Ruston 48DS in 7mm

[Ruston]

I bought this even before it was available. I paid for it at the Kettering O gauge show earlier this year and it was delivered a few weeks afterwards. It's sat in the box until a week ago.

 

This is what you get. Apologies for the pic quality, it would appear that my phone couldn't focus properly on all that shiny brass.

 

First impressions:

 

The body looks OK as it sits in the flat etch but anything could happen once I start and it looks like the cab is a one piece etch that must be folded on 4 sides, which spells trouble for a kick off.

 

One obvious problem is that the supplied wheels are the wrong size. They are Slaters' 4-hole discs of a scale 2ft. 8in. diameter whereas the prototype has 2ft. 6in. diamter wheels. I don't know if this is because 2ft. 6in. wheels are not available or that it's a schooboy error on the part of the kit manufacturer. It's not as if there's a lack of information on the prototype and they even include a copy of my book with every kit so they really ought to know better! It's a difference that will show up in the finished model so I'm going to have to do something about that.

 

The supplied buffers are sprung with cast whitemetal bodies and turned steel shanks/heads. The heads are way too small in diameter.

 

There is no wire supplied for handrails.

 

The mechanism would appear to consist of a can motor, a pair of worms and a pair of wheels. This is supposed to be made up into a fold-up etched sub chassis and features absolutely no compensation or means to fit any. On a 4-wheel loco of such a small size it's going to have big problems when it crosses the gap in turnouts.

[James]

It looks a world away from the A1 Models kit!

[DaveF]

I don't think Slaters do a 2'6" wheel.

 

David

[Turin 60]

I bought this even before it was available. I paid for it at the Kettering O gauge show earlier this year and it was delivered a few weeks afterwards. It's sat in the box until a week ago.

 

This is what you get. Apologies for the pic quality, it would appear that my phone couldn't focus properly on all that shiny brass.

 

First impressions:

 

The body looks OK as it sits in the flat etch but anything could happen once I start and it looks like the cab is a one piece etch that must be folded on 4 sides, which spells trouble for a kick off.

 

One obvious problem is that the supplied wheels are the wrong size. They are Slaters' 4-hole discs of a scale 2ft. 8in. diameter whereas the prototype has 2ft. 6in. diamter wheels. I don't know if this is because 2ft. 6in. wheels are not available or that it's a schooboy error on the part of the kit manufacturer. It's not as if there's a lack of information on the prototype and they even include a copy of my book with every kit so they really ought to know better! It's a difference that will show up in the finished model so I'm going to have to do something about that.

 

The supplied buffers are sprung with cast whitemetal bodies and turned steel shanks/heads. The heads are way too small in diameter.

 

There is no wire supplied for handrails.

 

The mechanism would appear to consist of a can motor, a pair of worms and a pair of wheels. This is supposed to be made up into a fold-up etched sub chassis and features absolutely no compensation or means to fit any. On a 4-wheel loco of such a small size it's going to have big problems when it crosses the gap in turnouts.

If I may offer a few words, some years ago I built two of the Impetus 48DS's. For 2' 6" wheels I used "Lowmac" wheels which in O gauge have 1/8th" axles so meaning I could use conventional 1/8" hornblocks from 4mm scale. Both were compensated with a simple pivot point, one was built with a small motor/gearbox on each axle while the second had a larger single motor with a chain drive all the forgoing hidden in the bonnet and between the frames. Good luck with yours, look forward to seeing it progress.

 

John.

[br2975]

I know the 48DS is a simple loco, and there can't be too many ways to draw up the etches, but the design and layout of those etches are 'very remeniscent' of the Impetus model.

.

As John says above, I also used Slater's 7mm 'Lowmac' wheels when building my Impetus model - but it was a rigid chassis (perhaps one day - he sighs)

.

Brian R

[Kenton]

I start and it looks like the cab is a one piece etch that must be folded on 4 sides, which spells trouble for a kick off.

Not sure why?

Agree that the fold up box makes more for rounded than crisp angular corners and distortion of the window edges could present a problem, but I guess the designer thinks it makes life simpler.

 

You do have the option of snapping along the fold lines or cutting them and creating the cab from the box parts. Probably what I would choose to do.

 

I guess the wheels are a bit of a problem but as long as no other compromises have been made to accommodate them it could be worse.

 

Missing wire is careless, perhaps because you have an early kit.

 

What does this one cost - comparing with the ridiculous price the Impetus ones go for on ebay, it must be cheaper!

