Izzy

With the class 15's the discs were mostly folded up rather than down. Like this Not quite sure why, but it seemed to happen right to the end of their existence and is clearly seen in photos of them. There are a few here which show this: http://www.emgauge70s.co.uk/ Look under the Reference & inspiration link Izzy

I think this is one of the main downsides for all these limited edition/online only/one retailer models isn't it? Most have to rely on reviews and posted images/opinions from others as they won't appear in local model shops for the vast bulk of modellers to look at and gain a personal opinion as to how good they are. Even if they don't personally want one it always helps should another later model that they do be released. Just the way things are now though. And of course it doesn't help the small shops at all. Izzy

Could this be because of the amount of detail that is added after the basic body and chassis are put together? On the Kernow 02 thread somewhere when taking them apart was discussed it was revealed that some pipes glued into place would need cutting through to do this for the same reason, that they weren't meant to be taken apart. Although I use the same size/type motors in 2mm and have encountered the same issue I use CT decoders. Here I have found the need reduce the BEMF motor parameters, the P& I mainly, but as I use a Sprog + JMRI/decoder pro I can't say what CV's these are as you don't need to know. As Farish also use these size/type motors in their new N gauge steam locos and this issue also arises with them perhaps asking on the NGF forum might raise more information from someone using Lenz decoders. Izzy

Could you remove one of the intermediate gears connecting the geared axles and alter/produce new rods to suit, so the loco becomes a single axle drive? I am sure I have seen this mentioned/carried out on a thread somewhere on here. It's the mating of gear coupled axles with coupling rods that is the basic issue. Most split axle chassis, whether home produced or commercial use a single axle drive. Izzy edited to remove duplicate post comments

Ah, thank you. My apologies to J Spencer, I mis-understood what was meant by gear quartering, taking the setting of the wheels relative to the gears on the axle for granted. Izzy

Could I ask how the beam compensation is arranged please? The whole design looks very clever. Izzy

Quarter gears? I must admit I have never heard of or encountered that before in specific terms. It's totally immaterial to the wheel quartering anyway, as two or more meshed gears of whatever size/gear tooth number/tooth form will keep the same relationship to each other. As I wrote previously there is the small matter of gearing backlash to take into account, that is what determines the relationship between gear connected wheels/axles, but of course in pure theory I suppose anything is possible. Izzy

The overall design and production quality in respect of tolerances are what counts rather than the material the gears are made of, although it's all related. But I think that perhaps poor running and the angle the coupling rods take, are being classed as one and the same. You could take the rods off and the loco will still run. What the running quality might be won't/shouldn't be affected by having rods on or not when all axle drive is involved. Judging by the pre-order page on Hattons, where it is stated that the loco is: Hornby R3589 OO Gauge (1:76 Scale) Class 48xx 0-4-2T 4837 in GWR green - Railroad Range DCC compatible but no socket at a pre-order price of £38, and looking at the image, I would hazard a guess you are both correct and that it is a re-issue of the last spec Hornby production, whatever/whenever that was. Personally at that price I would think that it was worth a punt, especially for those looking to replace the chassis with a EM/P4 jobbie. It might even have a useable non-coreless motor that some might prefer. Izzy

I would assume it will be the same basic design of all-geared axles as used in a lot of recent arrivals from DJM. This seems to be a N gauge and diesel bogie drive design that is now being introduced in 4mm models. N gaugers have long had the issue of coupling rods going this way and that because of it, and have just had to accept/put up with it. It doesn't matter with diesels of course. Because there will always be a measure of lag with gears in a gear train this will always exist whichever way the gears are rotating, and of course the more intermediate gears there are the larger the lag will be. The coupling rods no longer perform any useful function such as transmitting drive, - they can't as they would 'fight' the gearing - and are thus purely cosmetic, just going along for the ride. Izzy

