Wright writes.....

[coachmann]

Brian Brown's Westward's whitemetal kits were closely allied to Ron Charlton's Cotswold kits (later on Sutherland). Most likely used the same pattern-maker and Ron cast them. The solid brass milled chassis were a bit of a challenge when it came to adding detail. I carefully drilled into them and glued wire into holes to support brake rigging. Whatever their faults, they were head & shoulders above K's and a few other as well. Ron's metal was very soft and lead-laden, that was the downside. The crispest metal came from Wills and DJH. George Mellor at GEM went to a lot of trouble with his metal but his patterns were miles too thick and lacked detail. I mentioned their names because they were all good friends, but I am keeping in mind most members wlll only remember their companies.

Edited June 2, 2015 by coachmann

[Tony Wright]

Brian Brown's Westward's whitemetal kits were closely allied to Ron Charlton's Cotswold kits (later on Sutherland). Most likely used the same pattern-maker and Ron cast them. The solid brass milled chassis were a bit of a challenge when it came to adding detail. I carefully drilled into them and glued wire into holes to support brake rigging. Whatever their faults, they were head & shoulders above K's and a few other as well. Ron's metal was very soft and lead-laden, that was the downside. The crispest metal came from Wills and DJH. George Mellor at GEM went to a lot of trouble with his metal but his patterns were miles too thick and lacked detail. I mentioned their names because they were all good friends, but I am keeping in mind most members wlll only remember their companies.

True enough, Larry, but I still preferred a chassis with frames, even K's. Why? Because you could fit the motor of your choice (give or take) and also drive off the axle of your choice (again, give or take). Of course, that was when the standard motors were XO4s and their MW005/Airfix/Romford five-pole equivalents. Knowing the late Bernard Jepson, I used some of his five or seven pole XO4 rebuilds - one or two of my locos still have them and they still run well, getting on for 40 years hence. I never achieved success with K's motors, though a Mk.2 in a Stephen Poole J15 worked for a while, until it disappeared at a show somewhere/sometime long ago - not nicked, but borrowed by someone I've long lost touch with. My old ROD had a Mk.1 in it for years, but the Araldite holding the magnets and frames in place eventually failed; can you imagine, glueing a motor parts together? The HP2M, in my experience, just made smoke! With the solid brass 'lump', accurate though it was, without access to high-quality machine tools, you were stuck with which axle to drive. In one case, a 47XX, the XO4 was configured to drive off the rear axle, facing backwards. I never got it to run as well as I'd wish. As for compensation/springing, well! Still, they were far superior to the Nu-Cast white metal lump for a chassis, and the Wills white metal ones, though those did have bearings (which were free to revolve).

 

As has been expressed on another thread in this section, 'today we've never had it so good' with regard to RTR locos; those available and planned. Those old-fashioned loco kits, 'dinosaurs' to use a current description, did, however, in part, introduce me to the 'delights' of kit-building. Getting them all to go properly was an essential part of self-teaching for me (and, no doubt, hundreds/thousands of others at the time), allowing me (and all the others) to have the locos we wanted without being reliant on what the RTR boys gave us (contemporary RTR was, of course, pretty dire, anyway). Those kit-makers of yore are to be commended and thanked.

[Theakerr]

Tony, You are right, the problem was that the loco was rocking on the centre wheels.  I guess it is just terminology or from what perspective one looks, one mans high is another mans low

[ScRSG]

Tony,

 

A small suggestion, when you put the rods or the Comet chassis jigs in, instead of looking for squareness with the eye, have you considered using the aluminium mitre box supplied with most razor saws? The unsoldered chassis can sit in this and ensures it is dead level, leaving the eye to ensure the rods are at right angles to the chassis. I have used this method many times.

 

Chas

[lee74clarke]

Michael,

 

Thanks for posting.

 

 

 

I've never built the Westward T9 but I've built one or two other Westward locos in the past. Lumpen, I'd say, and, if my memory serves, one or two had a solid milled-brass chassis with an XO4 cut-out. Hopeless for altering and impossible to solder brake rigging to! The best of luck..........

