Wright writes.....

[Focalplane]

Thanks, Tony, my next question was to ask for a recommendation!  I am not sure 50 watts is enough for 7mm kits, but this option needs looking into.  At the moment I have to swap irons between large and small items which slows me down and has its own attendant risks.

 

Your "warranty" reminds me of shopping at Sears in the States.  Any Craftsman brand tool is warrantied for life.  One day I was browsing when a Hispanic male presented a very tired looking claw hammer to the sales assistant.  Without a question the man was presented with a brand new hammer!  This was in the days before "everything" was made in China.

[drmditch]

Arthur Kimber has mentioned one pending see here

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/28277-northeastern-kits/page-6

 

sadly since the post he has lost his wife and the thread hasn't been updated for a while .

Yes, I do follow Arthur's thread (and have one of his Q5s to build).

 

I think though that his kit was/is  to be for a V/09 (which the LNER lumped together with the original Vs as class C6.

I just like the wide splashers of the Vs.

 

But there's no accounting for taste!

[Clive Mortimore]

It sounds like a good excuse for a Thompson pacific theme day, although a shot of Great Northen passing Great Northen may raise some eyebrows.

I built a model of one of the Tinsley class 13 master and slave locos. I had a class 08 numbered as one of the two locos the class 13 was rebuilt from and have the 08 and 13 on the layout at the same time. No one ever noticed.     

[micklner]

You might recall some little time ago, I posted this picture of a kit-built O4/3 (among others) from the collection of the late John Brown. 

 

O4 3.jpg

 

Out of all the ones I've found new homes for, this is the only one not sold (well, not quite). It's well-made and runs exceptionally well, but is anomalous. Though listed as an O4/3, and with no vacuum ejector of standpipes, it tows a tender with water pick-up gear (which would make it an O4/1). I don't believe for one moment its inability to sell was down to that, but more because I was asking around £150.00 (not just at shows). I didn't get a sniff, though a Portescap-powered similar one sold very quickly (thanks Gavin). Why the difficulty in shifting it? Because a Bachmann equivalent can be obtained, brand new, for just over half the price I was asking. 

 

Bachmann O4.jpg

 

One like this. I detailed/altered/improved/weathered this example, and I've since sold it (for a fair bit more than a current Bachmann one!)

 

So, what to do? Selling the example above meant I had no example of an O4/1 on LB. Since I saw many of them at Dee Marsh, Chester, Manchester, Sheffield, Kiveton Park and Retford, then I should have one. So, I'm buying John's O4, but not before doing some 'tinkering'.

 

JB O4 1 01.jpg

 

JB O4 1 02.jpg

 

JB O4 1 03.jpg

 

I fitted a new chimney (the original just twisted off, though the main construction is solder), replaced the pony wheels with the correct, ten-spoke type, added a vacuum ejector pipe and standpipe, fixed on a wiggly conduit, scraped/rubbed off the LNER identity, renumbered it to BR, weathered it, added a crew and lamps, and fitted fire irons in the tender. I chose the same number as the modified Bachmann one; for no other reason than I saw this one. 

 

In some ways what I've done might seem a bit daft. One could argue that the Bachmann one is more accurate, more detailed and much better value. However, this one will pull a 'house brick' and it has much more 'presence' in my view. I also like the fact that you can see the frames between the footplates. I've yet to make the little steps which go on the motion support bracket and fit a snifting valve, but, in my humble opinion, it already looks the part. The black buffer stocks were an LNER painting spec which Gorton (and only Gorton) perpetuated into BR days. Those ex-GC 2-8-0s latterly shopped at Doncaster had red stocks. 

 

Though I'm definitely not in the habit of buying locos built by anyone else, I'm happy enough to acquire this one, and I do have a tangible memory of a friend. It's actually the second O4 I own built by someone else. 

