Bruciethefish Posted February 15, 2010 Share Posted February 15, 2010 After much slaving, the original 'Merchant Navy' masters are now complete & ready to mould.... The initial release will cover the majority of the class in final BR condition before rebuilding, with wedge-shaped cab & standard size smoke deflectors. A second series high-sided 5,100 gallon tender body will also be available as an add-on, as will a variation pack to produce a second series loco in SR condition. These will be followed by a first series streamlined 5,000 gallon tender body + suitable variation pack, & eventually a 6,000 gallon tender body in original condition. The kits are designed to fit the Chinese-made Hornby 'West Country' chassis & tender underframe, as the easiest option. (bearing in mind that the Hornby 'WC' & 'MN' chassis have identical wheelbases) I'm hoping to have some examples ready for the Tonbridge show at the weekend, though release date is officially at the end of this month.. More details & prices are up on the website now.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RedgateModels Posted February 15, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 15, 2010 Will you have samples ready for the Nottm Show? - I can see this as being quite a money spinner for you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruciethefish Posted February 15, 2010 Author Share Posted February 15, 2010 Supplies should be plentiful for Nottingham, I hope! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted February 15, 2010 Share Posted February 15, 2010 .....(bearing in mind that the Hornby 'WC' & 'MN' chassis have identical wheelbases).... I was given to understand that they don't. I thought there was an assymetrical cradle for the rear driving axle which, if you turn it one way, will allow the 7'3" trailing wheelbase of the Light Pacific, whereas if you turn it the other way, will extend the wheelbase to 7'6" for the "MN". Anyone? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RFS Posted February 15, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 15, 2010 I was given to understand that they don't. I thought there was an assymetrical cradle for the rear driving axle which, if you turn it one way, will allow the 7'3" trailing wheelbase of the Light Pacific, whereas if you turn it the other way, will extend the wheelbase to 7'6" for the "MN". Anyone? That's correct. Just consulted Brian Haresnape's "Bulleid Locomotives" and the Merchant Navy wheelbase is 7'6" + 7'6" whereas the light pacifics are 7'6" + 7'3". I have both the Hornby rebuilt MN and rebuilt WC and you can see the difference if you look. Also the distance between the rear driving axle and the pony truck is 10' on the MN but only 9' on the light pacifics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted February 15, 2010 Share Posted February 15, 2010 This could lead to some extra slaving.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruciethefish Posted February 15, 2010 Author Share Posted February 15, 2010 Just to muddy the waters a little more, I've just measured 2 west country & a merchant navy chassis;- The 'MN' (sprung rear axle) measures 30mm, as does the sprung 'WC' (Maybe I've turned the block round, but the axle is very slack in any case..), whereas the rigid rear axle DCC ready 'WC' measures 29.5mm, so maybe the current Hornby offerings fall between two stools. Dismantling the latter shows no facility for varying the wheelbase.. The trailing truck is easy, as there are two pivot mountings;- a forward one for the 'WC' & a rear one for 'MN'. Those wanting the authentic rear truck can get a spare Hornby one, or the Albert Goodall version, opting for the rearward mounting point. In any case, using the 'WC' chassis is always going to be a lot easier than the 'MN', particularly as the balance weights are moulded on... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattingleycustom Posted February 15, 2010 Share Posted February 15, 2010 Very interesting news, no doubt they will sell very well, however I can assure you that having renamed one or two of the beasts myself, the Hornby WC and MN chassis do not have the same wheelbases. Glenn - mattingley custom models Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted February 15, 2010 Share Posted February 15, 2010 Just to muddy the waters a little more, I've just measured 2 west country & a merchant navy chassis;- The 'MN' (sprung rear axle) measures 30mm, as does the sprung 'WC' (Maybe I've turned the block round, but the axle is very slack in any case..), whereas the rigid rear axle DCC ready 'WC' measures 29.5mm, so maybe the current Hornby offerings fall between two stools. ...... Or possibly someone's stuffed the chassis of the "MN" under the "WC" at the factory.... At this point, I'd suggest everyone check that they've actually got the right chassis underneath the body Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruciethefish Posted February 16, 2010 Author Share Posted February 16, 2010 The one definite difference between the two is that the 'MN' uses a longer rear motor/body mount, to bridge the longer firebox, although these too are interchangeable. It's possible that there have been some revisions, but this remains somewhat of a mystery.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
artisan100 Posted February 16, 2010 Share Posted February 16, 2010 We've had the WC/BoB chassis in the Comet range for many years, but not a MN, specifically because they're different wheelabases, as mentioned by RFS. But if Chris and Hornby have produced their MNs to scale length, then we could certainly consider doing one. Feedback and comments? Geoff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