 

DSC_1791.JPG

 

DJH are the best all-round kits in my view, similar to SE Finecast, though with more etched parts. This is the Klondike being built in EM for Paul Bason in exchange for his building of the Willoughby Arms. It's now been completed subsequent to my taking this picture, apart from the motion - that'll go on after painting. A mate grit-blasted it today (thanks Ray) and it came up beautifully - all the soldering/flux residue came off, making my work look unusually neat. It gives a good base for painting, too. I'm now well-on with the OO version for Grantham.

 

DSC_1785.JPG

 

Good though they are, beware the DJH pitfalls. Such as the tender having one too many coal rails. I merrily soldered all the rails on, then examined the prototype picture with Ian Wilson. Three coal rails are rare on the C2's tenders. So, out with the mini drill and slitting disc; heart in the mouth time!

 

Willoughby 02.jpg

 

This is Paul's progress so far. I know I've got the better end of this deal.

The Willoughby will make a great centre piece Tony, not sure if the butchers shop was still next door then? You'll have to check with my folks, they will know.

Hope all OK with you?

Lee

[gr.king]

I don't have a view on whether compensated, sprung or rigid chassis are "best", feeling that it is probably a case of whatever suits the situation (or personal preference). In the matter of brass or nickel silver side frames versus milled brass or cast whitemetal chunks, motorisation issues aside, an interesting observation came from John Musselwhite whose Bourne layout made a brief appearance on here a few pages back. He found that after much running over many years his models had LEAST wear in the "axleboxes" if the steel axles were running in plain drillings in whitemetal chunks. Harder metal frames, with or without brass top-hat bushes developed much more slop.

 

This may be partly attributable to the area of the bearing surface in a white metal lump, but there's also the enigma of the way that metals wear. In some conditions at least, soft metals wear away less than the hard metals that they rub against, possibly because the gritty particles that get into the interface just bed into the soft metal and then insidiously scrape away at the relatively impenetrable surface of the hard stuff.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing the Grantham C2.

Edited June 2, 2015 by gr.king

[S.A.C Martin]

No, I prefer to regard you as a bloke who has years of actual hands-on building under his belt who learned the hard way and became pragmatic through experience and not theory.

 

Just wanted to say "me too" for this. It's probably (for me anyway) best illustrated in Tony's excellent book The Book of the LNER Pacifics which remains on my beside, reminding me of the work that goes into building a locomotive fleet. In particular, the practical work and development of modelling in the Gresley A3 stakes led me to completely change my approach to creating a little fleet of them when Hornby's Railroad A3 came out in 2012.

 

The last time I saw Tony I was working on a number of Gresley Pacifics (almost this time last year) and I've actually finished one of them.

 

Before:

 

 

After:

 

 

Here's how I did it - more than a little of reading up on Tony's work on his models has helped me with this one. I should add the caveat that yep, the transfers aren't on straight, and these will be rectified. 

 

Just wanted to add my thanks to Tony for remaining a thoroughly terrific bloke and very much an inspirational modeller. I've found "doing" is more fun than buying and though I'm nowhere near the level of a number of my peers and elders, I'd like to think I've got a good basis from which to develop my skills in future. I sincerely doubt I'd have had a go without reading that book - the models in there are exceptional and the kits or RTR models they're made from change a lot to get the right details. Thoroughly recommended if you want some ideas to build your own specific models of Gresley, Thompson and Peppercorn Pacifics.

[MJI]

Brian Brown's Westward's whitemetal kits were closely allied to Ron Charlton's Cotswold kits (later on Sutherland). Most likely used the same pattern-maker and Ron cast them. The solid brass milled chassis were a bit of a challenge when it came to adding detail. I carefully drilled into them and glued wire into holes to support brake rigging. Whatever their faults, they were head & shoulders above K's and a few other as well. Ron's metal was very soft and lead-laden, that was the downside. The crispest metal came from Wills and DJH. George Mellor at GEM went to a lot of trouble with his metal but his patterns were miles too thick and lacked detail. I mentioned their names because they were all good friends, but I am keeping in mind most members wlll only remember their companies.

 

What happened to all of these people, I remember meeting Brian Brown many many years ago

[coachmann]

What happened to all of these people, I remember meeting Brian Brown many many years ago

Ron Charlton passed away some years ago. George Mellor died in the 1980's. Brian Brown has just recently joined the mighty heart bye-pass club and is in the process of recovering, albeit slowly. We are currently swapping notes!

