MarkAustin Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 That was the idea. However, I don't really know whether the Beaver model is scaled at 1:152 or 1:148 (or something else altogether) as I don't own one and wil probably never be so lucky as to obtain one. Obviously you would need whichever scale is best suted. Measurements, particularly the length over the outside of the bufferbeams and between the bufferbeams would be greatly appreciated. Chris Chris (and others) As of 2015, these were still available from ABS Models. He doesn't have a web site, but the catalogue I've got lists them. As I said, I've got 4 of the beasts, so I'll dig one out and post some dimensions. For your interest, he lists 3 catalogues. Orange cover, 7mm models Pale Lilac cover: Wrightlines 7mm NG Green cover 4mm, 7mm linside and figure, and Beaver N gauge Address: ABS Models Mail Order Department 39 Napier Road Hamworthy Poole Dorset BH15 4LX Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted April 12, 2017 Author Share Posted April 12, 2017 (edited) Chris (and others) As of 2015, these were still available from ABS Models. He doesn't have a web site, but the catalogue I've got lists them. As I said, I've got 4 of the beasts, so I'll dig one out and post some dimensions. For your interest, he lists 3 catalogues. Orange cover, 7mm models Pale Lilac cover: Wrightlines 7mm NG Green cover 4mm, 7mm linside and figure, and Beaver N gauge Address: ABS Models Mail Order Department 39 Napier Road Hamworthy Poole Dorset BH15 4LX Mark Not sure if he is still trading: https://www.scalefour.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4880 I've now remembeed I built a Beaver BR CLass 03 when in my teens. So these things have been around for a while! Chris Edited April 12, 2017 by Chris Higgs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orange Cat Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 From memory I have a feeling they were notionally 1:150 although, like most of their time, I suspect they were probably "adjusted" to fit the proprietary chassis that was intended to power them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium nick_bastable Posted April 12, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 12, 2017 from this I assume the Langley 56xx is a duffer although I confess I have no interest other than academic Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted April 13, 2017 Author Share Posted April 13, 2017 from this I assume the Langley 56xx is a duffer although I confess I have no interest other than academic Nick The firebox looks all wrong to me. Far too squared up. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAustin Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 A from this I assume the Langley 56xx is a duffer although I confess I have no interest other than academic Nick As I recall the Langley 56xx is grossly wide, and has an oval boiler to make things look in proportion. Mark A Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAustin Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 Not sure if he is still trading: https://www.scalefour.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4880 I've now remembeed I built a Beaver BR CLass 03 when in my teens. So these things have been around for a while! Chris I'll soon find out. I've got a 20024/15 catalogue and have written to him. Will report back when/if I get a eply. Mark A Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted April 14, 2017 Author Share Posted April 14, 2017 A As I recall the Langley 56xx is grossly wide, and has an oval boiler to make things look in proportion. Mark A Just like their 2251 then. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAustin Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 That was the idea. However, I don't really know whether the Beaver model is scaled at 1:152 or 1:148 (or something else altogether) as I don't own one and wil probably never be so lucky as to obtain one. Obviously you would need whichever scale is best suted. Measurements, particularly the length over the outside of the bufferbeams and between the bufferbeams would be greatly appreciated. Chris According to the catalogue, Beaver products are scaled at 1:150. I've got the kits, so I'll open a box and take the measurements. Won't be 'till after the weekend, as I'm away. Also, I've written to ABS models. If they're still running, I'll let you know. Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin1985 Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 I've just made a start preparing the bits for my J39 chassis, and just want to check a few things: The frame strengtheners go on the inside of the main frames? And therefore the holes should be reamed out to fit the larger diameter of the frame bearings? Because of the double thickness frames, it seems the spacers need to be narrower than the normal strip from the Association. With the strips in the jig, I measure it as 6.6mm - is that right? Thanks Justin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted April 18, 2017 Author Share Posted April 18, 2017 I've just made a start preparing the bits for my J39 chassis, and just want to check a few things: The frame strengtheners go on the inside of the main frames? And therefore the holes should be reamed out to fit the larger diameter of the frame bearings? Because of the double thickness frames, it seems the spacers need to be narrower than the normal strip from the Association. With the strips in the jig, I measure it as 6.6mm - is that right? Thanks Justin The frame strengtheners go on the the inside of the frames (as do the bearing flanges). They shouldn't need reaming out though, as they already have larger 3.2mm holes to match the bearings. They are a tight fit but should basically clip on. Solder the bearings in to the outer frames first and then add the strengthener. I say this because I did once have someone contact me asking how he was supposed to align the two sets of frames before adding the bearings. The Association does two widths of PCB frame spacer. You will need 3-156 (6.4mm) rather than 3-157 (7mm) when using the double thickness frames. Which you consider 'normal' really rather depends on your viewpoint. 3-156 is the original width, 3-157 got introduced to be used with thin 0.25mm etched frames. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin1985 Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Thanks Chris, much appreciated. I figured the strengtheners were probably meant to fit over the bearing flanges, but at least with the etch and the batch of bearings I have, it's not a snap fit at all, so thought it worth double checking. I've only ever worked with loco chassis from etches by Bob Jones or yourself Chris, so I've only ever encountered the 7mm one. I'll put an order in for some of the 6.4mm strip, as I don't have any suitable PCB kicking around to cut down (all of the double sided I've been able to get hold of is fibreglass, which seems to be very hard to cut neatly). It really would be worth updating the instructions on the 2mm website, which don't mention anything about the strengthened frames, or the different spacer strip. A first timer using the instructions might end up quite stumped! Justin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Copleston Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 (edited) According to the catalogue, Beaver products are scaled at 1:150. I've got the kits, so I'll open a box and take the measurements. Won't be 'till after the weekend, as I'm away. Also, I've written to ABS models. If they're still running, I'll let you know. Mark, You are correct, well at least some of the kits were to 1:150 scale. This is a list of the Beaver/ABS 'N-gauge' locos: BR Class 04 Drewry Diesel shunting loco (fit to MINITRIX 0-6-0T LMS Dock Tank chassis) BR Class 03 Standard Diesel shunting loco (fit to MINITRIX 0-6-0T LMS dock Tank chassis) GWR "1366" 0-6-0 Pannier Tank (fit to MINITRIX LMS 0-6-0T chassis) LNER "J63" 0-6-0 Tank Loco (fit to MINITRIX LMS 0-6-0T chassis) GWR "56XX" 0-6-2 Side Tank (fit to GRAFAR 0-6-0PT chassis) LNER "J52" 0-6-0 Saddle Tank (fit to GRAFAR 0-6-0PT chassis) LMS ex HR 0-6-4 Tank (fit to GRAFAR 0-6-0PT chassis) LMS "Flatiron" ex MR 0-6-4 Tank (fit to GRAFAR 0-6-0PT chassis) The kits listed to fit the Minitrix chassis were to 1:150 scale, but in one or two distinct areas were 'stretched' in the long dimension to accommodate the commercial chassis. If you place the models against a 2mm drawing it immediately becomes apparent where this has been done. It is then a simple process to chop out the offending section. For instance, the lengthened section in the GWR "1366" tank is about 2mm forward of the cab opening, between there and the front spectacle sheet. Width-wise it is spot-on for 2mm scale. John Greenwood did this with his "1366": He cut out the forward section of the cab and mounted the body on a scratchbuilt 2mm chassis. Result, a very attractive and useful and true-to-scale 2mm loco. I have the LNER "J63" and have done the same, except the extra metal was in the stretched height of the cab sides to accommodate the huge Minitrix motor. A replacement cab top resolved that issue. Width-wise it is exactly 2mm scale. As for the Grafar chassis models, I'm not so sure. I've seen the HR 0-6-4T and MR Flatiron on 2mm finescale chassis and they look very acceptable as true 2mm scale models. But whether any parts were "chopped out" before assembly to bring them into scale, I don't know. Perhaps someone can comment on these two kits? I also have an LNER "J52" and it is both too wide and too long for exact 2mm scale, but can be cut-down to look closer to scale. The saddle tank and cab are too wide. Nice boiler castings though, so probably worth the effort. As for the GWR "56xx", I've not examined one close-up, so can't offer a first-hand opinion - but I suspect the castings have been streched to fit the Grafar chassis in the same way as the "J52". Again, perhaps someone else has experience with this kit? As with all things like this, it is well worth laying the parts against a 2mm scale drawing for comparison where any streched areas of the kit becomes immediately apparent and you will then know what to do. Your local