoid clearance problems with the crossheads. The other axles can be given sufficient play to allow the loco to negotiate your curves.

 

-Avoid cheap and nasty gearboxes and invest in the best: Either a High Level or DJH.

 

 

 

(PS: It's cobblers to suggest, as above, that giving the crankpin holes plenty of play is 'bodging'. Think of it more of an insurance against frustration on your first build as the relationship between the rods and the axles is probably the most common thing that can go wrong when you start out. . As you get more skilled you can refine your tolerances. In any case I defy anyone to tell whether a loco has bearing play or not when in motion. But it's very easy to tell when there isn't enough as the thing jerks along and wont run slowly!!! I use my own home brewed phosphric acid flux but Powerflow from your local DIY shop is perfectly OK to begin with no matter what they say above and, unlike the small pill bottles of liquid flux, it is impossible to spill!!!. )

[polybear]

Powerflow is awful stuff - avoid!

 

Hi all,

 

Whilst not directly relevant to loco kit building, but relevant to the subject of soldering which is being discussed at the moment: I'm currently building a copperclad turnout using Nickel Silver rail which has been freshly degreased with IPA solvent. I'm using 145 solder (not horrible lead free stuff!) and find that when trying to tin the underside of the rail using 12% Phosphoric Acid Flux I get no-where. However, when using Powerflow it works a treat. Any ideas please? I do appreciate the negative views regarding powerflow when kit building, which in the main appears to do with the residue left over which can spoil the paint work.

 

Brian

[lonesome_whistle]

 

 

It was partly built to test what it could go around and managed 5 foot before the rear wheel had not got enough side play. It was a truck, anyway, not copying the radial slides etc, In 18 mm or P4 then the limit would be prototype curves only, the drivers have no sideplay worth speaking about. with scale frames

 

 

 

 

They were kits for the 282, K's and Cotswold I believe from memory, K's could manage about 4 foot or so, but the Cotswold about 5 foot.

 

All these at low speed could be forced to run on a tighter curve running light, but under load the rear wheels eventually come off. Cotswold did a 280 42XX as well, I have one of these 280 Cotswold chassis on the bench at the moment, again solid brass. The K's chassis was next to useless in this case as supplied, they bowed badly, correctable, but a nasty problem.

 

 

 

Quite prototypical in the case of the '72's as they had a nasty reputatation for not being able to stay on the road - not a Western engineman's favoured locomotive design by a long chalk!

 

Regarding the OP's original query, I would also suggest starting with something along the lines of a High Level chassis - possibly the 57XX as I can't imagine any location that saw 72XXs wouldn't also have them in abundance.

[halfwit]

-Avoid cheap and nasty gearboxes and invest in the best: Either a High Level or DJH.

 

 

Seconded. I use High Level, they're more expensive than others but well engineered and smooth running with a good range of types and gear ratios. The only problem with them is that they are etched in nickel silver which makes it harder to open out the splindle holes than if it was etched in brass, good broaches are a must.

[benachie]

Powerflow is definitely the flux to go for. It is no harder to clean off residue than with any other flux.

I also agree about High Level gearboxes with the one proviso that if the wheels lock solid (e.g. because of a pickup jumping out of position or whatever) the teeth on the plastic worm gear may be stripped. Replacements are, of course, available.

Alan

[bertiedog]

The reason I mentioned not using Powerflux is that it is difficult to entirely remove before painting, traces might remain to affect the painting later on.

 

I worked in making scientific instruments, with soldered assembly in brass, bead blasting, and then satin chrome plated. We got some failures, marks and surface flaws, but changed back to Bakers fluid and the problem vanished.

 

I had a talk with Johnson Matthey and Frys about this problem, and they say it is because the surface of the brass is micro-porous, and the Powerflux, or similar is retained in minute amounts on the "rough" surface. The residual "fat" may also contain carbon particles if the temperature is high, as with gas soldering.

 

All brass has this problem, it is made worst with etched parts as the zinc content of the alloy is etched faster than the copper, leaving a relatively rough surface at a minute microscopic level.

 

This does explain why some etched brass solders differently to others, it is the time the brass is in contact with the etchant that makes a difference, although the slightly rougher surface also helps solder to adhere to the brass and form an alloyed surface. Areas that are shielded from the etchant do no show the effect so much.

 

The parts we made using Powerflux were cleaned in very hot water with detergent and then stored in cellulose thinners, and this also cured the problem. So, nothing against using Powerflux, but make sure it is cleaned off completely.

 

Stephen.

[Metropolitan]

John,

 

As you say, we are talking about offering guidance to someone who is new to loco building.

 

So why do you insist on providing bad advice, as most of us see it? I accept that Bertiedog is inclined to get a bit "heavy" with his advice, but there are simple techniques that have been proven over a good few years. Your approach seems to accept that problems which are likely to be encountered can be overcome by bodging. In my experience, that's just as likely to lead to a badly running loco and even if your approach works, you won't learn how to do it better next time.

 

Perhaps it might be better to ignore the postings on this thread and read Iain Rice's books on Etched loco and 4mm chassis construction, look at the RMWeb threads where someone is building a kit and visit shows where you can talk to the demonstrators.