[br2975]

What does this one cost - comparing with the ridiculous price the Impetus ones go for on ebay, it must be cheaper!

 

(Draws breath) - About £190 according to the Electrifying Trains website, (including motor & Mr Ruston's book on the 48DS & 88DS) !

 

Brian R

[Kenton]

(Draws breath) - About £190 according to the Electrifying Trains website, (including motor & Mr Ruston's book on the 48DS & 88DS) !

 

Brian R

Ouch! That seems very overpriced for the book!

 

Let's check what you are getting: two sheets of etched brass (not n/s) which do not appear to be THAT finely detailed; the wrong wheels; no brass wire for hand rails etc; a motor; a dubious fold up gearbox+drive that most will wish to replace; no provision for springing (that sort of excludes S7 - but they will want to change the wheels anyway.

 

So just how does this compare to the competition? I know if you are really desperate for a 48DS you have little choice but if it is just a quality 7mm diesel shunter the R&H 165DS from JE looks like a bargain at £90 +wheels+motor+gearbox (all of which should leave ample change to buy the book)

 

But then this might come with that magical ingredient - it builds itself.

[Ruston]

Not sure why?

Agree that the fold up box makes more for rounded than crisp angular corners and distortion of the window edges could present a problem, but I guess the designer thinks it makes life simpler.

 

Yo do have the option of snapping along the fold lines or cutting them and creating the cab from the box parts. Probably what I would choose to do.

 

I guess the wheels are a bit of a problem but as long as no other compromises have been made to accommodate them it could be worse.

 

Missing wire is careless, perhaps because you have an early kit.

 

What does this one cost - comparing with the ridiculous price the Impetus ones go for on ebay, it must be cheaper!

 

As you say, the corners are not crisp angles but there's also where to make the joint with regard to butting the ends together to get it all square. Either way it won't be perfectly square. I tried it and I couldn't get it to line up and give each corner a proper 90 degrees.

 

As I'm building the fully-enclosed cab I would have needed to chop parts of the open sides away and sweat the chosen sides on to the box so I didn't bother. I cut the cab etch into 4 parts, along the fold lines. I then filed the remains of the half etching away and made up the cab using a square and a granite table mat.

 

I've already made a start on the frame, which is another fold up job.

(Draws breath) - About £190 according to the Electrifying Trains website, (including motor & Mr Ruston's book on the 48DS & 88DS) !

 

Brian R

 

 

 

 

£190? Bloody hell! I haggled, paid cash and also used the fact that I didn't need a copy of the book to get mine for £135, which I still think is a bit steep TBH.

[Turin 60]

As you say, the corners are not crisp angles but there's also where to make the joint with regard to butting the ends together to get it all square. Either way it won't be perfectly square. I tried it and I couldn't get it to line up and give each corner a proper 90 degrees.

 

As I'm building the fully-enclosed cab I would have needed to chop parts of the open sides away and sweat the chosen sides on to the box so I didn't bother. I cut the cab etch into 4 parts, along the fold lines. I then filed the remains of the half etching away and made up the cab using a square and a granite table mat.

 

I've already made a start on the frame, which is another fold up job.

 

 

 

 

 

£190? Bloody hell! I haggled, paid cash and also used the fact that I didn't need a copy of the book to get mine for £135, which I still think is a bit steep TBH.

 

OUCH, that does seem quite steep but I must confess it's a few years since I've done any O gauge modelling. Still have a few kits stored to build and of course a few to finish. Ho hum!

 

John.

[Turin 60]

Slightly "off topic" but I've just had a look at "Old Originals" gauge 1 website their 48 etched kit is £85 then you need wheels, gears motor and delrin chain drive. But this is gauge 1! Looked most impressive at Bradford upon Avon show the other year, even had the circular cab fan heater (very Land Roverish!)

 

John.

[br2975]

Having worried about whether I got the price wrong, here's the link to the Electrifying Trains website.

.

What I forgot to mention is the kit comes with a free defibrilator !

.

http://www.electrifyingtrains.co.uk/html/ruston_48ds.html

.

Brian R

[Kenton]

As I'm building the fully-enclosed cab I would have needed to chop parts of the open sides away and sweat the chosen sides on to the box so I didn't bother. I cut the cab etch into 4 parts, along the fold lines. I then filed the remains of the half etching away and made up the cab using a square and a granite table mat.

 

The only way to do it unless the brass is thin enough to make good creases - and that would cause more issues.

A Right-Clamp gizmo comes in handy for building up boxes like this.

