Lynton & Barnstaple OO9 Loco from Heljan

[Stevelewis]

One of the problems with building a Manning Wardle by kit, is that they are reported to be difficult to get the chassis working correctly.  John de Frayssinets website gives several examples where he has either reported that he has outsourced the frame to get it right, or has attempted it himself and ended up with a loco with a wobble.

 

Interestingly, on the page where he describes taking a GraFar 08 and modifying a brass kit to accept it, he concludes by saying that:

 

"The joy valve gear is extremely hard to get working properly. Unless perfect, bottoming out will occur on the eccentric and the assembly will eventually all fall apart"

http://www.009.cd2.com/members/how_to/grafar_mw.htm

 

I'm not too sure if this is the same failure that has been encountered on the Heljan models and I'm also aware that the Heljan model has a representation rather than the real thing. I'll leave Steve Lewis or another Heljan owner to comment on that fact. It does illustrate that the L&B Manning Wardles are tricky beasts!

 

My point is that if an experienced model maker finds the chassis difficult, then it shows that the option of buying an expensive brass kit of a Manning Wardle and giving it a bash may not be as preferable than waiting for Heljan to get it right.  However the sentiment of getting on with something else whilst waiting does ring true!

 

Sorry  only  just  read  this  re   the  valve  gear,  but as  far  as  I  was  aware  on  both  mine  the  valve  gear  simply fell apart  after  a  brief wobble  and audible  click, my personal view is  that  the assembly   is/was   simply  too fragile.

 

On  a  completely different  note,  I do feel  for  Peco  and  their  brave entry  into 009 with  the  rolling  stock,  perhaps  there  will be a  drop off in  offtake  from  the  retailers now that  the MW  is  delayed  again (No doubt  sales  will pickup again when  the  NEW  MW becomes  available)  .......................

However   I am  sure  that  there  are  many  items  of  Peco L&B  stock  happily  running  behind 'foreign' locos,  my  Roco locos  don't  seem  to  mind  hauling  them  occasionally

 

Have  to  wonder  though  what  if  Peco  had  chosen  another  NG  UK line  to  produce  rolling  stock  for instead of  the  L&B** none  immediately spring  to  mind        (exception GVT  which they have   produced   some stock for no doubt  complimenting  Fourdees  GVT  Locos)

 

** I can understand  Peco choosing the L&B it  being  sort  of  local to  their HQ)

Edited August 20, 2017 by Stevelewis

[bertiedog]

Which end of the anchor link came away? The one loco I saw and examined had no exact problem, except the top of the rod attached to the top part of the cross head slide / valve rod pressing was coming loose, and the end of the rod needed a new pin and washer to move it into line. The attachment of the anchor to the big end is a bit delicate, does that get knocked in handling?

The main adjustment I did was the bogies, new bearings and easing the pickups.

If Heljan are changing supplier it would have been nice to know, but it places orders out of turn etc, and still no G/tee any particular order will be delivered. Also the price jumping up on the remaining ones to be delivered is a worry, it's already £50 more per loco.

The alternatives are tracing stock not sold, and I have already tried that path, or building three Backwoods kits, one would be enough, but three?

 

Which joints?

 

In a real Joy M&W valve gear the anchor link has been attached to a flycrank, with the centre of rotation over the axle centre, so in effect it does not move backwards and forwards, but it's far end moves up and down with the jack link, not portrayed on the model. It was several weeks ago since i saw it running and wonder if Heljan have given the anchor link an unneeded movement by setting the throw to an excessive amount. (somebody referred to it as bottoming out?)

Please do not take this wrong way, but I suspect they may not know the difference between Walshaerts valve Gear and Joy valve gear, and have made the anchor link move, when it does not.

 

What they have is a layout like Walshaerts would be if fitted......and simplified a bit due to the tiny size.

[bertiedog]

To clarify, the first link, the anchor is not attached to a eccentric drive, it is attached to a flycrank centred over the axle, just placed there as a handy support point. If Heljan interpreted the fly crank as an eccentric drive, then this causes constant excessive movement in the anchor rod and maybe where the wear and tear comes from. Plus.... if set as an eccentric like Walshaerts, then it is very exposed as the wheels rotate, going up and down all the time.

I learnt the ins and outs of Joy gear on the 3.5 inch loco still under construction. My guess is that Heljan's designer, or the Chinese did not understand the operation or movements involved.