artisan100 Posted February 16, 2010 Share Posted February 16, 2010 I forgot to mention that although we at Comet do a trailing truck for the WC/BoB (etched brass and whitemetal - LS18 - GBP4.25) and it looks very similar on an MN, the trailing wheel diameter on an MN is 3' 7", and 3' 1" on a WC/BoB. Geoff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted February 16, 2010 Share Posted February 16, 2010 .... Hornby have produced their MNs to scale length, then we could certainly consider doing one. Feedback and comments?.... Oh yes please!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattingleycustom Posted February 16, 2010 Share Posted February 16, 2010 Those wanting the authentic rear truck can get a spare Hornby one, or the Albert Goodall version, opting for the rearward mounting point. In any case, using the 'WC' chassis is always going to be a lot easier than the 'MN', particularly as the balance weights are moulded on... The only problem here is the rearward mounting point isn't tapped on the WC, not a huge problem I know, but another obstacle. If I were doing one today I would simply swap the wheels and motion from an original WC/BB onto the MN chassis, that way I'd have the wheels without the balance weights, plus the correct spacing of, and moulding for, the pony truck. The rebuilt WC/BB model uses a totally different chassis to the older rebuilt MN/original WC/BB models. Glenn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruciethefish Posted February 22, 2010 Author Share Posted February 22, 2010 Opened brand new packs of Hornby coupling rods for both MN & WC over the weekend, just to check, & yes, there is a difference, although there's a lot of slop in the pin joint which allows up to .5mm movement. I've redesigned the body mount so that either chassis can be used, so it's going to be a case of you pays your money & decide how much work you want to put into it.. I've also turned up some more information over the weekend, so the first release will now cover the 2nd & 3rd series locos, & I'll then make a new pattern for the 1st series, to give a more faithful rendition of these in original form. This will mean I'm also able to add some extra details unique to the first batch, though some of the experimental variations will still require some minor scratchbuilding.. Should be making the first moulds over the next couple of days, once I'm completely happy with the masters, so should have pictures of the first test shots next weekend... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
paftrain Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 I've redesigned the body mount so that either chassis can be used, so it's going to be a case of you pays your money & decide how much work you want to put into it.. I've also turned up some more information over the weekend, so the first release will now cover the 2nd & 3rd series locos, & I'll then make a new pattern for the 1st series, to give a more faithful rendition of these in original form. This will mean I'm also able to add some extra details unique to the first batch, though some of the experimental variations will still require some minor scratchbuilding.. Should be making the first moulds over the next couple of days, once I'm completely happy with the masters, so should have pictures of the first test shots next weekend... Hi Chris, What's the latest progress with your MN? Paul. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruciethefish Posted March 7, 2010 Author Share Posted March 7, 2010 Moulds for the 2nd / 3rd series loco body, & the 5,100 gallon tender are now made, & should be ready for casting during the week, once they've gone off sufficiently. I've nearly finished the pattern for the 6,000 gallon tender body, & this too should be moulded by next weekend, so that'll be 2/3rds of the class covered, at least! Once I've got a few test shots, & the initial orders filled, I'll set about organising the patterns for the first series, attempting to cover as many variations as is practical.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiltedsignaller Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 Moulds for the 2nd / 3rd series loco body, & the 5,100 gallon tender are now made, & should be ready for casting during the week, once they've gone off sufficiently. I've nearly finished the pattern for the 6,000 gallon tender body, & this too should be moulded by next weekend, so that'll be 2/3rds of the class covered, at least! Once I've got a few test shots, & the initial orders filled, I'll set about organising the patterns for the first series, attempting to cover as many variations as is practical.. This all sounds an excellent project and I look forward to seeing shots. My "Devon Belle" is crying out for an un-rebuilt MN. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forester Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 A lot of the more familiar British Merchant Navy names were in the First Series. I think Hornby has missed out by not including a 5000gal tender with their rebuilt MN range to allow production of Cunard White Star, P&O, Union Castle, Royal Mail etc, names that everyone knows. Although the First Series has a few pitfalls I believe it would be well worth tackling it on early rather than risk falling into the Hornby frame of mind of - "well we've done most of them, let's stop now" and risk leaving out these well-known locos. In unrebuilt form the First Series appeared as entirely different locos to the rest and most fans would want both. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruciethefish Posted March 27, 2010 Author Share Posted March 27, 2010 Progress already being made on the 1st series patterns... Fear not! -I want an as-built 'Channel Packet' for my own use, in any case.. If only all the moulds needed didn't take so much rubber.. I got through over 4 kilos of the stuff just doing the 2nd & 3rd series bits! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZ Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 How are thing progressing? Any photo's yet ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZ Posted September 21, 2010 Share Posted September 21, 2010 Just a quick bump. Do you have some pictures Chris. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.