47137

I have just fitted the name and number plates and work plates to my blue 'Thunderer'. Just a thought for the manufacturers (not just Dapol) ... while the Shawplan etchings are perfection, I would be more than happy for the works plates to be merely printed on in the factory ...

... as long as they print it on straight!

Funny how a photo can show up something you have accepted for months.

- Richard.

I spent this afternoon at the Mangapps railway museum near Burnham-on-Crouch. Here are two photos of the coupler on their Canadian Pacific caboose, as a reminder of the inspiration of the original Kadee design. It is (of course) 87 x 25 / 64 inches above rail height, rather lower than a similar British coupler. The flange on the top of the mounting reminds me of a Kadee draw gear box, and a penny has dropped for me here; while I have sought to hide the gear box on British stock, it can be prominent on a North American vehicle.

- Richard.

Edited to add this third photo to show the size of the thing ...

Choosing a name and number for a blue Dapol Western with full yellow ends

Here is an updated spreadsheet to collate all the relevant information we have posted here since Geoff's posting at 16:44 on 7th August. The current data shows that if you want a 'prototypical' name/number for a blue Dapol Western (full yellow ends) you must remove the red route indicator dots and then choose one of D1001, 1003, 1008-11, 1013-16, 1021-1023 only (thirteen in all) ... or modify the model.

Class 52 Western details d.xls

This spreadsheet replaces all previous versions I have posted in this topic.

- Richard.

You can't run any of the Dapol Blue FYE Westerns alongside main line steam which had gone by the time the Talisman clips were introduced.

 

Geoff Endacott

Yes I agree. But row 12 of the spreadsheet revison c does say, "If the model is to represent any locomotive running before the Ealing crash, modify the extended battery clips or fit the battery box moulding from a maroon locomotive".

I have tried to get the spreadsheet to show the essence of what we need to watch out for, but it will get too complicated if I try to define multiple BFYE eras like 'before Ealing crash'. As you pointed out to my initial question, you cannot run any Dapol blue FYE Western without altering it in some way, if only to take off the red dots.

- Richard.

Edit: completely rewritten to try to make myself clearer 

Thanks for an informative debate / forum.

It has grown far more than I ever imagined when I made the first post!

Free running is no good, you just end up chasing the car you want to couple to.

Light weight cars are no good, when nice and heavy cars have nice inertia.

The springs on the Kadee 'Whisker' range seem to have the lightest action, and I am choosing the no. 146 (occasionally a 141) for new conversions to UK RTR wherever possible.

- Richard.

I like the long skinny option, it looks better with the platform and it gives you more choices to obscure the track exit e.g. trees (if appropriate) both sides of the railway or an industrial gantry of some kind.

- Richard.

Strictly speaking, none of them ...

Here is a spreadsheet based on Geoff's information above, with what I believe are valid locomotives highlighted in green ... I think most of us who want an accurate model would welcome corrections to this list or a similar table for other liveries.

- Richard.

Edit:

Attached spreadsheet deleted ... there is a more complete version with my posting at 00:19 on 8th August.

Technically yes, although since Dapol didn't actually fit the name and numberplates it's not incorrect until you do. The same is true of the Maroon SYP standard release - D1029 Western Legionnaire was one of those without headboard clips from new.

Supposing you have a Dapol Western in blue with full yellow ends (I think they all got this livery eventually) ... could someone possibly post a link or a brief statement to show which locomotives the model can (or if easier cannot) represent without modification? Sorry if this is already posted, I have read quite a lot of this thread but I couldn't manage all of it.

- Richard.

I am still debating whether or not to get a Maroon FYE one (Western Sultan - which I would change to Western Explorer) to add to the two blue FYE ones (Western Venturer - but will rename one to Western Thunderer) I have already.

I have a 'Venturer', currently without its name and number plates ... are there technical reasons for choosing 'Thunderer' as an alternative, or are there many other names/numbers which would suit the moulding of the Dapol 'Venturer'?