I thought that surely can't be right when it was first mentioned. But if you look at the side-by-side comparison shots that have been posted the Hatton's one does seem to sit slightly higher - would only be 0.5mm anyway - and I thought it just normal camera perspective differences. Well, perhaps the old Airfix/Dapol/Hornby - and the new Railroad one - will have some value after all. Izzy

When my son lived in Switzerland he found it quite a challange at times with the three languages and regional variations in addition to the broken english now common around the globe. He now lives in Australia - Sydney - and I find the spoken english there on media, TV etc, (along with that used generally when out and about), to be far superior to the mumbling drivel that now passes for the same in the UK, whatever the broadcaster involved. Izzy

I guess it could be possible using just the basic hacked servo if they are adustable for the servo operating voltage of between 1.5v -5v (which of course controls the speed/rate of movement). I have used previously made versions using microswitches at 1.5v for slo-mo action using fine sprung piano wire to absorb excess movement past the end stops needed to keep the nature of the setup simple. Once you start down the accessory decoder route it all becomes quite expensive and more involved. I always try and keep to the KISS principle if I can for both cost and reliability. Izzy

The use of servos for model railway use are now quite widespread with several producers - Tam Valley, ANE(Make Peco's Products), MERG, providing control boards etc. However, it is not always plain sailing and as far as the Peco Smartswitch is concerned you might find this thread interesting: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/88415-experience-with-peco-smartswitch/ There are those like me that have given up the struggle and 'hack' servos (strip out the electronics) to provide what is needed, (cheaper/simpler in the main). This is my current version: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/112916-hacked-servo-point-control/ Izzy

Look in Galleries. Very nice pics. Izzy

I think Nile has featured both the Oxford and Hornby versions here; http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/82968-niles-mostly-freelance-bodging-bench-back-dating-a-700/ Sorry I can't find the particular pages at present, but it's very informative to read through all the pages anyway. Some really good modelling involved. Izzy

True, I would agree. But they are much cheaper and smaller, the latter being the main consideration of why I tried them in the first place. But you can vary hacked servo speed by altering the supply voltage and using sprung acutators means they are no different to Tortoise/Cobalts. I envy those who have no problems and for who it just works because the premise is very appealing, and commiserate with those for whom it doesn't. It gets frustrating and then pointless in the end when the costs involved start mounting up and you feel like your banging your head against the proverbial brick wall. Izzy

Ah, that explains the problems with the overhead in that area recently then. The excuse as always was that it had been brought down again. Now we know it had instead been lent elsewhere....... Izzy

The bits like rodding etc are those which often have noticeable visual impact far beyond that which you might expect and do prove well worth the time and effort involved. That which you have done looks very good already, and once painted and the track ballasted will be even better. In that respect might I offer a word of caution with regard to the etched fishplates I spot in the first shot. I find that fitting them on the inside of the rails often means wheel flanges hit them, even shallow P4 ones, and sometimes it's neccesary to file them down a bit to seat them fully into the rail web, and also the raised detail, so this doesn't happen. regards, Izzy

Then you are both quite fortunate. Over the last few years it often takes far longer than that for them even to consider picking anything I order off the shelves let alone anything else. Now I mostly use other outlets. I am not surprised they have a much larger warehouse. The amount of new secondhand listed daily makes me wonder where they put it all, and how sustainable carrying it in large volumes will be in the longer term, both in logistics and overheads. Izzy

