Valentin

My kit-built Class C runs very bad when going forward. I scratch-built a new chassis for the tender, quartering is perfect (the chassis runs smoothly under it's own weight on a slightly tilted board). Without load the motor runs "round". The motor is the cheap "Graham Farish Clone" (eBay). Forward Backward In both video clips the "speed" setting on the Medvend controller is exactly the same. Any advice will be appreciated. After many hours of frustration, I am considering to use this tool to fix all the issues:

You are right, Chris but being my first attempt to build a solid brass chassis, I thought that building one for a tender must be easier than building the chassis for a locomotive. I would be happy if I can finish this project and even more happier if The locomotive will pull two, maxim three wagons.

After building half a dozen of split replacement chassis for RTR models or old brass kits, I "attacked" my first Worsley Works scratch-aid kit: a tender locomotive (SER Class O). The plan is to use all the parts for the locomotive and tender bodies and replace the chassis with scratch-built chassis made of milled solid brass (see the photos below). To separate the block from the strip 50 thou Plastikard was employed. The strip fitted to the block by 1/8" 12 BA steel countersunk screws; there are nylon (Acetal) plugs fitted into the block, tapped with 12 BA threads as it shows in this post. As others have mentioned, there are some parts missing from the fret (like tender springs in my case), and some spare parts (like two coal bunker doors - I am not going to use any as this will be in the UJ's path.

A Stirling Class O tender: Ignore the front beam overlay - it came of so many times during the construction, I won't tackle it until I finish all the soldering on the tender's body. Otherwise, I am very pleased with the model so far - as usual, the real thing looks better than it shows in the photographs. The chassis is solid brass:

Could anyone help in identifying the the two identical components marked with an asterisk in the photographs below (front and back view of the etch)? They are part of an Worsley Works scratch-aid kit for a SER Class O engine.

I can't see any of these two pictures, just the links. When clicked it returns: "Not Found The requested URL /community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/595035172_Framesmotormountmotor.JPG.df150ff264fb4b670dada665bc84c7cb.JPG was not found on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request."

To hold the two parts of a solid brass chassis together I used nylon rod as screw plugs. In the past I experimented with 2-part Milliput. The nylon rod seems to work better (the screws became loose quicker when tighten into the Milliput plugs. I have seen the Nigel Ashton's article in the 2MM Magazine, where he explains how to make plugs out of Araldite but I've never tried that method. Henk recommends Tufnol rod, which I intend to think is the best option, but I cannot find anywhere such small diameter rod, and I don't have a lathe to turn down a larger rod. Any feedback?

Thanks, Andy. Pretty clear now. I should've used the forum's search function before posting the question. I must be getting old now as I asked nearly the same question three years ago!

It seems there is no data in the 2019 Yearbook for the following metric gearsets in the Shop (I could find only for the imperial ones): 3-363 - Gearset: M0.25: 21:1 Skew Brass Gear 3.0mm Bore: Acetal worms 1.5mm and 1.0mm Bore 3-364 - Gearset: M0.25: 30:1 Skew Brass Gear 3.0mm Bore: Acetal worms 1.5mm and 1.0mm Bore (currently out of stock) I am confused about the below: the Shop has the 3-363 for the 21:1 metric gearset but the Yearbook shows this code for the 38:1 imperial gearset. what is the difference between the new 3-367 30:1 100DP gearset and the old one, withe the code 3-362, also 30:1 100DP. Any feedback, really appreciated.

Just out of curiosity: which method of improving current collection came up first? Yours or Mick Simpsons' "sprung" chassis? I know you used the same approach to chassis construction for the CR 0-4-2 No. 391 which you built a while ago.

Thanks, Tim. I've just noticed, I didn't actually mention that the frames are made of brass.

If the chassis frames for a shunter are 1 mm thick, is it necessary to have P/B bearings fitted for the drivers axles? The engine will "work" a shunting plank, at low speeds, so not many "miles".

