82044 - a lesson in humility (or something)...

[Captain Kernow]

I wasn't quite sure whether this should have gone in the 'Modifying RTR' forum or in here. However, given the sheer amount of kit-building and associated bodgery, I'm tending to think that this is the right place.

 

Followers of my blog entries back in 2011, and my more recent thread in the 'Modelling Questions, Help & Tips' section will no doubt be aware that I've been building a replacement chassis for a Bachmann 82XXX BR Standard Class 3 2-6-2T.

 

The original blog entries from 2011 are as follows:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/21/entry-5958-engine-wood-now-back-working-in-oo/

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/21/entry-5992-82044-continuing-work-in-oo/

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/21/entry-6195-standard-class-3-tank-in-oo-frustration-and-irritation/

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/21/entry-6214-standard-class-3-tank-in-oo-frustration-has-boiled-over-and-now-were-cookin/

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/21/entry-6274-82044-new-chassis-progress/

 

 

Having re-read my 2011 blog entries this evening, I've realised that I must have tempted fate in a major way, when I announced that the replacement chassis was running nice and smoothly. This was a mistake, and one that subsequently led to others, and as this wasn't my first chassis build, I should definitely have known better....

 

Anyway, what the blog entries have reminded me of, is that the original 82XXX chassis was a real pig. I did test it in the shop, but with hindsight, I should either have rejected it and chosen another example, or not even bought the model at that time. I've spent quite some time wishing that this had been the case!

 

It's not as if I was particularly surprised to find a Bachmann steam loco chassis that didn't run particularly smoothly. Oh, at a representation of 'line speed', say a scale 50 or 60 mph, the loco ran smoothly enough, but bring the speed down to something more suitable for shunting or running round a set of coaches, or approaching a signal at danger cautiously, the running was far too jerky, and certainly not suitable for use on a layout at an exhibition (in my view). This was a pity, as I had been hoping at the time to prepare the loco fairly quickly in time for Railex in May 2011, when I exhibited 'Engine Wood'. The plan was to change the number, add a bit of detail and weather the loco, but it didn't turn out like this...

 

Having dismantled the original Bachmann valve gear, I found that the cause of the jerky running was somewhere in said valve gear. The main wheel quartering and the relationship between the coupling rod centres and axle centres seemed fine. However, there was something about the looseness of the RTR valve gear, as I perceived it, that didn't satisfy. As a result, I foolishly thought 'I can do better than that', as I had a Comet 76XXX chassis kit sitting 'spare' in my spares box. In many ways, I wish I hadn't.... and had persevered with the Bachmann chassis...

 

But that is all water under the bridge now. The Bachmann chassis got stripped right down to it's individual components, and I wasn't particularly gentle with it, either. I used the main chassis block as a template for the rear chassis extensions. The 76XXX and 82XXX were very similar in terms of chassis and valve gear layout, with the same wheel diameters and wheel centres.

 

However, once it became clear that 82044 wasn't going to be ready for Railex 2011, I began to feel guilty at neglecting 'Callow Lane', which was already significantly 'overdue' in terms of when I had been telling everyone that it would be ready... So I stopped work on 82044, put the unfinished Comet chassis and other bits away in a shoe box on a high shelf, and got on with the P4 layout again.

 

Several buildings and far too many cobbles later, I felt like a change again earlier this year, so I decided to get 82044 out of the shoebox and complete her, but with no illusions this time as to how long this might take.

 

Fairly early on, it became clear that the DJH 50:1 gearbox and Mashima round can motor might foul the installation of parts of the valve gear, so I ordered a Mashima 1420 and a 54:1 High Flier gearbox, which would clear the chassis nicely, and still fit inside the loco body.

 

It was at about this time that baffling (to me) inconsistencies with the running of the chassis started to emerge. I'd built about 60% of the valve gear by this time, and I was finding that the chassis ran smoothly enough in one direction, but not in the other direction (it hadn't exhibited this problem with the DJH gearbox, but I hadn't made that connection yet...).  Then, with no intervention or tinkering from me, I'd put the chassis on the test track the next day, and the faltering gait had transferred itself to the other direction, and the direction of running that had given me problems the previous day was now smooth...

 

This is my more recent thread from the 'Modelling Questions, Help & Tips' forum, which covers my trials and tribulations with the new motor/gearbox combination:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/70577-getting-motor-and-gear-box-to-run-smoothly-in-chassis/

 

 

Anyway, when I had finally (and with no little help and advice from the good people of RMWeb, thanks everyone!) worked out that the 'stability' of the motor gearbox when running in the chassis is key, and that I had omitted to do certain things, I managed to get the running to a level where I would be happy to use the loco in exhibition service.

 

I had even ordered yet another (different) motor and gearbox from Chris Gibbon, but this was not needed in the event, and will now be used in another project in due course.

 

82044 made an appearance at the DRAG test track last Monday night and generally managed not to disgrace herself (or me!).

 

I've now pretty much finished the work on the chassis and body, and the main task that's left to do is to weather the body (the chassis was weathered as it was hand painted). Here are some photos:

 

This one was taken before the problems with the motor/gearbox really started to manifest. Note the droopy regulator rod:

 

Being intended for the 76XXX, the cylinders needed a 'spacer' piece added, which was made from a piece of square Evergreen plastic section:

 

 

 

The original Bachmann rear pony truck was used, albeit modified to fit the Comet chassis, and the Comet 76XXX one was used on the front. Dummy springs have been added (I know that Brassmasters do a nice pony truck, and I do have some of these, but they are all earmarked for other projects):

 

 

Here is the part-completed chassis being 'run in' on blocks, before I had really worked out what wasn't working properly. Although not shown in this photo, it now has 'proper' torque reaction arms from brass wire (thanks to Miss P and Ullypug for their respective suggestions in this regard):

 

No further photos were taken until today. Here is the current state of play (please note that the pony trucks aren't properly attached in this view):

 

Remember the droopy regulator rod? This has now been replaced with some brass wire (involved cutting the old one off and drilling a 0.4mm hole in the remaining housing on the boiler...). There is a suitable hole already present in the cab front, so I didn't need to drill that:

 

All told, I'm glad I persevered. I came very close at times to just putting the whole thing away again, but with a bit of luck, 82044 will be running on 'Bleakhouse Road' at the Cheltenham show this October.

 

 

[JeffP]

Great stuff...well done for persevering where others might not have done so.

 

I always had a soft spot for the 82xxx class after seeing one in green livery at Nine Elms as a boy.

[Mallard60022]

Glad you did this mate as I am contemplating 'forcing' my Grandson to go with me to Cheltenham this year (he is 2 and lives in Ross on Wye - his mum is a real rail fan).

Loco looks really smart; I too have a soft spot for these little beauties. 

Quack

[jwealleans]

Been there, Tim.... I have a Coopercraft B12 which is on its' third set of motor and gearbox and second assembly of the chassis.  It will still only pull 6 wagons, but it looks nice.  It's no fun while you're doing it, but it's all the more satisfying when you manage to get it working as you want.  It's all a learning experience as well.