[JeremyC]

I don't have a view on whether compensated, sprung or rigid chassis are "best", feeling that it is probably a case of whatever suits the situation (or personal preference). In the matter of brass or nickel silver side frames versus milled brass or cast whitemetal chunks, motorisation issues aside, an interesting observation came from John Musselwhite whose Bourne layout made a brief appearance on here a few pages back. He found that after much running over many years his models had LEAST wear in the "axleboxes" if the steel axles were running in plain drillings in whitemetal chunks. Harder metal frames, with or without brass top-hat bushes developed much more slop.

 

This may be partly attributable to the area of the bearing surface in a white metal lump, but there's also the enigma of the way that metals wear. In some conditions at least, soft metals wear away less than the hard metals that they rub against, possibly because the gritty particles that get into the interface just bed into the soft metal and then insidiously scrape away at the relatively impenetrable surface of the hard stuff.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing the Grantham C2.

And of course up until the end of the steam era the vast majority of axles on the prototype ran in whitemetal bearings and they're still used today on crankshafts etc in diesel engines among other things.

Jeremy

[Tony Wright]

I don't have a view on whether compensated, sprung or rigid chassis are "best", feeling that it is probably a case of whatever suits the situation (or personal preference). In the matter of brass or nickel silver side frames versus milled brass or cast whitemetal chunks, motorisation issues aside, an interesting observation came from John Musselwhite whose Bourne layout made a brief appearance on here a few pages back. He found that after much running over many years his models had LEAST wear in the "axleboxes" if the steel axles were running in plain drillings in whitemetal chunks. Harder metal frames, with or without brass top-hat bushes developed much more slop.

 

This may be partly attributable to the area of the bearing surface in a white metal lump, but there's also the enigma of the way that metals wear. In some conditions at least, soft metals wear away less than the hard metals that they rub against, possibly because the gritty particles that get into the interface just bed into the soft metal and then insidiously scrape away at the relatively impenetrable surface of the hard stuff.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing the Grantham C2.

Graeme,

 

The old Nu-Cast white metal lump chassis had, in effect, a continuous white metal bearing on every driven axle the full width of the chassis, so wear wouldn't be an issue I imagine. Anyway, it must be a good bearing material at source because real steam locos used it. 

 

In all the years of running my locos, I've never found wear in bearings to be an issue. Forty years on, my locos of that vintage are still going strong in their brass bearings - or just holes in my Jamieson-chassis or scratch-built brass ones. There must be wear but it's not appreciable enough to notice. 

[Tony Wright]

Just wanted to say "me too" for this. It's probably (for me anyway) best illustrated in Tony's excellent book The Book of the LNER Pacifics which remains on my beside, reminding me of the work that goes into building a locomotive fleet. In particular, the practical work and development of modelling in the Gresley A3 stakes led me to completely change my approach to creating a little fleet of them when Hornby's Railroad A3 came out in 2012.

 

The last time I saw Tony I was working on a number of Gresley Pacifics (almost this time last year) and I've actually finished one of them.

 

Before:

 

CIMG6627_1.png

 

After:

 

IMG_6041_1.jpg

 

Here's how I did it - more than a little of reading up on Tony's work on his models has helped me with this one. I should add the caveat that yep, the transfers aren't on straight, and these will be rectified. 

 

Just wanted to add my thanks to Tony for remaining a thoroughly terrific bloke and very much an inspirational modeller. I've found "doing" is more fun than buying and though I'm nowhere near the level of a number of my peers and elders, I'd like to think I've got a good basis from which to develop my skills in future. I sincerely doubt I'd have had a go without reading that book - the models in there are exceptional and the kits or RTR models they're made from change a lot to get the right details. Thoroughly recommended if you want some ideas to build your own specific models of Gresley, Thompson and Peppercorn Pacifics.

Splendid work Simon, and thoroughly 'up my street' with regard to folk making/adapting models for themselves. The Hornby Railroad range makes an excellent starting point for super-detailing projects - turning the products, as you have shown, into most acceptable locos. So, without, I hope, perceived as being patronising, a hearty 'Well Done!'. Please bring them round for a run on LB before too long. 

