Kernow Adams O2

[Richard Lee]

Smallbrook Studio do resin kits for 4-wheeled Stroudley coaches in their Isle of Wight condition.

 

http://www.smallbrookstudio.co.uk/products-new/4569521214/lbscr-four-coach-set-of-4-wheel-stroudley-coaches/3738609

 

I built some for my smaller, 1900ish mainland layout.  (I removed the battery boxes and should have removed the truss rods.)  The parts do need a little fettling, but go together fairly well.  The coaches are reasonably heavy, so if you can find suitable plastic figures for your era to populate them, it is a good idea.  I used metal ones because I could only find metal Edwardian passengers.

 

EDIT:  During their construction I treated myself to a Parkside cordless multigrinder from the local Lidl.  (I am sure that they show up in UK Lidl stores from time to time.)  It made fettling the kits a lot easier.  These kits were the first rolling stock kits that I attempted.  I am sure that more experienced modellers would have Dremels and things like that.

Edited February 15, 2016 by Richard Lee

[PaulRhB]

And there was me bought two mainland ones to resist the urge to start an IoW model

Offering the gate stock to go with it eventually certainly affected my choice of which ones to go for and the forthcoming older coaches tipped me into adding the SR one too. These are the types of things that make me add something I don't really need, but like, as it's no time taken and I can devote that time to other models.

[Podhunter]

The latest batch (last 6-8 months) have the coreless ...

Who supplies your coreless motors?  Can I purchase one for my own chassis project?

 

Regards, Jon Summers

[DJM Dave]

Who supplies your coreless motors?  Can I purchase one for my own chassis project?

 

Regards, Jon Summers

 

Hi,

 

My coreless motors are available as a spare. please feel free to PM me if you would like to order one.

cheers

Dave

[ChrisG]

Readers of this thread may remember I kicked off a discussion about how one gets inside a Kernow O2. Of course I was questioned on why I would want to, but the reason is simply if I can put all the DCC gubbins in the bunker (I have no ambitions of fitting sound chips), I can put a slug of lead in the boiler and, I hope, improve the haulage characteristics which are not up to pulling the sort of trains I build (brass coach kits, whitemetal wagons, etc.).

 

In this connection, the most interesting thing that has transpired has been that Kernow Models have told me there is a THIRD screw under the front coupling. I haven't had a look yet - I'm now out of the loft and don't intend going back up there tonight.  This might solve the mystery of how to remove the body from the chassis (assuming they are right!). 

 

This third screw is NOT mentioned in the instructions!

 

In answer to my more general questions about servicing (which were particularly relevant in a situation where the body cannot be removed) Kernow have confirmed that items returned for repair will be examined in the shop. If they can't fix them, they go to DJM who hold the supply of spare parts. 

 

Chris

[No Decorum]

There is indeed a third screw but removing it doesn’t help me to get the body off.

[Butler Henderson]

The bottom of the smokebox was glued on mine. A bit of prising released the body from the chassis without any damage.

Edited February 17, 2016 by Butler Henderson

[ChrisG]

The bottom of the smokebox was glued on mine. A bit of prising released the body from the chassis without any damage.

 

 

Did it go back together OK?

 

Chris

[Butler Henderson]

Did it go back together OK?

 

Chris

Yes, although its one without all the pipework at the front.

[ChrisG]

 

There is indeed a third screw but removing it doesn

Yup - tried it myself and it doesn't appear to be anything to do with getting the body off. 

 

I'm still stumped.................

[No Decorum]

Yup - tried it myself and it doesn't appear to be anything to do with getting the body off. 

 

I'm still stumped.................

Yes, so am I. There seem to be three bits: chassis, running plate and body. The chassis the front moves a little downwards from the running plate. The body at the rear moves up a little from the footplate, bending the footplate. Butler Henderson’s suggestion (thank you, BH) leads me to think that the side tanks are glued to the footplate. It’s all back together now.

 

Incidentally, I’m not bothered about adding weight. If it pulls the gate stock it is intended to, that’s good enough for me. I was just wondering if it would be easy to remove the cog between the driving wheels to let the coupling rods do what they are supposed to do, to see if that would stop them flailing around as they do. However, I suspect that the slop is too great and aftermarket replacements would be required.

[penrithsteve]

I've tried this modification to one of my three O2s.

 

To give you some background my IOW layout features Ventnor and Wroxall stations on two levels. They are connected by an incline - approximately 1 in 40, which snakes around a series of curves (admittedly not ideal, but its worked well until recently). My Bachmann 03 diesel shunter hauls 7 ratio coaches up this gradient no problem. A considerably lighter Hornby 0-6-0 Terrier can manage 4 coaches with ease, 5 with a bit of slipping. In contrast the O2s slow to a crawl as soon as they hit the gradient, and can just about manage 3 coaches at a very slow pace.