- Richard.

Somebody posted a YouTube video of a friend's D1000, and the various maladies it had.

I have watched through this video and then had a look at my blue D1005 Western Venturer. On my model, 11 of the wheels have working pickups but one does not. All of the wheel back to backs are 14.5 to 14.6 mm. All four of the screws holding the chassis to the body can be loosened and retightened easily. I haven't looked inside the model, I don't want to end up fixing something that currently works.

I am guessing these models are made in separate batches, e.g. all the 400 'Steam' models, all the BFYE ones, all the blue weathered ones and so on ... different assembly workers do different batches ... and some assembly workers do care and some do not care what they produce. Though if someone can produce a report of a good 'Western Enterprise' or a bad 'Venturer' this would rather negate this suggestion.

I'm not so sure about the claims of a lack of 'quality control' in the video ... my own experience of this discipline told me it may ensure consistency, but not fitness for purpose. The lack of control seems to be in the assembly.

With Downendian on this  in the Whizzo 4mm are tight but 3.6 a tad on the small side - so have gone with 4mm

 

 

There is a web site named http://www.headcode.co.uk/ which has samples of numerals 0 to 9 and letters A to K on its home page. It should be straightforward to pop the desired combination into a graphics package and scale down to suit. You could even print 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 mm (slightly tongue in cheek!) and see what looks best on the model.

Please, what is the true diameter of the white dots? If I am going to go to all this effort it needs to be something in period like (dot) 0 5 for my 'Venturer'.

- Richard.

(Edit: typo)

I worked with a delegation from a Chinese electronics manufacturing company in around 1996. We were talking about 'technology transfer', like getting 1980s British designs built in Beijing; while they were picking up bits of solder from the benches to take it home and analyse. My overwhelming memories from those days are of sloppy copying (like winding bespoke inductors, wrongly) without understanding why the original thing was made the way it was, let alone trying to add in any original thought to make the thing better. It was a very alien (to me) mixture of wanting to be like the West ... by taking it 'ready made', not actualy 'trying'.

I remember having to take the group to 'see' London, and pointing out the salient features of the UK 25kV electric railway system while we all waited at Chelmsford railway station. They were from an engineering company after all. I met complete disinterest.

I have no idea whether the Chinese today have model railways; or if they do, what they make models of. I would however imagine an assembly operator in the UK, tasked with putting wheels onto axles, would put them the right distance apart without being told. After allm, the thing has got to sit on some track. The members of this delegation (admittedly, most of twenty years ago) might have been pleased to put the flange sides of the wheels on the insides, after you showed them.

This makes me want to think of more detail on assembly procedures and drawings to sort this out. But then again, when I buy something non-railway 'Made in China', while I expect it to probably work, for a while, I know if I try to take it to pieces I will encounter a mess of hot glue, messy solder and most likely some seriously under-rated electrolytic capacitors ... "No user serviceable parts inside"!

Dapol supply their Western with some self-adhesive numbers to stick onto the headcode boxes. I guess this is so you can have your choice of headcodes, without taking the thing to pieces. If we insist on taking it apart, whether to fit new wheels or headcodes or driver figures or whatever, are we expecting something of this toy train which we would never expect of the usual consumer durables from the same source?

I have started to convert my HO scale narrow gauge stock to Kadees too ... I think most people reading this topic will be looking for standard gauge applications so I have put the details with my layout here:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/52540-castell-y-bwrdd/?p=1107702

- Richard.

As David says, the couplers are robust. There is a chance of damage to the stock if a coupler sags, the trip pin fouls a running rail and the incident is near the edge of the baseboard ... 

If you know you don't need the magnetic uncoupling feature, the trip pins can be removed with a cut-off disc in a mini drill or some sturdy cutters.

What is the best glue for the Draft Gear box on plastic wagon kits, does plastic melt glue work (eg Mekpak). or is it best to use a taped screw fitting?

