Chris Higgs

The problem with broaches are that they soon end up cutting on a large section of the muff all at once. Plus the hole will be slightly tapered - at least in theory not good for wobble. With my drills I end up with a parallel hole and the reaming out is much easier. Chris

Sadly I have now forgotten :-) But it was at an online supplier, and I think not a model railway one. CHris

I bought myself a set of drills with very small increments: 1.5mm, 1.51, 1.52 etc. These I can run into the muffs until I reach the desired size. A general comment on the muffs - they are made tight as it's relatively easier to open them out than fill them in! Tolerance reasons on them and the wheel axles mean we cannot make them exactly to a certain tightness of fit. A significant proportion would then have to be discarded as too loose. Plus each loco builder has his own preference of how tight he wants them to be. Chris

I would recommend using some brass rod instead of the axle steel. You will find it easier to solder to the flycrank. Chris

Somewhere on RMWEB (or its previous versions) Richard Brummitt had details of the test build he did for me, which was of the rear axle drive. Chris

For the rear axle drive you have to remove metal both to accomodate a decent size motor, and to leave daylight under the boiler. WIthout removing metal you could only get in a 6mm coreless motor, with metal removal you can get in an 8mm. Anything larger and you will obscure the space below the boiler that this method is designed to create. These rear axle frames are really for advanced modellers. To do a really proper job you also really need to make a new footplate from brass, as Julia did on her Pannier. Removing metal from Farish bodies is a right pain because of the alloy they use. You will get through a few tools on you milling machine or Dremel. For the centre axle drive no metal removal is needed, although you may wish to remove a tiny bit to position a 10mm coreless motor further forward. The new Association can motor (8mm by 10mm by 16mm) can be accomodated without any body changes. Chris

For the rear axle drive you have to remove metal both to accomodate a decent size motor, and to leave daylight under the boiler. WIthout removing metal you could only get in a 6mm coreless motor, with metal removal you can get in an 8mm. Anything larger and you will obscure the space below the boiler that this method is designed to create. These rear axle frames are really for advanced modellers. To do a really proper job you also really need to make a new footplate from brass, as Julia did on her Pannier. Removing metal from Farish bodies is a right pain because of the alloy they use. You will get through a few tools on you milling machine or Dremel. For the centre axle drive no metal removal is needed, although you may wish to remove a tiny bit to position a 10mm coreless motor further forward. The new Association can motor (8mm by 10mm by 16mm) can be accomodated without any body changes. Chris

Well, they could always spend that little extra time thinking about the scenarios in which their products might get used. In almost all walks of life, the earlier you make the adjustments the easier they are. Chris

It's not a bend line, but a seperation line. Some people will prefer not to leave the metal running right across the spacer with only a small off-centre isolation gap. So as an alterative you can use the hole as a drilling jig for the spacer, then remove the centre section. This is no problem. You can either make sure the wires mounting the brakes are short enough to fit into the frames but not not foul the spacers, or simply drill a little into the spacer to give the wire a hole to sit in. I prefer the latter as it requires less precision work. Chris

I think you will find that as the business end of the coupling is the same, changing details like how it is mounted may not be sufficiently different to protect people from copyright issues. Trust me, I have encountered real difficulties in the past with these issues, even when there was no copyright issue (because the person involved had not noticed he was not the first person to actually invent the idea!) it still caused everyone a lot of hassle because that person just would not let it rest. It put a numebr of people to a lot of wasted time rebutting him. So I won't worry my pretty little head about it, Missy. But someone might well have to. Chris

I hope you are considering the copyright issues here. I don't know who you pestered in the Association, but it wasn't me as Products Officer and if you had, my answer would have been that we don't own the copyright and therefore are not able to redesign them for NEM pockets. We just sell them. I suggest you contact D.G. Couplings if you have not already done so. Chris

We seem to have heard this before. I do hope we are not about to witness Class17gate all over again. Chris

Instructions are in VAG files area now. Please read - Richard this means you :-) Chris

I expect you have been brainwashed by Tim into thinking all great layouts must take 30 years to build. (he is of course wrong, the truly great take more than 50). Or just waiting for Easitrac to come along? Chris

That bus is a bit unlikely for the early 70s, though. Chris

Here's a quick tip I don't put in the instructions. The quickest way to cut the spacers to length is with a Xuron track cutter and file smooth. Beats cutting them with a saw. Chris

Hint: in this case, you will need to read them. There is one part that must be done in exactly the specified order, otherwise it goes horribly wrong. Chris

These went to Shop 2 Friday. I still need to write the instructions though. Chris

Dapol use three different factories, and I suspect this lies at the bottom of what we see. I suspect the factories tell Dapol how the design details will be, rather than the other way around. And if when you come back for more there is no capacity to make it , that's the end of it. I was quite disappointed by my Dapol 121 which everyone seemed to be raving about. It's bogies sideframes are way more chunky than they need to be. And the windows have a far more prismatic effect than other manufacturers seem to manage. Bachmann on the other hand own a factory as I understand it. Chris P.S: I am very happy with may latest modern EMU though, an 8 car unit manufactured by Hornby in N. I will leave you to work that out.

Farish do that (churn out 40 year old models). Whether they should is another question.

Probably a step too far. Might as well build the David Eveleigh kit if I want an accurate model. Chris

I found to my horror that I owned one of those later GPs. I have a whole box of the plastic version in my attic, but I also have now a metal one whjich came as a job lot on ebay with a J94 body that I did want. The funny thing is, I picked it up and realised functionally it would make an ideal 2mm loco! It weighs a whole lot and have acres of space inside for a Mashima motor. Think I might design it an 0-8-0 chassis to counteract all these teeny-weeny things that are everyone else's taste in locos. Should make a change as I can put the wheels where I like to suit the gears rather than the usual palava of having to match a published drawing. MR design for a hump-shunter for Toton yard? Or perhaps not... Also measured the 'J69' and was surprised it was not as distorted as I thought. Tanks are too high and long, but not by much. The body itself is actually not as wide as it should be for a J69, so it could even take some side overlays. Chris

You may be interested to know that three new Association cattle wagon kits have been ordered from the etchers and should be in the shops in a month or so. 1. GNR/early LNER 2. late LNER 3. late LMS (also a BR diagram). Probably only the first is in period for your layout though. Chris

With your choice of metric gears, you need 1 each of muffs 3-102a and 3-102b. The other two axles you can put on what you wish as they have no gears, so 3-100 woud be fine. If using imperial gears (64DP), you would need 2 x 3-101 and 2 x 3-100. 3.-157 is the correct frame spacer as it is the one used with thin etched frames. 3-156 is for those who still build locos by cutting out frames from thicker material themselves. Chris

No, they had some lines built to 9.42mm gauge but with the point flangeways set such that N gauge stock could pass through. And there were practically no points on those lines anyway. They also used Code 55 rail instead of Code 40 to give extra depth for the bigger N gauge flanges that were used in those days. If it was built today they would just have used Easitrac. Chris