 

TG O4 3.jpg

 

When Tony Geary moved up to 7mm, I bought this Little Engines O4/3 he'd made/painted/weathered off him - how could I resist? It's from the same kit as John Brown's O4. It's heroically filthy - 'weathering' doesn't quite describe it. 

 

Speaking of weathering, I've noticed some 'just-out-of-the-box' locos/stock running on exhibition layouts recently. I personally don't think this is right. I've also noticed a reluctance by some to not even weather kit-built locos/stock. In my view, realism is immediately enhanced by the application of weathering - not the usual factory-finish weathering, which is often no more than a squirt of dirty thinners. No, subtle weathering/distress, based on observation. I use a dry-brush technique for my weathering, employing a sable and enamels. There are many techniques which can be employed. In some ways it's something that 'anyone' can do to make their models more realistic. Just use some cheap wagons to try techniques on.  

 

Tony

The problem with weathering, is that if ebay is any kind of guide, is that on occasions they do fetch as  good a price as pristine r.t.r.. This may explain the reluctance by some owners to weather their (getting even more) expensive investments. 

 

While I am here,s re the post for Great Northern and its Tender from yesterday photos.

Two problems were found, on checking the Tender body it was not seated down properly on one side and on checking the height it was 3mm too high. File etc, has been in use today and now awaits new paint , thanks.

Edited March 16, 2017 by micklner

[Theakerr]

And the piston is at the correct angle on the Little Engines 04 unlike the Bachmann

[coachmann]

The 04 running plate is wider over the cylinder but the wider section extends too far back on the Bachmann model.

[Tony Wright]

Tony

The problem with weathering, is that if ebay is any kind of guide, is that on occasions they do fetch as  good a price as pristine r.t.r.. This may explain the reluctance by some owners to weather their (getting even more) expensive investments. 

 

While I am here,s re the post for Great Northern and its Tender from yesterday photos.

Two problems were found, on checking the Tender body it was not seated down properly on one side and on checking the height it was 3mm too high. File etc, has been in use today and now awaits new paint , thanks.

Mick,

 

Sorry to ask this, but do you mean that weathered items do not fetch as good a price as pristine RTR? If so, I can say the same, and not just about RTR items. 

 

I recall when photographing some models for David Jenkinson which were built by Geoff Holt and painted superbly by Larry Goddard (and others, maybe, by Brian Badger), he insisted they not be weathered because it spoiled the potential resale value. He was right, of course. David was a connoisseur of modelling and probably the greatest model coach builder of all time. 

 

I said to him I always weathered my models (though they were - and never could be - in the same class as his) because they were more realistic that way. Which, I suppose, might prompt a discussion. Are models made/painted as an investment for the future or to look as realistic as possible; even though they're filthy in some examples? Though I'd never compare my work with David's (contrast, perhaps), the O4s I've illustrated are, in many ways, TOO CLEAN! Browsing through numerous books and photographs showing the class, on many examples the numbers and brandings are illegible. In a couple of Keith Pirt colour pictures, the locos are just various tones of brown, not even grey. Without being able (just) to pick out the front numberplate, they are anonymous. 

 

I know several firms offer a weathering service for RTR examples, for which, quite rightly, they charge. So, in that case, a dirty loco is more expensive than a pristine one. Some examples I've seen are very good, but others seem (to me) to be too uniform in appearance. To me, weathering is all about observation and a lot, lot more than just a waft over with an airbrush. Dribbles and rust patches need to be replicated; even flaking paint in the larger scales. 

 

As for me, I'll stick to weathering everything. Even fresh-from-shops locos didn't have burnished motion (except for exhibitions). On just a test run from the Plant to Barkston and back there'd be evidence of road dirt on the wheels and frames, brake dust around the blocks and soot staining on top of the boiler. 

 

I have built locos for clients where no staining/weathering anywhere has been requested. Though the clients were happy, the locos never looked 'real'. 