Even if the four pins are intended to be used with the Masterclass chassis, I plan on keeping them for a scratch-built tender chassis. Could anyone help with the exact dimensions between the centres of these four pins? Many thanks,

-missy-, I am sorry I started this dispute - I cannot stress enough how grateful I am for all the efforts made by the Association members to design and develop new products. I was so frustrated with the 3D printed universal joints, I just had to cry my dissatisfaction with the material they are made of - as I mentioned before, the design is great and they are very easy to assemble, easier than making precise loops in a string wire. Anyway, after about an hour of working on a new UJ I got this: Video Clip 1 Video Clip 2 I wonder why the engine wobbles...

Hi Andy, Nick, Thanks for your input. The wire (guitar string) I have is about 0.27 mm. I hand-drilled, only through the "fat" part of the "ball", using a 0.3 mm drill bit. As the plastic is somehow transparent I was able to see how much I was drilling, and I was going very slowly.

I tried one of these UJ's today. I don't remember last time I was so frustrated. In my opinion they should be withdrawn from the shop. The design is excellent but unfortunately the material is not good enough for purpose. The first "ball" broke just after a few minutes of rolling the engine when I accidentally knocked the engine of the rails; it fell down on one side next to the track - not a drop, not a hard kick just the kind of accident that happen all the time with no dramatic consequences. When I put the engine back on track I noticed the broken joint. Unacceptable. The second "ball" broke during more extensive testing. The locomotive run beautifully around a circular track, at different speeds, for an hour or so; I was stressing the motor by suddenly changing the direction and increasing / decreasing the speed. After one such change of direction, at high speed, the UJ broke. This is also unacceptable. Tomorrow I will go back to the standard UJ, with looped wire.

Is it smart to use 9 mm locomotive driving wheels with a 25 teeth M0.3 driving gear for which the OD is 8.55 mm? Or should I go for the 22 teeth (OD = 7.20 mm)?

For the Class C I built I used the Fence House's ‘UNIVERSAL’ 0-6-0 loco and tender chassis (8’-0” + 8’-6” w/b) for 10mm dia wheels. I wonder if this will fit to the Graham Farish body...

My first ever sector plate, inspired by the one built by Mark Fielder for British Oak: I chose the "Kite" type of tufnol as it seemed to be more suitable for tapping the holes for the bolts. The drill I used was a 2.3mm HSS Jobber - is it normal to smoke when drilling the holes?

Would the components in the below photos make two prototypical wagons? From left to right: Bodies: 2-554 RCH 1887 open wagons Chassis: 2-327 RCH 9' wheelbase Wheels: 2-010 8 spoke / 6mm diameter Buffers: 2-070 v1 RCH 4 rib The brakes are on one side only with one shoe.

Thanks, Nigel. I used one of the Association ones and it was good; I just needed another adapter to modify a brass bearing from 1.5 mm bore to 1.0 mm bore and I didn't want to last adapter from the Association I had.

Would be thinkable for these adapters not to be concentric? I have a couple and, looked at under a magnifying glass, they don't seem to be very accurate. Or maybe I should start questioning my eyesight?

I am looking into getting some good quality drilling bits. I was browsing the Drill Service (Horley) Ltd website and I am overwelmed by the huge range of drilling bits they sell. Could the more experienced modellers suggest what type are best suited for our needs? Thank you,

How large the holes in the connecting rods could be before having issues with the running qualities of a 0-6-0 chassis?

The arrangement drawing for the replacement chassis of Class03/04 shows two relatively short (4.4 mm) PCB spacers: one at each end. I was thinking to add another one, 0.8 mm thick PCB in the middle, as shown below. My plan is to use only one driven axle, the rear one, so the middle and front axles will have 2.3 mm muffs. Apart from strengthening the chassis, this spacer will also have the role to support the motor. Can anyone think of any draw-backs of my plan?