 

Solved!  just checked on Youtube videos and they have interpreted it as an eccentric, the rod attached to the big end flycrank is moving up and down as if Walshaerts gear was fitted. This is where the wear and breakage are coming from.

It is not just strengthening thats required but the drive centre must be over the axle centre.

 

Trouble is the there is then no movement at all to the valve gear on the model! It would need a tiny amount out of the axle centre line to give movement without too much wear.

 

Hope this helps clear up the reasons for the breakages, if any body wants to correct it I can help with dimensions to correct what is there. It is however watchmakers work at these sizes.

[rockershovel]

The shot shows the parts of the Joy gear done by Heljan, most is dropped out leaving the anchor link and a single link to the reverser. In effect a more normal valve gear, due to the tiny sizes. The clearances have been increased by shortening the anchor link. The jack link, and source of the radial action is not portrayed as the clearances would be impossible on a commercial model.

 

xx.jpg

How much difference would it REALLY have made, if there was a fixed overlay, like the Minitrains 0-8-0T? That way you'd still get a representation, the sense of motion from the connecting and coupling rods, no reliability issues and all in a semi-concealed location.

 

It's not as though the motion is out in the open, like the Minitrains and Bachman Baldwins, with high panniers and no running plates.

 

Generally speaking, it seems to be a very effective, atmospheric model of a very distinctive design. Heljan appear to have over-reached themselves in certain details. Perhaps it might just be best to accept that, remove the valvegear and/or replace it with a fixed representation, tweak the pony trucks if your curves require, and move on? Or, accept that it isn't for you?

Edited August 20, 2017 by rockershovel

[Nile]

In a real Joy M&W valve gear the anchor link has been attached to a flycrank, with the centre of rotation over the axle centre, so in effect it does not move backwards and forwards, but it's far end moves up and down with the jack link, not portrayed on the model. It was several weeks ago since i saw it running and wonder if Heljan have given the anchor link an unneeded movement by setting the throw to an excessive amount. (somebody referred to it as bottoming out?)

Please do not take this wrong way, but I suspect they may not know the difference between Walshaerts valve Gear and Joy valve gear, and have made the anchor link move, when it does not.

 

What they have is a layout like Walshaerts would be if fitted......and simplified a bit due to the tiny size.

 

Based on my observation of one running on Friday night I would agree with you. The valve gear parts fitted have far too much movement, considering their tiny size. I'm not surprised some have fallen apart.

[bertiedog]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ohP1UlRYWAU"frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Video on  youtube clearly shows the links operating as Walshaerts, not Joy, widely excessive movement of the anchor link and the drop link

[rockershovel]

Yes  its  still  there   a  LOT different  than  when  first  launched  works  a  LOT  better  ( flywheel  etc)

 

My first  one  was  in  a   set consisting   of  the  loco + 3  w Wheel  Zillertal  passenger  coaches

 

PRICE  £7-7s-0d  in  old  money  (=  £7.35)  seemed  very  expensive  in  those  far  off days

I thought it had been significantly upgraded, yes, but I couldn't find a picture of the original version. I did buy one, back in the day, out of curiosity; it attracted a lot of attention, shuttling to and fro on a section of track on my desk (engineers like this sort of thing). I always liked it and I'm sorry it doesn't survive.

[bertiedog]

How much difference would it REALLY have made, if there was a fixed overlay, like the Minitrains 0-8-0T? That way you'd still get a representation, the sense of motion from the connecting and coupling rods, no reliability issues and all in a semi-concealed location.

 

It's not as though the motion is out in the open, like the Minitrains and Bachman Baldwins, with high panniers and no running plates.

 

Generally speaking, it seems to be a very effective, atmospheric model of a very distinctive design. Heljan appear to have over-reached themselves in certain details. Perhaps it might just be best to accept that, remove the valvegear and/or replace it with a fixed representation, tweak the pony trucks if your curves require, and move on? Or, accept that it isn't for you?

In the end the joy gear on the M&W is pretty static on the parts Heljan have fitted. The motion comes from the connecting rods, and that parts is left off, making me very suspicious that the designer has not understood Joy valve gear at all. But then I bet most modellers do not know or care, but the error is biting back with the wear caused and the weak flycrank having to act as an eccentric.

Again apologies if this is too academic!!

[Stevelewis]

I thought it had been significantly upgraded, yes, but I couldn't find a picture of the original version. I did buy one, back in the day, out of curiosity; it attracted a lot of attention, shuttling to and fro on a section of track on my desk (engineers like this sort of thing). I always liked it and I'm sorry it doesn't survive.