 

Now I don't have a copy of your book so the next comment I defer to your knowledge of the prototype but that cab etch still looks wrong to me. I think it is the half-etched window frames on the inside and that seeming large half-etched door surround.

[halfwit]

Door handles are in the wrong place - the hinges are at the front and the handle at the back. A1 made the same mistake on their kit.

Also the cab side rear bottom corner should have a square cut-out to clear the buffer beam angle - another mistake that the A1 model has but a lot more noticable in 7mm.

See here;

My link

Maybe I'm being picky but for £190 I woudn't expect to see those mistakes.

 

Still, I reckon that you'll get a decent model from it Dave.

[Kenton]

Maybe I'm being picky but for £190 I wouldn't expect to see those mistakes.

At that price compared to the competition in the kit designer field we have every right to be picky and given that the kit is being sold with a copy of a book dedicated to the subject and a book presumably with at least one photo these are details that we have every right to expect the designer to get right without excuses.

 

These seem to be mistakes a novice designer would make in a test etch.

 

Looks like the square cut out is there on the kit as a fold back flap but there are an absence of rivet detail.

 

BTW Am I the only one who cannot see Paul's image in the above post (just get a spinner) ?

[Ruston]

Now I don't have a copy of your book so the next comment I defer to your knowledge of the prototype but that cab etch still looks wrong to me. I think it is the half-etched window frames on the inside and that seeming large half-etched door surround.

 

The half-etch on the inside seems to be so for the locating of glazing (not provided!) and so that the full thickness of the brass doesn't show against the glazing. There's also outer window frames to be soldered on but I'm not sure I'll be using them. If you look at prototype photos the frames aren't flush but they don't stand out very much. I think it may be one of these cases where less is more.

If you look in Paul's album you'll also see that there are two variaties of side window - a single pane drop type and a two-pane horizontal sliding type.

 

I've done some more on the bodywork.

 

And I've folded up the chassis.

In this photo I have folded up the sides and removed two pieces that were on the ends. They had a fold line and were sort of mirror images of the parts you see with the hole for the body/chassis mounting screws and the notch for the coupling hook. I have no idea what these were supposed to do and, despite reading the instructions, I am still non the wiser. Even without them the chassis will not slot into the body. The ends of the frame are the buffer beams, which are folded up into a [ shape and soldered on. Because of this the chassis cannot slot in unless it or the insides of the bufferbeams are hacked about.

 

The instructions are very poor and skimp on a lot of detail. This is my third O gauge brass kit and the other two I managed to build without referring to the written instructions at all! They were Agenoria kits that come with an excellent numbered exploded diagram - something which this kit lacks but could really use.

 

I'm not too bothered about the fit of the chassis just yet because I still don't have any suitable wheels for it and am thinking of building my own chassis that will have suspension.

[Kenton]

Hmm. This is sounding even worse than first appeared and that the price certainly is well over inflated.

 

Re: the windows: I still have the impression that the cab sides are etched inside-out. Those half-etched windows really should be on the outside and if the window frames are also half-etched they would have made a good prototype representation of the actual frames. I am racking my brains to think of another kit where the inside has been half-etched to take glazing.

 

The chassis: sounds like a horror story or something from the 70's - the lack of potential for springing in ta modern kit is really inexcusable for the sake of a few half-etches.

 

Instructions: a kit priced at this level should at least have instructions comparable to its competitors or better.

 

But above all the parts should fit for it to claim the title of "kit". This seems to be merely a scratch aid.

[Ruston]

Re: the windows: I still have the impression that the cab sides are etched inside-out. Those half-etched windows really should be on the outside and if the window frames are also half-etched they would have made a good prototype representation of the actual frames.

 

I'd agree with that. It's a designer's error rather than me puting it together wrongly because the door frame etching is on the outside and the half-etched circles for rivets (actually bolt heads) to be pressed out are on the inside. The half etching for the window frames should have been on the outside. The ends of the cab are the same. I punched out the 'rivets' so that the side with the now raised detail had to go on the outside but it still leaves half-etching for the window frames on the insides!

 

I've emailed them about the wheels but have had no reply so far. I'd like to get on with it so I'm going to see about buying some wheels and getting a refund on the incorrect Slaters wheels - if I get a reply!

 

I'm hoping that I don't have any work on tomorrow so I can get a bit more done on the kit.

[Ruston]

I haven't made much progress.

 

Mainly because I got rather p****d off having to do something about another error in the etches.