I regret to say that I have given up on trying to use servos as they stand for model railway purposes. Initially I used SG90's with MERG boards after recommendations to do so. I could not stop errant behaviour of various kinds, twitching, chatter etc. Some was at startup, but also at other times. It would often involve just one board or servo but at others could be found with all those installed irrespective of wire run distance or wire size. Increasing the basic power supply to a dedicated one able to supply sufficient at startup did solve the 'where am I' twitching, ( I have read that each individual servo needs about 0.5amp to 'initialize' on startup and used an old DVD SMS power brick of 12v/3amp capacity). The current draw with multiple servos isn't generally mentioned, and if you only have a few, as most radio controlled cars/boats/planes do ( which also mainly have large current draw dedicated battery packs) then not an issue. Otherwise it can be. Mention has been made of using digital servos. My experience here - and again I might just be generally unlucky - is that these are even more susceptable to outside EMF interference. I fitted one layout with these - JP 7.5g EnErG ones - which were quiet and quick until my DCC system was switched on. Then they went haywire, constantly twitching and chattering. The command station didn't even have to power up the layout for this to happen......... It is possible that all these issues can be overcome given sufficient time, effort, and knowledge, but for me it's just something that isn't 'there' in terms of ease of use and reliablity under all/any conditions. So now it's hacked servos - as here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/112916-hacked-servo-point-control/ Izzy

Another vote here for Halfords cans. I adopted their use for primer, top coat, and lacquer many years ago, letting down the finish with enamels afterwards to taste. Given the now poor quality of most model paints, a real lottery it seems whatever the make and paint type used (not their fault, just present day formulation rules), this seems to be a much more reliable way of getting a reasonable result. Izzy

Coreless motors don't really like high levels of BEMF and the tiny ones now being used in some 4mm locos - I use the same size in 2mm locos - are no different in this respect to larger ones. Whatever make/type of decoder used the basic rule is to reduce the BEMF and adjust the settings associated with this, the motor control parameters. This varies depending on the decoder make and what is provided by way of control and adjustment. The Gaugemaster DCC23 6-pin is I believe made by Digitrax and the same as their DZ125/126. The decoder manual is here and page 47 section 8.5 deals with the settings and the CV's, they call it scaleable speed stabilization. The actual CV's are 55,56,57: http://www.digitrax.com/static/apps/cms/media/documents/documentation/Decoder_Manual_V2-01_2014.pdf I hope you can understand it better than I can. Not very easy. I have to admit I don't like these decoders, the motor control they produce, or the general lack of adjustment with it or other aspects, lighting etc, and either use CT or Zimo which are just as cheap these days. Izzy

Or at all TBH. Only invest what you can afford to write off is always best. If it isn't, then don't. There must have been good reasons why the ranges being discussed got sold off by the original owners, and throughout this thread I keep thinking that the reality that a few folks are trying to inject is mostly being ignored and it's just basically wish-listing on a different level to normal. Izzy

Annealing is a metal softening process that takes the 'spring' out of material. Rather than help curve stuff I have found it does quite the opposite, makes it harder to maintain a smooth consistent curve, and especially when rolling such as boilers. It's very easy to put a crease/kink in annealed stuff, and very hard to get it out. Some thin etched stuff can be like this if over-etched with too strong an acid bath, tends to anneal/soften the material involved. On what can often be the vexed subject of P4 I have always used it simply for the track and wheel standards, nothing else. Everything is made to the same very average standards I use/am capable of achieving if another set of standards, or indeed another scale, are involved. We all have differing needs and desires and place certain requirements in the order of importance to us as individuals. This is what makes this thread so interesting for me. The exchange of views on how those affect what others model and the manner in which they do so, the relative importance placed on one aspect against another. Izzy

So sorry Tony. I removed the remark about the 25T from the post because I realised that I'd had (another!) one of my brain out moments and somehow deducted the flange dia from the wheel dia. 0.5mm clearance is fine, the same as exists on the 08 I just finished and more than enough. The 53-1 ratio you have arranged would be good to have in my experience. This almost crossed with the post Chris made, and it's interesting in that I was just thinking that the overall total wheelbase is quite a bit and might prove a challenge in getting sufficient sideplay while keeping the end throws minimal. Might I offer the suggestion that you treat it like a 0-8-0 in this respect, giving only as much sideplay to the leading and trailing wheels as needed and as much as possible to the middle sets. If you have gentle radius trackwork it might not be an issue as it normally is for me, but perhaps worth mentioning anyway. cheers, Izzy