 

Jol

 

Hi Jol

 

I do not regard my advice as bad. I do regard those so called experts who seem determined to over complicate what is essentially a simple task as detrimental to the hobby and to the furtherance of loco kit building.There is no need for it to be a trial of nerves as long as you accept that you cannot run before you can walk. It is easy to build a nicely running kit loco if you take the line of least resistance and take no notice of any elitist clap trap. Take for instance the nonsense of compensation and springing; they don't work and, in fact, are likely to make your loco run much worse! I have built over 200 loco's and can say as a fact that a rigid, heavy loco runs far better than any fragile compensated concoction. Simple is best!

 

Iain Rice's book is superb and a great read. It is however terribly out of date particularly with regard to gearboxes, motors and wheels. Also, he is by nature a P4 man and so much of the book is way over the top.

 

 

 

 

 

[Jol Wilkinson]

Hi Jol

 

I do not regard my advice as bad. I do regard those so called experts who seem determined to over complicate what is essentially a simple task as detrimental to the hobby and to the furtherance of loco kit building.There is no need for it to be a trial of nerves as long as you accept that you cannot run before you can walk. It is easy to build a nicely running kit loco if you take the line of least resistance and take no notice of any elitist clap trap. Take for instance the nonsense of compensation and springing; they don't work and, in fact, are likely to make your loco run much worse! I have built over 200 loco's and can say as a fact that a rigid, heavy loco runs far better than any fragile compensated concoction. Simple is best!

 

Iain Rice's book is superb and a great read. It is however terribly out of date particularly with regard to gearboxes, motors and wheels. Also, he is by nature a P4 man and so much of the book is way over the top.

 

Hi John,

 

of course you don't regard your advice as bad, it's based on your experience and what has worked for you.

 

However, it is at odds with what several other RMweb members who have expressed their views in this thread, myself included, regard as the best approach, for beginners or "experienced " modeller alike.

 

We all have (or hopefully will) tread the path of improving our model making skills over the years. I have found it possible to make much better performing locos using P4 standards, compensation/springing, etc. from etched loco kits than I ever did from whitemetal kits, to 00 "standards". Why? because I wanted to make something better and was fortunate to get guidance and advice from experienced (and in some cases, exceptional) modellers, whose work I admire. In addition, some of the "techniques" required by modelling to P4 wheel standards, confer mechanical and electrical performance benefits.

 

I've also tried most of the various products that people recommend, such as Powerflow (because people raved about it) but quickly found out that the disadvantages it gave outweighed the apparent benefits. Stephen (Bertiedog) has already detailed some of the problems that can arise with Powerflow, and I know of one leading professional painter who will not paint a model that's been assembled with it, because of subsequent paint adhesion problems.

 

Finally, like Iain Rice I am a P4 man as you put it, but I don't regard what I do as "over the top", even to the smallest degree.

 

Jol

[Kempenfelt]

There are clearly several varying schools of thought being expressed above and I do not wish to argue about who's method's are right or wrong, I may however be slightly bias towards certain approaches! B)

 

As mentioned in my earlier post, my experience is limited, however there are a few more comments I would like to add to the mix.

 

Firstly if the OP decides to choose a more simple kit to begin with, choose a protype that you want to build and avoid making a choice based purely on people's suggestions. The reason for this is to maintain motivation! You will forever hear about people who have half built kits on there work bench of packed away to be finished one day (I know because i'm one of them!). The more you want to build the kit, the more likely you are to finish it!

 

Next, think about what it is you want to achieve from the kit and plan it if neccessary! This has been the biggest stumbling block for me trying to finish my first kit! I chose to go straight in at the deep end with P4, I chose compensation over springing (as per the instructions) and I chose the prototype I wanted to model. As I progressed through the kit I realised that I didn't like the horn blocks provided, I preferred the option to be able to dismantle the chassis with the option to drop out the wheels and I would have prefered CSB. It has been making these changes that have prolonged the build most, identifying the options available and working out how to achieve my additional requirements. Unfortunately the option of springing is one modification that I haven't been able to incorporate and this has effected my motivation to finish the chassis as it's not exactly what I wanted. I would advise talking to professional modellers, discussing what modifications they make and deciding what you do and don't want to do to your own build. It is much harder to make any changes once you've started!

 

I would like to mention that I took the advice to make everything as tight as possible and to take my time. I've done this and haven't found this particularly hard going. I've ended up with a nice square chassis (using a pair of parrallel wooden blocks I may add) which runs nice and smooth with very little slop, so it works for me!

 

Finally do make the effort to find a local group who are willing to assist you/discuss any problems with you as you progress the build. It is this reassurance or gentle hints and suggestions that not only aid your build, but also renew your enthusiasm to push on and finish the job! It usually also means a good excuse to finish the evening with your choice of tipple down the local drinking hole! (Actually if i'd saved my money from all those occasions I could have probably afforded to have had someone proffesionally make the chassis for me, but it wouldn't have been half as much fun or rewarding!)

 

Best Wishes

 

Paul