 

Now, apart from a few jobs for friends, I only build locos for myself - and they end up weathered, whether Ian Rathbone paints them, Geoff Haynes paints them or I paint them. In the case of the first two, it would be mad to obliterate a hand-lined job, so any weathering is just light from those. Mine are usually filthy when finished, even those lined. If weathering impacts on the potential resale value of what I've made it'll be up to my sons to find out by how much, when they act as my executors. I hope I live long enough for them to be of little value. Not because I dislike my sons (I'm very proud of them both), but because it'll mean that I'll have outlived most of those of my generation who might have been interested in buying them. 

 

Which, brings me on to one final point. I'm of that immediate post-War generation who grew up with BR steam. That generation is the major buyer of model railway items right now, and continues to be, because, in many cases, members of it wish (like me) to try and replicate what they remember. This is not absolute, of course, and there are those who model a time when their grandparents were young. There are also those of more mature years who model what they can see today. 

 

My point? Before too long, in my view, we'll have a situation where the supply of fine models coming on to the market will outstrip demand. It's already happening with the collectors' side of things. 

Edited March 16, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Focalplane]

I have to admit that, after all the work in building a locomotive I would prefer not to weather it, at least not straight away. My thesis is based on observations in the 1950s after obtaining petmits to tour Crewe, Derby and, yes, even Doncaster. The last place visited in each case was the paint shop and that is what I remember most. I know that ex-works condition didn't last very long but that is what I want to revisit with my modelling. Perhaps I may weather a locomotive after a while, but not yet (probably never if I am honest).

[micklner]

Mick,

 

Sorry to ask this, but do you mean that weathered items do not fetch as good a price as pristine RTR? If so, I can say the same, and not just about RTR items. 

 

I recall when photographing some models for David Jenkinson which were built by Geoff Holt and painted superbly by Larry Goddard (and others, maybe, by Brian Badger), he insisted they not be weathered because it spoiled the potential resale value. He was right, of course. David was a connoisseur of modelling and probably the greatest model coach builder of all time. 

 

I said to him I always weathered my models (though they were - and never could be - in the same class as his) because they were more realistic that way. Which, I suppose, might prompt a discussion. Are models made/painted as an investment for the future or to look as realistic as possible; even though they're filthy in some examples? Though I'd never compare my work with David's (contrast, perhaps), the O4s I've illustrated are, in many ways, TOO CLEAN! Browsing through numerous books and photographs showing the class, on many examples the numbers and brandings are illegible. In a couple of Keith Pirt colour pictures, the locos are just various tones of brown, not even grey. Without being able (just) to pick out the front numberplate, they are anonymous. 

 

I know several firms offer a weathering service for RTR examples, for which, quite rightly, they charge. So, in that case, a dirty loco is more expensive than a pristine one. Some examples I've seen are very good, but others seem (to me) to be too uniform in appearance. To me, weathering is all about observation and a lot, lot more than just a waft over with an airbrush. Dribbles and rust patches need to be replicated; even flaking paint in the larger scales. 

 

As for me, I'll stick to weathering everything. Even fresh-from-shops locos didn't have burnished motion (except for exhibitions). On just a test run from the Plant to Barkston and back there'd be evidence of road dirt on the wheels and frames, brake dust around the blocks and soot staining on top of the boiler. 

 

I have built locos for clients where no staining/weathering anywhere has been requested. Though the clients were happy, the locos never looked 'real'. 

 

Now, apart from a few jobs for friends, I only build locos for myself - and they end up weathered, whether Ian Rathbone paints them, Geoff Haynes paints them or I paint them. In the case of the first two, it would be mad to obliterate a hand-lined job, so any weathering is just light from those. Mine are usually filthy when finished, even those lined. If weathering impacts on the potential resale value of what I've made it'll be up to my sons to find out by how much, when they act as my executors. I hope I live long enough for them to be of little value. Not because I dislike my sons (I'm very proud of them both), but because it'll mean that I'll have outlived most of those of my generation who might have been interested in buying them. 