 

Regarding my book, I'm astonished now how much it's out of date, especially with regard to the RTR stuff. Another N Gauge A3 and A4 have appeared in the last five years, and there are the numerous manifestations regarding the Bachmann A2 now. There are also the multitude of Graeme King adaptations now available. But, I'm glad you like it. It sold well enough, but not well enough for a revisit, despite Irwell's superb job of designing and printing it. They regard it one of the 'prettiest' books they've ever published.

 

As an aside, I've just completed my latest prototype book with Irwell - describing the green to blue transition on BR on the ECML, to be published later this year. Most of the green-period pictures were taken by Andrew Forsyth, and all the blue ones by me. Since my first one sold really well, there is optimism over this, with more in the pipeline projected. I've also promised one for Strathwood, so I'll have to get on with that. I suppose it's down to a diminishing market for BR steam-era publications - books bought by those who remember the time. Irwell's principal market is that era, but anyone who can remember it really well is now getting on or no longer has a memory! I started trainspotting just after the BR Modernisation Plan was announced, so the writing was on the wall for steam before I even got going - and I'll be 70 next year! By the way, there are more of my urchin ramblings in the current BRILL. 

 

So, publishers have to investigate a younger market. The oldest pictures I took in the forthcoming book are now 50 years old, and the majority 35-40 years old. Andrew's pictures date from the late-'50s onwards. Anyone remembering the blue period well must be now in their 50s - a market still very much alive, or we hope so. 

 

But, the main reason for responding was to congratulate you on your model-making. 

Edited June 3, 2015 by Tony Wright

[Theakerr]

Watched "Trainspotting at Little Bython" last night.  Very enjoyable but was a little surprised at one of the credits about a "Demanding Director"!

[t-b-g]

Graeme,

 

The old Nu-Cast white metal lump chassis had, in effect, a continuous white metal bearing on every driven axle the full width of the chassis, so wear wouldn't be an issue I imagine. Anyway, it must be a good bearing material at source because real steam locos used it. 

 

In all the years of running my locos, I've never found wear in bearings to be an issue. Forty years on, my locos of that vintage are still going strong in their brass bearings - or just holes in my Jamieson-chassis or scratch-built brass ones. There must be wear but it's not appreciable enough to notice. 

 

I have been having trouble with one of the Buckingham locos that after much investigation turned out to be down to wear in the axle holes.

 

Peter Denny used to cast a lead block, using a wooden mould designed specifically for a particular loco and having a hole where the gear would go. Brass frames (1/16" thick) were bolted to the lead block. The frames are all live to one side, with pick ups on the insulated side only.

 

One of the tank engines, known to most of us as a J63, has been shorting out while running over points. After ruling out the coupling chain dragging on the blade and the guard irons, I eventually found the it was down to the lead block. The axle holes have worn upwards and the lead block has dropped downwards. Only about half a mm. but enough to cause a short. Even though Buckingham is a terminus-fiddle yard layout, it has been operated intensively several times a week for many years. I would suggest that even the shunting tanks have run many more miles that many a pacific on a main line continuous run layout. 

 

I got very brave and held the loco in a vice in the milling machine and very gently skimmed a layer off the bottom and all is well. Probably for another 50 years anyway.

 

The other option was to strip the loco down and to fit new bearings but I didn't fancy that as other than the shorting it runs superbly and it is against my religion to mess about more than necessary with things that are working well.

[glo41f]

A friend of mine now passed on was Gerry Brown who made a number of the patterns for the Nu Cast kits of yore when they were marketed by Mr Stott. Gerry was a firm believer in the solid white metal underframes for the very reasons experessed here. Fristly, provided they were square, he maintained that the overall wear was going to be very low over the life of the model. He would have a large number of the frames in his workshop fresh from the casters and he would have a jig to ensure they were true before using the jig to drill the frames for the axles. If one was seriously wrong he would drill it out to fit a brass tube for the axles which was then set correctly. I had several Nu Cast B1's and I must say that they all worked very well. Gerry was involved with the B1, Q6, J21,V2 as well as the East Coast L1 and V4. The masters were super as they fitted like a three dimensional jigsaw puzzle. I was very taken with his skill as a modeller.