photocopier is for this purpose! Edited April 18, 2017 by Phil Copleston Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted April 25, 2017 Author Share Posted April 25, 2017 Just to let you know, at my request Nick Birkett-Smith has put a version of the GWR Standard No 4 boiler without smokebox saddle onto Shapeways http://shpws.me/Ostx http://shpws.me/Osum My etch for the GWR Aberdare to use this boiler is close to completion. The boiler is also good for the 43XX and 3150 classes. I am thinking of hacking one onto a Farish Prairie. Chris 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium DavidLong Posted April 25, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 25, 2017 Just to let you know, at my request Nick Birkett-Smith has put a version of the GWR Standard No 4 boiler without smokebox saddle onto Shapeways http://shpws.me/Ostx http://shpws.me/Osum My etch for the GWR Aberdare to use this boiler is close to completion. The boiler is also good for the 43XX and 3150 classes. I am thinking of hacking one onto a Farish Prairie. Chris An Aberdare! A Kruger could be on the horizon . . . David 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted April 25, 2017 Author Share Posted April 25, 2017 (edited) An Aberdare! A Kruger could be on the horizon . . . David In your dreams. A Bulldog, on the other hand... If I can persuade Nick to do a Swindon No 2 boiler in due course. Chris Edited April 25, 2017 by Chris Higgs 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Copleston Posted April 25, 2017 Share Posted April 25, 2017 An Aberdare! A Kruger could be on the horizon . . . David Aberdares are all very well and characterful engines. But now, a Kruger complete with saddle sandbox 'n all? Ahhh, now you're talking! And in 2-6-0 and 4-6-0 versions too, please. Yup, beauty is truly in the eye of this beholder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted April 25, 2017 Author Share Posted April 25, 2017 (edited) Aberdares are all very well and characterful engines. But now, a Kruger complete with saddle sandbox 'n all? Ahhh, now you're talking! And in 2-6-0 and 4-6-0 versions too, please. Yup, beauty is truly in the eye of this beholder. Sadly however, they did not make it as far as the end of the war. Unless you count the Boer war. EDIT: seriously though, there were only ten and they only lasted 7 years. Even the BR Standards were not that short-lived. I'm probably not going to look at stuff that didn't make it to 1945. Although I might be persuaded to make an exception for a County tank. Now there is a beautiful engine. Edited April 25, 2017 by Chris Higgs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Copleston Posted April 25, 2017 Share Posted April 25, 2017 Sadly however, they did not make it as far as the end of the war. Unless you count the Boer war. EDIT: seriously though, there were only ten and they only lasted 7 years. Even the BR Standards were not that short-lived. I'm probably not going to look at stuff that didn't make it to 1945. Although I might be persuaded to make an exception for a County tank. Now there is a beautiful engine. T'was only in jest. T'would be nice, tho' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richbrummitt Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 In your dreams. A Bulldog, on the other hand... If I can persuade Nick to do a Swindon No 2 boiler in due course. Chris There's already a firebox for this on shapeways that I could make public. It is just the shape though - no bands, covers, or other details. That's the hardest bit. I had it made in brass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted May 14, 2017 Author Share Posted May 14, 2017 A way to go on this, but here are the bare bones of a GCR 4000 gallon tender to go with the Aberdare. There are dangerous tempatiations here as there are a whole lot of other things that can go with this tender as well. Chris 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim V Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 ROD? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted May 14, 2017 Author Share Posted May 14, 2017 ROD? J11, D10/D11 (Director), O4 (ROD), O1, lots of 4-6-0s. The GWR knew nothing about standardisation. On the GC, it was pretty much a case of one size fits all in regards to tenders. Chris 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
djgriff Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 A spurt of activity over the weekend meant that I finished the artwork for the following chassis: GWR 42XX/72XX 2-8-0T/2-8-2T GWR 56XX 0-6-2T GWR 47XX 2-8-0 You'll probably spot that the first two are related to me working out how to do a radial truck. Chris Hi Chris when will the 72xx chassis be available. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ian Morgan Posted May 15, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 15, 2017 Hi Chris, any news on the LSWR O2 chassis mentioned a couple of pages back? Also, you mentioned N Brass for a body kit, but it is not listed on his website. Is there a body kit available anywhere? Ian. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now