 

Which, brings me on to one final point. I'm of that immediate post-War generation who grew up with BR steam. That generation is the major buyer of model railway items right now, and continues to be, because, in many cases, members of it wish (like me) to try and replicate what they remember. This is not absolute, of course, and there are those who model a time when their grandparents were young. There are also those of more mature years who model what they can see today. 

 

My point? Before too long, in my view, we'll have a situation where the supply of fine models coming on to the market will outstrip demand. It's already happening with the collectors' side of things. 

 

Tony,

      Correct yes , A lot of people as you say buy them r.t.r as an investment (whether they end up as such is another matter) perhaps some being used on shows belong to to other people who don't want them weathered ? who knows everybody has their own tastes.  

     I weather my Goods Locos  and most of my Goods stock, but wouldn't dream of doing the same to any of my Express Locos, Pullman and LNER Teak Coaches. Why? far to beautiful to cover in muck, simply my own preference.

    I also might decide to sell them when something else comes along, e.g I have just sold all of my older detailed Hornby Pullmans why ? Because I now have the correct rake of LNER Type K Steel Pullmans, the sold ones were SR area etc, but when I bought them they were the only ones available and I wouldn't even think I could get close to their quality via kit builds. I therefore bought some. Selling them provided the money for the Type K's . If they had been weathered how much would they have been worth? 

     Some people  change gauges backwards and forwards or even allegiance from one railway company to another , we all have our own likes/favourites and methods/ideas . As to the the "older" generation you see many at exhibitions , perhaps the next generations are hopefully waiting for their retirement and or have enough money to enjoy their hobbies.

 

Most if perhaps not all popular hobbies seem to survive one away or another over the years.

[t-b-g]

Thanks, Tony, my next question was to ask for a recommendation!  I am not sure 50 watts is enough for 7mm kits, but this option needs looking into.  At the moment I have to swap irons between large and small items which slows me down and has its own attendant risks.

 

Your "warranty" reminds me of shopping at Sears in the States.  Any Craftsman brand tool is warrantied for life.  One day I was browsing when a Hispanic male presented a very tired looking claw hammer to the sales assistant.  Without a question the man was presented with a brand new hammer!  This was in the days before "everything" was made in China.

 

Having seen one in action in the capable hands of a fine builder of 7mm locos, I went mad and purchased the same iron he was using. It is a 150w temperature controlled iron by ERSA. Not cheap but superb quality. The actual iron is quite small, enabling it to get into small places, yet it has enough heat to laminate 3 layers of 18 thou brass. I can turn it down to 180 degrees and use it for soldering whitemetal with no problems as the tip temperature is well regulated.

 

It has transformed my soldering. I got mine from a firm called Blundells, who usually have it included in their special offers. Last time I looked it was a shade over £200 plus VAT.

[jrg1]

The usual temperature controlled irons are for circuit board work, and have a pointed bit.  This is less useful for modellers soldering sheet and larger areas.  A chisel bit makes a huge difference, with better heat transfer

[gr.king]

For me, the accurate appearance of the highly characteristic Robinson cab on the Bachmann O4 more than makes up for the annoying quirk of too long a portion of wide running plate, and for the angle of the slidebars (which latter can be altered anyway). Almost every kit-built whitemetal Robinson GCR loco I've seen featues a wholly unrealistic and un-necessary major overhang of slab-thickness roof at the eaves, with the rainstrips also too far out towards the edges - sometimes on the very edges! I've even seen this howling error faithfully reproduced in some etched brass GC loco kits. Did many past kit designers and many kit builders simply never LOOK at a GCR cab roof, sides and spectacle plate to see the relationship? Spectacles reduced almost to a horizontal slit shape in whitemetal O4s seem to be another regular feature too, because the roof is too thick and no thought went into the design of the joint with the cab front. The Bachmann loco is good in that respect too.