 

When you compare the solid underframes with what K's were making, the white metal ones worked very well indeed. Of course we did not worry about brakes and sand pipes in those days! It was good at the local club as most folk were building models all the time and each week there would be something new to see being put through its paces. Now it is a matter of opening the box it seems.

 

Have we come a long way? Perhaps but in a number of respects the current super model scene does not produce the satisfaction of creating something from a box of parts. Happy times!

 

Martin Long

[great central]

 Gerry was involved with the B1, Q6, J21,V2 as well as the East Coast L1 and V4. The masters were super as they fitted like a three dimensional jigsaw puzzle. I was very taken with his skill as a modeller.

 

 

 

Martin Long

 

A Nu-cast B1 was my first attempt at a loco kit, maybe a bit ambitious but I was young and foolish then. I also wanted a B1!

Bought just after I got married which is 40 years ago this year, the body went together well enough with epoxy, but when it came to making it run, could I heck! I kept filing the holes in the coupling rods bigger and bigger until there was very little metal left. At that point I decided that I'd gone too far and sent off for a replacement set of valve gear.

I received by return post a full set of valve gear with an apologetic note saying that there was a dimensional error with one batch and even a stamp to refund my postage. After that the chassis didn't run too badly for a first attempt in my opinion.

I've also built a V2, a J6, two K2s, two O2s and three ECJM/ABS L1s. I still have a K2 and J6 to build, bought within the last couple of years. I think that Nu-cast were one of the best whitemetal kits, given your note above I can see why.

[Tony Wright]

A friend of mine now passed on was Gerry Brown who made a number of the patterns for the Nu Cast kits of yore when they were marketed by Mr Stott. Gerry was a firm believer in the solid white metal underframes for the very reasons experessed here. Fristly, provided they were square, he maintained that the overall wear was going to be very low over the life of the model. He would have a large number of the frames in his workshop fresh from the casters and he would have a jig to ensure they were true before using the jig to drill the frames for the axles. If one was seriously wrong he would drill it out to fit a brass tube for the axles which was then set correctly. I had several Nu Cast B1's and I must say that they all worked very well. Gerry was involved with the B1, Q6, J21,V2 as well as the East Coast L1 and V4. The masters were super as they fitted like a three dimensional jigsaw puzzle. I was very taken with his skill as a modeller.

 

When you compare the solid underframes with what K's were making, the white metal ones worked very well indeed. Of course we did not worry about brakes and sand pipes in those days! It was good at the local club as most folk were building models all the time and each week there would be something new to see being put through its paces. Now it is a matter of opening the box it seems.

 

Have we come a long way? Perhaps but in a number of respects the current super model scene does not produce the satisfaction of creating something from a box of parts. Happy times!

 

Martin Long

Thanks Martin,

 

Having built umpteen (and more!) of the kits you mention, I always replaced the white metal chassis with a scratch-built alternative, mainly because the motor position was 'set' in the WM one and the other was the over-weight nature of the locos when completed. I know the latter seems a daft statement, given that weight usually equals greater hauling power but, to take the first Nu-Cast B1 I built as an example, the loco would just about pull itself (especially since the tender was all white-metal and it had a white metal sub-frame as well). The drive was on the rear axle, with the motor pointing backwards. As expressed in another post, I had to file the coupling rod holes to such an extent that the thing eventually just limped along. Perhaps I'd got the inaccurate ones, too! I finally gave it away. I've subsequently built several more Nu-Cast B1s, running on Comet frames and I think they've come out quite well (given my limitations, of course).

 

 

 

Apologies if this shot has appeared before (though way, way back) but it shows one of my Nu-Cast B1s running on a Comet chassis. It retrospect, I should have used the Nu-Cast valve gear because this is an original Comet B1 chassis, designed using the Roche drawing. Because of this, the pivot for the expansion link is too far back in the radius rod and the eccentric rod, thus, far too short. The tender is from Bachmann. 

 

 

I think this shot might have appeared before as well, but it shows my Nu-Cast V2 in action (I've built several more for customers in the past). This runs on a scratch-built chassis, using the Nu-Cast valve gear. 

 

 

To pick up on one of your other points, here's the V2 again, passing a Bachmann 9F. Though it could be argued (and proven!) that the RTR loco is the best model in all respects, both the V2 and the B1 are all my own work. The 2-10-0 was massed-produced in a factory and is really only the result of my purchasing power, though I have weathered it. The other two are the result (good or bad) of my endeavours alone (though the bits had to be paid for). 