The reinforcing strip along the bottom edge of the frame is too thick. Not only will this not look right in itself but it means that the axlebox guards cannot be positioned correctly in relation to both the strip and the axlebox. In the photo I have placed one of the guards on the strip. If everything was correct the top of the guard should be at the top of the strip but the pair of bolts (dimpled our rivets on the kit) should be just below the level of the frame.

 

As I had already soldered the strip on (well you don't expect such a glaring mistake, do you?) this has meant a lot of hassle in removing it to replace with some plain strip of a more appropriate thickness. I also means that I've lost the axleboxes, which are a fold-up of the reinforcing plate etch and not very good representations IMHO - they ought to have been cast whitemetal. I can't belive that they have got this so wrong! I don't know if they ever measured a real loco but even laying it on a scaled Ruston GA drawing reveals it to be too high.

 

Which brings me onto this:

I have found a set of cast whitemetal axleboxes in my parts/scrap bin. They are from the Wrightlines 33/40HP narrow gauge Ruston kit but were purchased as seperate items. When I was doing 7mm narrow gauge I bought several sets to fit to my scratch-built locos. Luckily the prototype 48DS used the same axleboxes as the range of narrow gauge Ruston locos!

 

The other bits will go to make up the drive train once I can source a pair of small (8 tooth?) Delrin sprockets.

[Kenton]

I wonder if there was ever a test build of this scratch aid?

[Arthur]

I wonder if there was ever a test build of this scratch aid?

 

Sounds like it's being documented here!!

[tim@dy]

KARLGARIN MODELS sell 8 tooth delrin sprockets.I only have a phone number for him 01245 226110.

 

Tim

[Ruston]

I wonder if there was ever a test build of this scratch aid?

 

There was, I think, a body-only and a completed model at Kettering but the completed one had a different mechanism that used a motor/gearbox driving one axle and delrin sprockets/chain to drive the other.

 

I've had a reply to my query about the wrong size wheels being supplied and I quote part of it here:

 

I have referred your query to my colleague Mike Radford who deals with the design & technical side of what we do.

He says that the 48DS started out with 2'3" wheels, which then became 2'6" to cater for increased engine efficiency and so that with a bigger wheel they could go that bit faster and have better adhesion to the rails as they did not spin under power, larger length brake shoes for better braking, greater weight in the right place for better adhesion also availability to a small engine manufacturer. Some were also fitted with 2'8" wheels at some stage either under manufacturer or during restoration.

We found during research that Salters made a good likeness to the style of wheels used on these locomotives but they are as you say, equivalent to the 2'8" size, and unfortunately they are the only people that we have found that do a good quality wheel set in any diameter that the locomotive had.

 

I don't know what to make of that. AFAIK the 48DS never had 2ft 3in. wheels. The 44/48HP locos did and some 44/48s were fitted with 2ft. 6in. wheels. The sales leaflets that I have for 48DS (that have a GA drawing in them) only show 2ft. 6in. wheels and don't mention optional sizes on the drawing or in the text. Of course that's not to say that some individual locos weren't specified with 2ft. 8in. wheels or that they haven't been fitted with them in preservation but Ill not be happy to fit them until I see proof of this as I have a feeling that I'm being fobbed off with this explanation. If it is true it's still rather misleading to provide wheels that are for specials and not the usual size without plainly mentioning it before purchase.

 

To be fair though they have offered to give me a refund but I want a 48DS and as correct a one as possible. Maybe I'm being too picky and the extra 1.16 (?) mm diameter isn't going to be noticeable?

[Kenton]

I think to be a little fair on the kit manufacturer (I know that's not much like me) the wheels were a problem whichever way it is looked at. Slaters do not supply the correct size and

and unfortunately they are the only people that we have found that do a good quality wheel set in any diameter that the locomotive had.

probably depends on how far you look or definition of "quality".</p>

 

I'm probably of the opinion that I would rather have wheels supplied in the kit than not and then having to find some dubious source myself. The difference is relatively small in "typical viewing distance" concerns though it may well be obvious to some (especially when pointed out)

 

I still think the more serious issues are to do with the etching "errors" as these need better explanation. </p></p>

 

I know I keep returning to it but something sold at a premium that declares itself a kit of a particular prototype should be capable of being built to that prototype without additional scratch-building skills.</p>

[halfwit]

Just to confirm Dave's observations, the Chasewater loco has 2'6" dia. wheels (I measured them...) and the GA drawing that I have also shows 2'6" wheels.