 

I spent some time modifying the three or four whitemetal GC cabs that I built in order to either eliminate or minimise the errors in the roof. I've seen very few others thus modified.

Edited March 17, 2017 by gr.king

[Rail-Online]

Regarding the Bachmann ROD and the over-wide section of the running plate behind the cylinders.  I heard a couple of years ago that this was corrected on the GWR version (in GWR and BR livery)

 

Can anyone tell me if this correct?

 

If so you could use this as a basis for a LNER one (changing the boiler fittings etc)

 

Tony

[Focalplane]

Back to temperature controlled soldering irons, there appear to be two contenders, the Antex and the ERSA.  On paper, the latter appears to win out for heavier 7mm brass kits, etc.  Although I have not researched prices (Blundells have to be contacted) the £200 price tag for the basic station is probably about right.  Along the way, I noted that ERSA also produce a simple 150 watt iron for around £60 which could be a good companion for my trusted Antex 25 watt iron.  Should my 80 watt Camping Gaz iron give up this would be a logical replacement at a quarter of the cost of a soldering station.

 

So, some thought is required.  Thank you to those who offered suggestions.  Knowing the contributors I feel they are good recommendations, to be trusted.

 

Paul

[coachmann]

My attitude to a 45 watt Weller soldering iron is much the same as to a 'Birmingham screwdriver' (a hammer). Using one tool makes one skilled with one tool.

[grob1234]

Hello,

 

May I share with you something I am very pleased with? My first go at outside valve gear. After much fretting about how this would go, it appears to have worked out OK. I am worried about the amount of luck I have used up in order to get to this stage, however I am pretty happy with it. I know I am missing a piece of gear that goes on the furthest axle away from the cylinders (not sure what this is) but the part wasn't supplied in the kit. Thank you Tony for all the pictures and help you have given in order to get me this far.

 

http://youtu.be/BVfiyhVlSSk

[Tony Wright]

Hello,

 

May I share with you something I am very pleased with? My first go at outside valve gear. After much fretting about how this would go, it appears to have worked out OK. I am worried about the amount of luck I have used up in order to get to this stage, however I am pretty happy with it. I know I am missing a piece of gear that goes on the furthest axle away from the cylinders (not sure what this is) but the part wasn't supplied in the kit. Thank you Tony for all the pictures and help you have given in order to get me this far.

 

http://youtu.be/BVfiyhVlSSk

Great stuff Tom.

 

You've been quick doing that, for it was bare last weekend. 

 

The extra linkage on the offside rear crankpin is the lubricator drive. I make this up from spare bits of etched valve gear. 

 

May I make one suggestion, please? 

 

If you're contemplating running-in the gear in the fashion you've illustrated, turn the whole chassis upside down. That way, it'll run-in in the 'right' way so to speak, with weight on the top of the bearings. You'll also find out if your clearances in plan-view are sufficient. 

[jwealleans]

Is that missing part only on one side, Tom? If so, probably a speedometer drive. Check when it was fitted as I don't think many/any locos had them prewar.

 

Edit - Tony beat me to it and with the correct answer, I have no doubt.

Edited March 17, 2017 by jwealleans

[Tony Wright]

For me, the accurate appearance of the highly characteristic Robinson cab on the Bachmann O4 more than makes up for the annoying quirk of too long a portion of wide running plate, and for the angle of the slidebars (which latter can be altered anyway). Almost every kit-built whitemetal Robinson GCR loco I've seen featues a wholly unrealistic and un-necessary major overhang of slab-thickness roof at the eaves, with the rainstrips also too far out towards the edges - sometimes on the very edges! I've even seen this howling error faithfully reproduced in some etched brass GC loco kits. Did many past kit designers and many kit builders simply never LOOK at a GCR cab roof and spectacle plate to see the relationaship? Spectacles reduced almost to a horizontal slit shape in whitemetal O4s seem to be another regular feature too, because the roof is too thick and no thought went into the design of the joint with the cab front. The Bachmann loco is good in that respect too.