 

Inspired by Chris G's suggestion I've tried adding weight to the smokebox. The body lifted off by removing the two screws in the bunker, then carefully cutting through the pipework on either side of the boiler, and at the bottom of the Westinghouse pump . With the body removed it was very easy to relocate the DCC decoder to the bunker.

 

I've since experimented by adding strips of lead into the smokebox. Add too much and motor stalls, and the model overbalances, resulting in the pony truck derailing. To be honest I've not noticed any real improvement with the extra weight. Perhaps marginally more grip, but it feels to me as though the motor is just underpowered compared to my other locos. 3 coaches remains the limit on the incline. You can probably achieve the same result without moving the decoder (I've added some lead wrapped in insulating tape into my other two O2s).

 

The O2s look fantastic - top marks to everyone involved in capturing their look so well. I just wish they had a bit more power - they look a bit out of place with only three coaches in tow.

Edited February 19, 2016 by penrithsteve

[ChrisG]

I've tried this modification to one of my three O2s.

 

To give you some background my IOW layout features Ventnor and Wroxall stations on two levels. They are connected by an incline - approximately 1 in 40, which snakes around a series of curves (admittedly not ideal, but its worked well until recently). My Bachmann 03 diesel shunter hauls 7 ratio coaches up this gradient no problem. A considerably lighter Hornby 0-6-0 Terrier can manage 4 coaches with ease, 5 with a bit of slipping. In contrast the O2s slow to a crawl as soon as they hit the gradient, and can just about manage 3 coaches at a very slow pace.

 

Inspired by Chris G's suggestion I've tried adding weight to the smokebox. The body lifted off by removing the two screws in the bunker, then carefully cutting through the pipework on either side of the boiler, and at the bottom of the Westinghouse pump . With the body removed it was very easy to relocate the DCC decoder to the bunker.

 

I've since experimented by adding strips of lead into the smokebox. Add too much and motor stalls, and the model overbalances, resulting in the pony truck derailing. To be honest I've not noticed any real improvement with the extra weight. Perhaps marginally more grip, but it feels to me as though the motor is just underpowered compared to my other locos. 3 coaches remains the limit on the incline. You can probably achieve the same result without moving the decoder (I've added some lead wrapped in insulating tape into my other two O2s).

 

The O2s look fantastic - top marks to everyone involved in capturing their look so well. I just wish they had a bit more power - they look a bit out of place with only three coaches in tow.

 

That's a most interesting and useful e-mail. I guess the models are perfectly balanced as they are, and unless the weight can be added uniformly along the whole length it is going to upset the balance. My kitbuilt O2s have all had their boilers stuffed with lead, with great success, but then I have built that into the  equation when adjusting the ride height at the back to ensure optimum traction and perfect balance. The optimum place for the weight is of course probably somewhere between the drivers.  It is of course disappointing to hear that the extra weight made no difference to tractive effort. 

 

Whilst I may be giving the impression of being a dog who won't leave the bone alone, I am interested in more detail as to how you separated the body from the footplate. Can you tell me whether the splashers/sandboxes are fixed to the boiler or the footplate. i.e. did they stay on the footplate when you removed the boiler, or not? 

 

Between Ventnor and Wroxall you need 6 coaches of course! 

 

As you say - such beautiful models in every other respect.

 

Chris

[ChrisG]

Yes, so am I. There seem to be three bits: chassis, running plate and body. The chassis the front moves a little downwards from the running plate. The body at the rear moves up a little from the footplate, bending the footplate. Butler Henderson’s suggestion (thank you, BH) leads me to think that the side tanks are glued to the footplate. It’s all back together now.

 

Incidentally, I’m not bothered about adding weight. If it pulls the gate stock it is intended to, that’s good enough for me. I was just wondering if it would be easy to remove the cog between the driving wheels to let the coupling rods do what they are supposed to do, to see if that would stop them flailing around as they do. However, I suspect that the slop is too great and aftermarket replacements would be required.

 

I can't believe that removing the cog would do anything but damage the smoothness of operation. On the other hand, leaving it in AND adding less sloppy con rods might have the desired effect. Me - I'm going to leave well in that department!  Geared drivers is nothing but an improvement for operation. 

 

Chris

[penrithsteve]

The key to removing the boiler was carefully cutting through the pipe that's approximately halfway between the Westinghouse pump and the side tank. If you make a cut just above the splasher it didn't show when reassembled. When you lift the boiler the splasher stays with the footplate. Watch the pipe work beneath the Westinghouse pump; I had to cut this as well.