 

It  was  /Is  extensively  changed  from    the  first  edition  probably  more  a  less  everything  revised  but cannot  check  as  I  have  none  to  look at!

[rockershovel]

It was /Is extensively changed from the first edition probably more a less everything revised but cannot check as I have none to look at!

I'm pretty sure that the motion consisted of two links, from the crank to the end of the slidebars - impressive stuff, in the days when Arnold and Minitrix Dock tank chassis were usual!

 

... and here they are!

 

Edited August 20, 2017 by rockershovel

[PaulRhB]

Going a bit far off track chaps might be worth a separate topic.

[bertiedog]

Estimating the dimensions of the flycrank driving the anchor rod, as it acts as an eccentric, with a throw, if the flycrank shifts it's rotational position, perhaps due to handling, then it could reach a position where it would jam the two rods in a stretched position, and Bingo you get the sudden snap and loose parts!

Not easy to cure.....

The video shows the effect clearly as it pulls both the rods towards a straight line, on this example still working OK

The opposite could also happen, the rods fold up to far and jam.

Stephen.

Edited August 20, 2017 by bertiedog

[Barry Ten]

 The motion comes from the connecting rods, and that parts is left off, making me very suspicious that the designer has not understood Joy valve gear at all. 

 

Can you please stop making these assertions. You have no idea whether the designer has or has not understood Joy valve gear.

[DCB]

In the end the joy gear on the M&W is pretty static on the parts Heljan have fitted. The motion comes from the connecting rods, and that parts is left off, making me very suspicious that the designer has not understood Joy valve gear at all. But then I bet most modellers do not know or care, but the error is biting back with the wear caused and the weak flycrank having to act as an eccentric.

Again apologies if this is too academic!!

Sounds like a reasonable assertion to me, all the videos I have seen of Heljan models have the return crank outside the con rod fitted so as to give an eccentric motion whereas in the prototype it would have been concentric to provide an anchor.  I suspect Heljan originally assumed it had Walschearts gear as per the GWR Vale of Rheidol 7 and 8 (as do most modelers) and that the outside rod has to waggle about (as do most modelers).  Might be an idea to simply fit Walschaerts gear and 99% of buyers would think it was great.  

[ndg910]

Crikey, I must be on the wrong thread!!! Over 6hours and no sign of any slanderous rant. If we are not careful there will be an outpouring of admiration for a fine model or even an historical snippet to drool over.

 

Whilst writing does anyone know if the tooling allowed to produce Lew? Probably the least favourable of the 4 as it has the fewest livery options.

[rockershovel]

Going a bit far off track chaps might be worth a separate topic.

.... I thought this was relevant. The original version of the Lilliput 0-6-2 had what might politely be called "representative" valve gear, quite good by the standards of the day and quite reliable. Quite a few were sold and had a good reputation, I've seen one running on the test track at my club!

 

The Minitrains 0-8-0T also has "representative" valve gear (which DOES have its own thread..) so it seems reasonable to suggest that this might be the best option for the Heljan MW, given that (as others have pointed out) the actual visible movement would be very small.

[bertiedog]

I doubt if even the Backwoods kit has 100% right valve gear, there's not the space to get clearances with side to side wheel movement added in. As it is going to be a long wait I may order a Backwoods kit, but arthritic fingers do not help with the smaller parts, and the painting is quite complex. The rest of the Heljan is very well done.

[PaulRhB]

.... I thought this was relevant. The original version of the Lilliput 0-6-2 had what might politely be called "representative" valve gear, quite good by the standards of the day and quite reliable. Quite a few were sold and had a good reputation, I've seen one running on the test track at my club!

 

The Minitrains 0-8-0T also has "representative" valve gear (which DOES have its own thread..) so it seems reasonable to suggest that this might be the best option for the Heljan MW, given that (as others have pointed out) the actual visible movement would be very small.

The original references were relevant but as I said it was STARTING to go off track with more discussion on the other models development over time. I didn't report it I just made an observation before it got too tied up in the Liliput history

 

Whilst writing does anyone know if the tooling allowed to produce Lew? Probably the least favourable of the 4 as it has the fewest livery options.

They have done work on the Lew cab, reliable source so far, but with this unexpected cost it may depend on how the sales go at the new prices I guess?

