Brian D Posted June 22, 2013 Share Posted June 22, 2013 Taking inspiration from a couple of RMWebbers, namely "40-something" and "Flyingscotsmanfan", I thought i would have a go at mating a Lima body to a Bachmann Pannier Tank. Accessing a well known web auction site over several weeks, I managed to source a LNER green Lima J50 body for £10.36 and a complete Bachy GWR Pannier Tank (32-200A) for just over £38. The Bachmann chassis is a lovely runner and was obviously well run-in and looked after by its previous owner. I also ordered a drawing from Isinglass. Various bits and pieces were subsequently purchased - hand rail wire and knobs at Alley Pally, lamp irons, sprung buffers and a J52 whistle from Mainly Trains. I already had the necessary transfers from Fox and car spray paint from Halfords. The most nervous activity was bending the (straight) J52 whistle through a right angle praying the lost wax brass casting wouldn't snap in two which fortunately it didn't! I'm quite pleased with the overall result - see photos, but by all means the result is far from a totally accurate replica of the prototype. I have only glazed the front cab windows and various parts of the Bachmann mechanism are visible inside the cab and through the tank aperture. The main frames below footplate level are not quite right and the chimney and dome remain as Lima. I mught yet still do something hiding the mechanism and the extending the main frames. From normal viewing distances though, I like to think it passes muster and catches the character of the prototype. Right, Tin Hat Time. Over to you. Regards, Brian. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Alex TM Posted June 23, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 23, 2013 Hi Brian, Nice job. I am no expert on these locos but comparing yours to some online images it certainly looks the part. I note that I am not alone in forgetting to file or carve off the moulding line on the chimney before finishing a model. Any chance you could show or describe how you fitted the chassis to the body? Regards, Alex. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted June 23, 2013 Share Posted June 23, 2013 None of the J50/3s had the vacuum brake, so to be correct you ought to take the vacuum pipes and hoses off your otherwise nice model. Ironically all the other engines in the class (/1, /2 & /4) did have vacuum brakes but 68970 (as a J50/3) never did. There's always some know-all ready to spoil your day....(sorry) FYI - (although you may already know this) 68970 was built at Doncaster in 1927 and carried the number 1082 until Jan 1946. During BR days it spent most of it's time allocated to Frodingham, but in 1959 was at Hornsey, being withdrawn in April 1961. SNAP - well, very near.... My J50/3 is an O gauge model. Chaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian D Posted June 23, 2013 Author Share Posted June 23, 2013 Thanks for the replies and advice. Teddy Bear Basically I added plasticard sheet spanning between the internal edges and at each end of the Lima body where the Bachmann chassis screw holes needed to mate with the body. I then, by eye, decided on the correct fore and aft alignment by comparison to the drawing and using a pin in a pin vice marked the centre of the screw holes in each sheet. I then drilled a 1 mm diam pilot hole for the screw which was then a self tap into the plastic. We will see how long this lasts - I was expecting to have to super glue a nut to the plastic sheet but thought I'd give the "self tapping" a try utilising the original Bachmann screws. I'll add some photos soon to show the arrangement. You know, I hadn't even noticed the chimney mould line until you mentioned it. Photography can be brutal sometimes! I'll probably leave it for now unless it starts to bug me - most of the time the loco will be viewed side on and probably not always head on. Chaz B*gger. Thanks for that. I have now edited this topic to read "J50 Project". If I can explain about the chosen number; this was chosen purely to simplify the smoke box number transfer - I only had a sheet of Fox transfers suitable for WDs so had to cut the transfer around to get a number starting with 6 and not 9! I will renumber the loco in due course. I need to retain the vac pipes as I would like the loco to perform station pilot duties. It miust be great to have the space and resources to model in 7mm scale. Regards, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted June 23, 2013 Share Posted June 23, 2013 If I can explain about the chosen number; this was chosen purely to simplify the smoke box number transfer - I only had a sheet of Fox transfers suitable for WDs so had to cut the transfer around to get a number starting with 6 and not 9! I will renumber the loco in due course. I need to retain the vac pipes as I would like the loco to perform station pilot duties. It miust be great to have the space and resources to model in 7mm scale. Well now, it depends how accurate you want to be. Your loco definitely can't be a J50/1 (68890-68899). They had shorter frames, shorter bunkers and coal cages (amongst other differences). It also can't be a J50/4 (68978-68991) as they had a bigger hopper style bunker. If you want to renumber your loco so that you can retain the vacuum brake fittings your best move would be to choose a J50/2 whose numbers ran from 68900 - 68939). However these engines had many detail differences - numerous, long-lived classes were notorious for this. Most, but not all, of the J50/2s had GNR style buffers whereas I think your model has LNER group standard buffers. As I said, it depends how accurate you want to be. It must be great to have the space and resources to model in 7mm scale. Yes, I think so, but it does force compromises. My exhibition layout, Dock Green, is 16 feet long and 2 foot wide. So, no Pacifics, no Deltics, no rakes of Pullman coaches etc etc. Just goods wagons and tank locos and small diesels. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/58132-dock-green/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Alex TM Posted June 23, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 23, 2013 Hi again Brian, Thanks for the info on chassis mounting. It may come in handy for two future LT locos that I am hoping to build on rtr chassis. Keep up the good work. Is it just me or do all LNER loco classes get so complicated in terms of sub-classes and detail? Regards, Alex. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted June 23, 2013 Share Posted June 23, 2013 Is it just me or do all LNER loco classes get so complicated in terms of sub-classes and detail? Regards, Alex. Not all Alex, but quite a few did. It can be a nightmare getting a model right, even with decent photographs of a chosen loco there are numerous pitfalls just waiting to catch the unwary out. I have, on occasion, been reduced to doing the best I can and then waiting for somebody to tell me what I have done wrong! Rather like I did with Brian's 68970..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted June 24, 2013 Share Posted June 24, 2013 Brian, thought you might like to see my J50/1 - 68891. The prototype was built in 1914 as a GNR J23. After the grouping the LNER classified it as a J51/1 but when it was rebuilt with a larger boiler it became a J50/1. The most obvious difference (apart from the vacuum brakes!) is the shorter bunker with a coal cage added to boost the coal capacity. Note also the GNR buffers. I rather like this variant - I'm sure the Lima body could be suitable hacked but the coal cage would be a challenge in 4mm - easy enough to solder up in 7mm. If your engine has the vacuum brake then it should have the brake pipe along the valance that you can see in the snap. The condition of this loco is typical of many shunting tanks, so filthy the BR emblem is obliterated by dirt, and the number is only visible because it gets the occasional wipe with the legendary oily rag. Hope that's of some interest. Chaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted June 24, 2013 Share Posted June 24, 2013 Hallo Brian, That's not a bad effort - you should be pleased. You'd find that RTR bodies are improved beyond recognition by filing off mould marks (the one on the chimney is very visible) and replacing the moulded lamp irons with either flattened brass wire or staples. The Doncaster works plates are also available from 247 Developments and they'd make a surprising difference as well. The smokebox dart you can get from Mainly Trains. If you've cracked the running, though, you're 90% of the way there - you can carry on gilding the lily as much as you like after you've got it working and can enjoy it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted June 24, 2013 Share Posted June 24, 2013 For anyone interested, the old K's J50 whitemetal kit body will equally well take the Bachmann 57xx chassis with a little plastic or metal added to create a rear 'landing' for the body. That's what one of mine has, and even alongside my correctly chassied J50 looks well enough; and way better than on the original Wrenn or H-D chassis that K's suggested. The crucial bit being the 7'3" spacing between the leading and second coupled wheels which the 57xx and J50 share. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian D Posted June 24, 2013 Author Share Posted June 24, 2013 As promised to Teddy Bear, there follows some further photos showing how I mated the chassis to the body. As you can see, I have hacked around the packaging to enable the J50 to fit back in the Pannier box for storage. The couplings mask the chassis/body retaing screws on the Pannier chassis. I have had to extend the front coupling NEM socket. It is only at rear, as I recall, that there is no support in the body to bear on the chassis. I therefore provided this plastic ledge as seen above. I had some Evergreen styrene angle to hand, 1.5 x 1.5 mm. Using short lengths of these either side to start, this gave a ledge for a piece of full width 30 thou plasticard. Further strips of thinner plastic were added to get the ride height correct as was necessary at the front end. There is a sorry tale about the (non) sprung buffers. These are Alan Gibson stepped LNER type as shown on the Isinglass drawing. Unfortunately, one of the four springs took off never to be seen again despite a lengthy search!! Consequently, the buffers are not sprung, although I have always felt that sprung buffers are a bit of an irrelevance if using the type of couplings shown and I will not miss this feature. Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread, it is much appreciated. Regards to all. Brian. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian D Posted June 24, 2013 Author Share Posted June 24, 2013 Teady Bear - A drawing which I hope explains all. Drawing1.PDF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Alex TM Posted June 24, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 24, 2013 Hi again Brian, Many thanks for the pics. Again, it looks the part. Have you done any more like this, using the body from one loco upon the chassis of another? Chaz - there is always something that seems just right about small-ish locos in a big scale. Regards, Alex. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted June 24, 2013 Share Posted June 24, 2013 Interesting coincidence Brian. You used a GWR Pannier chassis, my J50s run on Slater's wheels (4' 7.5") that are intended for GWR pannier tanks. Chaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian D Posted June 25, 2013 Author Share Posted June 25, 2013 Hi Alex, No - this is a first for me and might be the last. In the absence of a decent model of a rtr B12 I might be tempted to research the possibility of mating a decent Bachmann or Hornby 4-6-0 chassis to a detailed Triang body but that is not a priority for me at the moment. I am, however, currently "murdering" a Hornby Railroad D49 Hunt class, and turning it into a D49/1 Shire. The chassis is a superb runner including as it does tender pickups. The project is being hampered by my reluctance to seperate the tender which is semi-permanently connected physically and electrically to the loco, but it is coming on, having removed both tender and loco bodies from the relevant chassis - may be the subject of a future thread. I "got my trains out" this afternoon, the new permanent layout has not yet been commenced so I'm still using my current portable fold-up layout which takes about and hour and half to set up (including populating the five road fiddle yard, hence the modified original Pannier tank packaging to store the J50) and another hour or so to put away! The J50 performed station pilot duties admirably with faultless shunting. The Bachmann Pannier chassis is a superb mechanism, there seems to be an element of springing on the central axle so it runs unhesitatingly through my dead frog points and erm less that perfectly flat track/baseboard - I strongly recomment this mechanism as a a basis for any hybrid loco projects. Regards, Brian. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 ... using the body from one loco upon the chassis of another... For some of us this is the long term SOP. Wherever there is a decent running RTR chassis reasonably close in dimensions to a prototype for which there is no RTR model, the transplant shall be performed, into whatever body we have or can make that represents that prototype. Bachmann's small six coupled chassis in the Jinty, Pannier and 56xx have been a boon in this respect. My list from the last dozen years apart from the J50 already described: Bachmann class 45 chassis into Joueff class 40 shell. (Retired following Bachmann class 40 model emerging.) Hornby Brush type 2 chassis into Airfix Brush type 2 (class 30) bodies. (Airfix body fundamentally more accurate!) Stanier 2-8-0 chassis into modified B1 body for an O1. (Retired. Chassis to be recycled into a V3 body for a 2-8-2T, with the emergence of the Hornby O1.) Bachmann standard 5 chassis as powerplant for V2, replacing clapped out split chassis. V3 chassis into a massively modified V2 body for a K3. (Retired following Bachmann K3 model emerging.) 56xx chassis into N7 whitemetal body Jinty chassis into modified J39 body for a J38, and whitemetal J19 and J26 bodies replacing previous ancient RTR chassis. Rewheeled K3 chassis into a J6 bodyshell. J72 body knocked about to represent J69 (The Worsdell connection between GER and NER makes this fairly straightforward.) Coming soon, J11 chassis into J39 body replacing clapped out split chassis mech. (J11 chassis 1 inch out for J39, oh joy!) Havering over knocking a B1 body about and putting it on a rewheeled K3 chassis for a K1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 40-something Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Taking inspiration from a couple of RMWebbers, namely "40-something" and "Flyingscotsmanfan", I thought i would have a go at mating a Lima body to a Bachmann Pannier Tank. Accessing a well known web auction site over several weeks, I managed to source a LNER green Lima J50 body for £10.36 and a complete Bachy GWR Pannier Tank (32-200A) for just over £38. The Bachmann chassis is a lovely runner and was obviously well run-in and looked after by its previous owner. I also ordered a drawing from Isinglass. Various bits and pieces were subsequently purchased - hand rail wire and knobs at Alley Pally, lamp irons, sprung buffers and a J52 whistle from Mainly Trains. I already had the necessary transfers from Fox and car spray paint from Halfords. The most nervous activity was bending the (straight) J52 whistle through a right angle praying the lost wax brass casting wouldn't snap in two which fortunately it didn't! I'm quite pleased with the overall result - see photos, but by all means the result is far from a totally accurate replica of the prototype. I have only glazed the front cab windows and various parts of the Bachmann mechanism are visible inside the cab and through the tank aperture. The main frames below footplate level are not quite right and the chimney and dome remain as Lima. I mught yet still do something hiding the mechanism and the extending the main frames. From normal viewing distances though, I like to think it passes muster and catches the character of the prototype. Right, Tin Hat Time. Over to you. Regards, Brian. Hi Brian Im glad I could provide inspiration for you! You've done a great job on your conversion! One of my good friends has just done the same as his first major conversion project and he's done a great job too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 40-something Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Hi again Brian, Many thanks for the pics. Again, it looks the part. Have you done any more like this, using the body from one loco upon the chassis of another? Chaz - there is always something that seems just right about small-ish locos in a big scale. Regards, Alex. Hi Alex I've done a J83 using a 57XX chassis - post 31 onwards, satisfying project but quite a lot involved! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.