 

Let me know how you get on. I'm still experimenting to try to eek out a bit more performance. I'd designed the layout with 6 coach trains in mind ..... alas my model of Apse Bank seems to have defeated the O2s. Now contemplating a significant layout rebuild.

[Nile]

This photo might help.

Apart from the two screws at the back the only things holding the body to the footplate are the glued on pipes at the front.

[ChrisG]

This photo might help.

02_11.JPG

Apart from the two screws at the back the only things holding the body to the footplate are the glued on pipes at the front.

That's so helpful. I'll have a go on Sunday, which will be my next opportunity. 

 

I am wondering if I should sacrifice some cab space for some lead. We shall see - experimentation required. 

 

My Wills/Southeastern Finecast O2s will pull 6 coaches quite happily - on the flat, at least.

 

Chris

[roythebus]

That's so helpful. I'll have a go on Sunday, which will be my next opportunity. 

 

I am wondering if I should sacrifice some cab space for some lead. We shall see - experimentation required. 

 

My Wills/Southeastern Finecast O2s will pull 6 coaches quite happily - on the flat, at least.

 

Chris

 

Get cast models of fat loco crew and inspector to make additional wight in the cab.

[roythebus]

I got my model of no.18 at long last, having been sent to my old address, what a lovely model. I haven't run it yet, but one things I noticed is why do the driving wheels have so much side play on them?

[ChrisG]

I got my model of no.18 at long last, having been sent to my old address, what a lovely model. I haven't run it yet, but one things I noticed is why do the driving wheels have so much side play on them?

 

I believe it is to do with the way the trailing bogie is mounted. It has less sideplay than one would generally expect. In fact it is very much like a coach bogie, although pivotted off centre, towards the front of the loco. To be able to negotiate 2nd radius curves the drivers then need more lateral slop. Rest assured I don't believe you will be disappointed with the running, despite the slop offending the normal conventions - this appears to have been thought through thoroughly and the  chassis rolls like a dream.

 

Chris

[Dunsignalling]

I got my model of no.18 at long last, having been sent to my old address, what a lovely model. I haven't run it yet, but one things I noticed is why do the driving wheels have so much side play on them?

Largely to reduce swing-over at the bogie end. You can put washers behind them to reduce it but the loco will then need curves of very generous radii.

 

It's not actually noticeable when the loco is running, so I left well alone.

 

John

[trevor7598]

I have the early crest push/pull version of the O2, the running of which vastly improved after

many hours of running in. it now runs very sweetly on it's own, but will not pull more than 

two Hornby Maunsell;s easily. I Wonder if the motors in the O2;s are a bit variable in quality.

 

Reading through this thread some owners seem delighted, but others, like myself, have

found their loco's underpowered.

 

I spoke to Kernow at a show in Brighton today, their Guy said I should return the model,

which I shall at Alexandra Palace.

[Ian Hargrave]

I have the early crest push/pull version of the O2, the running of which vastly improved after

many hours of running in. it now runs very sweetly on it's own, but will not pull more than 

two Hornby Maunsell;s easily. I Wonder if the motors in the O2;s are a bit variable in quality.

 

Reading through this thread some owners seem delighted, but others, like myself, have

found their loco's underpowered.

 

I spoke to Kernow at a show in Brighton today, their Guy said I should return the model,

which I shall at Alexandra Palace.

Your decision obviously.....but would you need more haulage capacity for a push/pull version prototypically? If it runs sweetly with the Maunsells in both directions,then it's doing what you need it to do.I would not think the motor is ,from what you are saying,a problem.It's a coreless motor btw and doesn't like feedback controllers.Check the wheel back to backs and,if I dare say it,your track.Is it clean ? Are the loco wheels likewise clean ? Always a good idea to invest in a couple of conductive wheel cleaners ( Gaugemaster do them ). What I'm trying to say is check your end is functioning as it should before doing anything with the O2.

[trevor7598]

Ian,

Many thanks for your reply. The track and wheels are clean, the O2 wouldn't run as well if these were not.

As for haulage capacity, I agree a two coach P&P set is mostly what the prototype of this model would

have hauled. But other O2's had a lot more asked of them ( IOW ) for example.

 

I will return the model to Kernow for examination/ repair/ replacement as it did cost quite a lot of money.

I all other respects it is a superb model.

[Ian Hargrave]

Fair enough.I agree that it would indeed struggle with a prototypical IOW rake.....should one ideally exist in r-t-r form of course