The draft gear boxes respond well to Slater's Mek-Pak, I have also used old-fashioned polystyrene cement by Humbrol. I always glue the boxes to the chassis, sometimes I add an M2 nut and bolt too. Every wagon is different and if it is easy to take the body off the chassis then I put a nut and bolt too. If it looks difficult with a chance of spoiling the model, I stay with only the glue. Beware of overtightening a nut and bolt, this can impair the self-centring action of the coupler. I use a steel nut and bolt, nylon ones would be better when I can find some.

- Richard.

Thanks guys for the really helpful answers to my questions.  I am pretty much sold now on the Kadee way forward.  So will now look at getting the appropriate packs of couplings and start the conversion process, I might first get one the of sample pack they do to see what all the different type are.

For models of British railways, I suggest you buy one pack each of the #146, #18 and #20, I think you will be pleasantly surprised how much of your stock you will cover. If you have something with a particularly deep buffer beam, the version of the #146 with an underset shank, which is the #141 may help. (If the rolling stock is unusually high, you can easily pack a 146 downwards so to speak).

Many people have had success with the #5, but to be honest it is rather short for British models with buffers. I bought only one pack. The #146 lets you hide the draft gear box back behind the buffer beam. I didn't buy the Kadee sample pack because so many of the items in it seem to be geared towards North American stock.

I was tempted to post something like this in the thread on the heights of Kadee couplers so thanks for asking!

Edit: the Kadee catalogue is useful, and less overwhelming when you have some samples in your hands: http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/catalog.htm

Simplicity is usually the best approach ... I was imagining a fiendish mechanism with one or two folds in it to get the rails clear of the edges of the box and the lid.

Yesteday evening I sat my current micro on my lap while I painted the sides of the rails - much nicer than bending down over a fixed layout! It might be worth trying to build most of the model outside the box, and then sliding it in and securing it near the end. Perhaps with just a few buildings remaining to fix down. It all seems too confined to work in there to me.

- Richard.

1. The springs don't ping off too often ... The trick is to pick up the spring close to one end and put the long end on to the knuckle first. Also pick them up from a small container (a plastic milk bottle top is good) so they don't disappear if (when) you drop them.

 

Kadee suggest fixing them in place with a small drop of CA (superglue) but it needs to be a VERY small drop applied with great care to avoid gluing up the pivot.

"Putting in Kadee knuckle springs": I took the spring out to modify a coupler and then lost at least six to the carpet putting it back in. In the end I tried this, which worked first time: I fixed the pointed end of a wooden cocktail stick into the side of the spring using superglue. Manipulated both ends of the spring into place. Held the spring in place and teased out the cocktail stick ...

- Richard.

Having read a fair bit on Kadee I sort of think that they will be the best for me and my son on the layout I am planning.  So what is the view of other users on this and in particular these points ...

I am a 'new user' of Kadees, I have fitted about 30 pairs in the last two months. Here are my thoughts ...

            Conversion ease - loco, wagon coaches, not looking for a big answer, just is it worth the effort?

It has got to be worth the effort. I sat behind the fiddle yard of a club layout using tension locks and thought how glad I am I have got rid of these things at home.

            Usability - me and my son

Mine never come detached. There might be unwanted uncoupling if you build abrupt gradients.

            Robustness – in case of hard shunting and stock being separated by being picked up vertically.

If you twist the vehicle slightly as you lift it, it comes away cleanly. Less risk of damage than with the tension locks. The coupler heads have tiny springs and these are a serious challenge to refit if they come out. However I have had only one come out so far.

            Cost

Seem fair value, even if you cut off the trip pins and forego the magnetic features.

            What to do with the 3 link, leave the hook in place?

If the Kadee is in the right place, the hook can stay but you will have to lose the chain.