 

I spent some time modifying the three or four whitemetal GC cabs that I built in order to either eliminate of minimise the errors in the roof. I've seen very few others thus modified.

You're right Graeme.

 

I hadn't paid enough attention to that cab feature. 

 

However, have you tried fretting out that great slab of metal in the middle of the Bachmann O4's footplate? To me, not being able to see inside the distinctive (and open) frames is a bit of a turn-off with regard to the RTR example. More so than the thick cab roof on the kit-built examples.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited March 17, 2017 by Tony Wright

[grob1234]

Great stuff Tom.

 

You've been quick doing that, for it was bare last weekend. 

 

The extra linkage on the offside rear crankpin is the lubricator drive. I make this up from spare bits of etched valve gear. 

 

May I make one suggestion, please? 

 

If you're contemplating running-in the gear in the fashion you've illustrated, turn the whole chassis upside down. That way, it'll run-in in the 'right' way so to speak, with weight on the top of the bearings. You'll also find out if your clearances in plan-view are sufficient. 

 

 

Is that missing part only on one side, Tom? If so, probably a speedometer drive. Check when it was fitted as I don't think many/any locos had them prewar.

 

Edit - Tony beat me to it and with the correct answer, I have no doubt.

 

Thank you gentlemen, I have to confess, I cheated a little. The gear was assembled prior to my holiday, I just had to mount it. I say 'just' because it wasn't straightforward, I had to modify the cylinder blocks to move them forward, and also space them away from the frame as they were way too narrow as supplied. I had to fettle a couple of areas but was amazed when it all went round!

 

I was wondering about the lubricator drive. Unfortunately I won't be able to fit it on this chassis due to the fact there is nothing to fix it to, and the fact I don't have any spare bits and pieces in the stash yet, however it's lack shouldn't be too noticeable under the combing of the W1.

 

The video was for demonstration purposes, however, it does make sense to run the model with the bearing weight in the correct sense, so when I next have time I'll turn it over and let her run.

Edited March 17, 2017 by grob1234

[Focalplane]

My attitude to a 45 watt Weller soldering iron is much the same as to a 'Birmingham screwdriver' (a hammer). Using one tool makes one skilled with one tool.

 

When you are from Birmingham it's called an Irish screwdriver!  Of course, nearly all of "us Brummies" have some Irish blood.

[glo41f]

I am with the Leader on the question of weathering as to my mind it makes the model look the part that we are trying to portray, It was very rare to see cleaned locos in the times that LB was set especially if they were on mundane daily duties as opposed to a prestige working. You chaps are so fortunate to have a portfolio of offerings either from kits or the retail  trade to vent your artistic skills on. Speaking of which our leader makes great mention of the various horse trading deals whereby and through which the great work of LB has come about. It is an admirable way of carrying on with mutual benefits all round to those involved. However, what about us folk who have no "trade able" skills? Perhaps we live in a modelling dessert where there are few fellow types to educate, emulate of encourage us in our endeavours.We are thus perhaps condemned to a life of dreaming what might have been had our talents taken other turns. In my case,I have issues with electrics (I do not understand them especially when relays and complex switches get involved.), and infrastructure as to boards and tracklaying especially out doors where my main line is supposed to run. Folk in my situation often  feel inadequate and as the reality of our situation seldom matches the dreams for the reasons mentioned along with the lack of financial resources to pay for the expertise required. Hence I guess they buy what they can and sit and use the purchases as a trigger to the wonderful world that exists in our heads where we all have an equivalent of LB or something similar. There are times when I feel like getting rid of it all and sitting in the chair and imagining what could have been if only the talent mix had been different!

 

Martin Long

[gr.king]

You're right Graeme.

 

I hadn't paid enough attention to that cab feature. 