[PaulRhB]

I doubt if even the Backwoods kit has 100% right valve gear, there's not the space to get clearances with side to side wheel movement added in. As it is going to be a long wait I may order a Backwoods kit, but arthritic fingers do not help with the smaller parts, and the painting is quite complex. The rest of the Heljan is very well done.

Please note Pete has put Backwoods on hold due to his wife's illness so it is effectively shut down for an indefinite time until a new owner is found. There's a note on the website now so no kits being produced.

 

http://www.backwoodsminiatures.com

Edited August 20, 2017 by PaulRhB

[rockershovel]

A propos the Heljan MW valve gear, there doesn't seem to be any insoluble production or operation problem with both modern N gauge, and other 009 models having full-featured Walschaerts gear; so there does seem to be a prob,em with the geometry or overall design of the Heljan one.

 

Which, in turn, tends to suggest that sending it back in the hope of a better one, might not be the best way forward, and waiting for someone to produce a batch of etches for a "representative" set might be s better bet..

[Legend]

Your relentless attacks on Heljan really are getting too much. I for one, would be grateful if you would just lay off. Heljan undertook to produce a model which was always going to be a near impossible project in OO9. I've built one in 016.5 so I know just what a tricky little beast it is. I wouldn't have attempted it in RTR OO9 but Heljan chose to do so and clearly the result has not been satisfactory. So, rather than release more and receive a load more venom from people like you, they have decided to stop the project here and start again with a new vendor. With the way that the vendors work it will almost certainly mean new tooling (why persevere with something that's giving problems anyway?) I can understand that it is frustrating (I have one on order and I know others who also have) but you are using language which is offensive and which, unless you can prove it, is actionable. Cut it out, and lets have some sympathy and understanding for a manufacturer who is trying to provide us with something that hasn't been done before. (CJL)

Certainly looks like Heljan have bitten off more than they can chew, for the moment. It seems a sensible decision to transfer to another manufacturer or revise the design to get it right. But I am confused . Given that they have by default accepted that there is something that needs fixing and presumably the existing design is deficient, does that mean they are recalling the models that are already out there ? I do have sympathy for the manufacturer. In the case of the defective Clayton they replaced the motorised chassis after about a year which must have cost them dearly. Will they be doing the same here ?

 

I hope that the model press will be reporting these issues, as not everyone uses the internet, as has been pointed out before . I'd feel sorry for the consumer whose valve gear on this model may be deficient. They need to know there is an issue and what's being done about it, I suppose also who to return the loco to , although this should be the retailer that sold them the item. Will they get a replacement at same price or will they simply get money back and have to renew order at new price.

Edited August 21, 2017 by Legend

[PaulRhB]

After reading all the stuff on the valve gear I've now watched two videos of real Joy valve gear and there's no way you could make it robust in 009. Heljans interpretation is about as close as you could get in a mass produced model. I don't agree the movement is excessive when you watch this from about 1:40 it looks pretty close to the model. Ok they have missed out the second link that provides the vertical movement on the drop link but it's just too fine for a rtr model.

 

It seems like a sensible compromise as it provides some movement, that a static etch can't, in the right place. Short of ultra micro engineering the only other option would be a vertical piece as part of the connecting rod to provide the vertical movement and a pivot where they meet. There's no way you could make the tiny link between the two reliably for rtr.

Edited August 21, 2017 by PaulRhB

[rockershovel]

That's an interesting video. The Heljan motion is clearly incorrect, but does indeed provide some motion where some would be expected.

 

Reverting to Lilliput for a moment, the Heljan motion seems to be much like the representative motion on the original Ziller 0-6-2T. That worked well, and was also plastic; which suggests that there is something very slightly wrong with the Heljan design, or possibly its cumulative tolerances allow some sets to be assembled so that they will not work reliably.

[bertiedog]

It is not that Heljan got it wrong, it has to be a drastic compromise to make it, but what has happened is the excess motion can pull the rods to such an extent the mounting moves making it worst, and at that point it snaps. If the mounting on the big end did not fail, then all would be fine. The Loco in the video is not quite the same arrangement as the L&B, as the anchor rod moves far more than usual. There are many ways to make Joy gear

[bertiedog]

I can't quite figure out why the real thing has the anchor point in motion, same with the Peco loco, it is there to turn an elliptical motion into a circle, rather like a pantograph, so it must mean that sometimes the proportions of the valve motion need the anchor pivot to move. I suspect it is the very tight space there was that forced a re design by M&W