One thought - if you know you will never turn the vehicles round, you could remove the tension lock hook from one end of each vehicle. You could always try this first? Easier uncoupling, but might be frustrating if your son starts to assemble two parts of a train which he then finds won't couple up together. Or, remove the hook from both ends of each loco (I always used to do this), this makes uncoupling the train from the loco easier.

Richard ... As for paying £185 for something that does what it is supposed to do...then where is the problem? Paying £120 for something that doesn't, is a 100% waste of money. 

Perhaps a good compromise would be for the manufacturer to fit an EM profile wheel, set to 00 gauge but able to be regauged to 18.2. For me (using 00), this would be worth paying for. The P4 people would have to pay the extra and still throw away the wheels, not so good. The Continental manufacturers don't have to put up with all this! I do currently expect to change the wheels on a RTR wagon or a coach, but not on a locomotive, which is probably a bit silly one way or the other.

If a company is going to manufacture/contract for working models...then that is exactly what they should be...not a half-baked excuse for the damn thing!! 

The claim, "If your wheels are true...they're most likely Ultrascale" seems to be saying "most wheels need work". Given this firm wanted a five-month lead time when I enquired (I did not order!), most of us are using someone else's wheels and making them work as needed. As a railway modeller, as opposed to a purchaser of railway models, I learnt how to fix wheels and back to backs when I went to code 75 track.

A railway model can be made to a higher specification (try the Fleischmann DB BR 218, list about £185), but imagine the outcry if the Western price went up to match and people said "it's exactly the same!"

The typical British modeller is conditioned to expect to pay rock-bottom prices for perfection, and manufacturers like Dapol face something of a risk to get the price and the product to tally. I know the wheels should be spot on ... but at the present price point, it is a lot easier to set up some wheels or tweak some other detail than build the model from a kit or from scratch; and the result will be first class, and a good deal cheaper than the Flesichmann.

Richard.

 

These first few posts are retrospective so I am further on than it looks - the track has already been laid and wired.

I too have an APA box, though mine has got only as far as a mock up. Could we have a photo of the track where it crosses from the box to the lid, ideally before the details are hidden under ballast and landscaping? I think this could get my project going again - Richard.

Here are five photos to show a conversion of a Bachmann wagon with their newer design of NEM pocket ...

Here is a no. 18 coupler in the NEM socket:

Remove the wheels and then the screw holding the support for the NEM socket. Shorten the screw by about 2 mm and replace it. Assemble a no. 146 coupler into its draft gear box and cement the box onto the chassis. The box lid clips into place, I have left this unglued so I can remove the coupler.

Put a scrap of microstrip or some other shim material under the shank to lift the coupler to the correct height.

The result is a lot tidier.

I think we have the best of both worlds; we can use the NEM socket (very quick and easy to go back to a tension lock), or fit a standard coupler instead.

I am relying on cement to hold the gear box, but I will leave it to set overnight and I only run short trains. It would be wise to add an M2 / 8BA screw.

Richard.

Here is a photograph to show the conversion described by John in the previous post, this is a typical older Bachmann wagon chassis. I used the no. 242 gear box (this is the one supplied with the 146 coupler) ... the no. 252 gear box in John's procedure is about 1/16 inch shorter than the 242, so this would let you keep more of the original NEM box support moulding. I used an M2 machine screw and a nut to hold the box to the chassis. This particular wagon has some Gibson wheels ... if you intend to change the wheels, do this before you set up the couplers in case the diameter is different to the originals.

Richard.

The Heljan coupler is not as 'stepped' or 'cranked' as the one above.  The Heljan couplers are very close to being the correct heights, much like the Bachmann MK1 / MK2 coaches... but the ones that are on the Class 40 & 45 I have are waaaaay out.  I can take some pictures tonight if anyone is interested?

Photographs of particular models and solutions are always useful. While someone reading this thread may not have (for this example) a 40 or a 45, the ideas may well transfer to something they do have.