 

As you say (at the time), something new to view each week and not just the result of opening boxes. 

Edited June 5, 2015 by Tony Wright

[kenw]

Tony, just wondering if you or anyone here has built this kit before, a Westward T9.

 

Its also very nose heavy.

 

Haven't built one of those, but my DJH D20 4-4-0, (kindly pictured and commented on by Tony on here a few month ago on it's visit to L.B.), had the same problem of being nose heavy and lack of anywhere for extra weight where it wouldn't make this worse.

 

I normally use a brass bar for the drawbar, secured at either end by 8BA bolts, as part of using the 'split live' pick up system.

A spring (the type supplied with screw couplings) was fitted over the bolt in the tender, between drawbar and tender base, and adjusted so most of the weight of the front of the (heavy whitemetal) tender is carried on the drawbar by the rear of the loco.

 

Transformed the loco from struggling with 3 coaches to being perfectly happy with 6, and capable of more

Edited June 6, 2015 by kenw

[AndyID]

Another variation on chassis/drive mechanisms. I was so unhappy with Hornby's tender drive that I bashed this out about 20 years ago. I'm posting this as I might give others some ideas. (Please excuse the horrible paint job!)

 

 

 

 

I think I overdid the gearing a bit. It's a bit on the slow side, but because the boiler is full of lead, it hauls just about anything. The tender chassis is brass with Romford wheels.

 

The drive-shaft consists of two nested pieces of hexagonal brass tube acting as splines to allow for changes in distance between the "universals". They are made from silicone model aircraft fuel line. The motor is one of the wonderful Sagami products - sadly no longer available. The motor is mounted on foam, and that, in combination with the silicone universals, makes for extremely quiet running.

 

The downside is the great big shaft between the tender and boiler - maybe we could pretend it's some sort of coal pusher

 

Edit: Speeling error

Edited June 6, 2015 by AndyID

[jrg1]

Great reading about the WM kits-anyone recollect the K's keyhole chassis?  Never did get mine to work.

[coachmann]

I never got K's anything to work....

 

One aspect of loco building not touched on is the lack of fittings. I want simple GWR copper capped chimneys and top-feed/brass safety valve covers, but I have been out of the game for so long I just dont know where to find such parts these days. Of course it could be said i am partly responsible for this state of affairs!

 

So if anyone can disprove my theory, please do. I want GWR 51XX copper capped chimney, 51XX top feed and brass safety valve cover, GWR smokebox dart.

 

The websites dont assist prospective purchasers and I for one am not prepared to get a headache searching thought 150-odd pages of lists. Their 'Search' engines leave everything to be desired when one types in scale locos parts manufacturer bla bla bla only to get. No results found! All I am looking for is handrail knobs!!! The steam-age telephone always worked so websites clearly have a very long way to go in the model railway world. If most poeple are like me it is small wonder we take the route of least resistance and buy RTR.

Edited June 6, 2015 by coachmann

[Craigw]

 

So if anyone can disprove my theory, please do. I want GWR 51XX copper capped chimney, 51XX top feed and brass safety valve cover, GWR smokebox dart.

 

 

Coachmann,

 

Not immediately available, but when Brassmasters have the Martin Finney kits available again, they dd note they would be considering selling fittings and castings separate. it might be worth dropping them a line.

 

Regards,

 

Craigw

[gr.king]

It must be fluke that it does so, but my K's J3 (really a J three and a half I reckon now that I measure the boiler which is in between J3 and J4 sizes) runs very nicely on K's wheels with K's gears and K's motor. I built it when I was fairly inexperienced in such matters too - probably explaining why I actually bought the kit in the first place and failed to notice the wrong size of the boiler for years afterward....

[gr.king]

 the "universals". They are made from silicon model aircraft fuel line.

 

Not unless the silicon is in the form of a silicone compound they aren't.

[Nimbus]

So if anyone can disprove my theory, please do. I want GWR 51XX copper capped chimney, 51XX top feed and brass safety valve cover, GWR smokebox dart.

This is the closest I can find.

 

The Nim.