 

However, have you tried fretting out that great slab of metal in the middle of the Bachmann O4's footplate? To me, not being able to see inside the distinctive (and open) frames is a bit of a turn-off with regard to the RTR example. More so than the thick cab roof on the kit-built examples.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

A good point, and you'd gain nothing by fretting out the slab in the middle of the running plate anyway since the chassis thus revealed is a solid block and the Bachmann drive layout quite un-necessarily invades the space under the boiler in front of the firebox. My scratchbuilt O4 in contrast has the drive totally hidden, but the body and chassis still separate easily and the motor can be removed too without a load of fuss. It's disappointing that, with just few more recent exceptions, RTR manufacturers in the last few years have been wedded so firmly to the idea that motor armatures must be absolutely horizontal and the drive must be to the coupled axle nearest the middle, even if that means occupying space that should be visibly empty beneath a boiler. Compare for instance the Bachmann 9F with gearbox amidships versus the neat DJH version with gearing installed below the firebox. Modellers building their own locos have been successfully hiding the motor and gearing/gearbox entirely for years, as well as obtaining good running with drive to an outer wheelset rather than a middle one.

[Woodcock29]

Regarding the Bachmann ROD and the over-wide section of the running plate behind the cylinders.  I heard a couple of years ago that this was corrected on the GWR version (in GWR and BR livery)

 

Can anyone tell me if this correct?

 

If so you could use this as a basis for a LNER one (changing the boiler fittings etc)

 

Tony

Yes that is correct. In fact I bought two Bachmann WR RODs a few years ago which complement the three O4/1s I bought (the last of these was second hand for about 40 pounds).

 

The two WR RODs have formed the basis for my O4/5 which uses a Bill Bedford 3D printed boiler and cab and the other for an accurate O4/3(ex ROD)on which I have used one of the Bachmann O4/1 boilers. The best thing about using the WR ROD for this is that it has the correct cab roof. Bachmann have excelled in not only making the footplate more accurate but have also made the correct cab roof for the ROD version - it had the rear piece of angle iron set further forward to allow for a tarpaulin to be rolled up and tied on top of the rear section of roof behind the angle iron in ROD days. Bachmann have also included the prominent boltheads on the front frame extensions on the WR ROD. There are some variations also in the inspection plates on top of the footplate which might not be correct for LNER versions but I wasn't fussed about that.

 

The O4/5 has a modified tender with water pick up fitted. Unfortunately I have had to use the Gibson water pickup hand wheel which has two spokes too many. There is a brass one available in an etch from Brassmasters but it appears to be too big in diameter. Both have had the cylinders raised to line up the piston rod with the centre of the driving axle. On the O4/5 I also swapped the buffer heads with those from a Bachmann D11 as they are a different shape - not so elliptical and correct for my O4/5.

 

These two plus the first Bachmann O4/1 I purchased trundle around my layout easily with 40 mineral wagons but of course can't out perform my old Ks O4 with its Portescap (fitted about 1981)!

 

One Bachmann O4/1 is spare at present and the bits from the other WR ROD will be used on other projects in the future - the boiler with some modification probably on my McGowan B4.

 

Photos of the O4/3 and O4/5 below.

 

Andrew Emmett

[johnlambert]

One habit I am trying to break is the 'keep it nice and keep the box' one, and trying to see ready-to-run stock as raw materials instead of finished items (I hope that makes sense).  If I buy a loco, wagon or coach I am buying it to use and not to re-sell for a profit in the future. 

 

When buying second hand I prefer good, un-boxed items to 'mint in box', not only is it cheaper but there's less personal angst involved if/when I do decide to have a go at weathering.

 

I am slowly making my way through my collection, doing jobs like replacing old 'pizza cutter' wheels with modern, low-profile items and applying touches of weathering.  The other day it occurred to me that I get more satisfaction from seeing the scruffy wagons I've made and modified than I do from running the pristine RTR coaches that I own.