Chris Higgs

As an update, it has been decided to release the chassis range as Association shop items, the first of which will be the 57XX, 14XX and Class 03. Watch the shop notes and the Association website for more news in due course. Chris

In which case, looks like the 10.5mm wheels will work. Which is nice, as the 10mm ones would have looked a tiny bit undersized.

Actually the 2251 body is to 1:148, so the scale driving wheel diamater would be 10.64mm. But rounding up is a dangerous thing here. The O/D over the flange will then be 11.5mm, definitely more than the prorotype, and whether that will fit inside the splashers I do not know (not owning the aorementioned loco). At some point, the AGM if not before, my chassi ethc has to be matched to the body to see whether everything has worked out as expected Hacking 1.5 from the rear of the etch will impinge upon the rear spacer, which has specifically been positioned to match the Peco location hole. So really not quite as easy as it sounds.

Never fear. I have discovered that the 2251 chassis could also be built with other combinations of spur gears which have near enough the same centres. 20:28 using M0.3 20:37 using 100DP -altohough you diefinately want the 10.5mm dirvers in this case Chris

Oh well. My interest just plumetted from low to zero. However the 2251 chassis is the correct wheelbase for a 'proper' Dean Goods, although if there was any mileage in it, I'd be likely to produce a different chassis as the frames are a lot lighter on the Dean, just as they are on a 57XX compared to a 94XX.

On the 14XX yes, it was lowered. This should leave more of the cab free of motor. The 57XX is different as I am only doing the middle axle drive version at present, which is not the one you built.

Don't stock up yet, I might change my mind! At the moment, it's looking like this: For the 14XX - the new Asscoation motor (3-257) it's about the only thing that will fit in. This motor was pretty impressive in the tests we ran, and out-performed a whole lot of larger beasts. You could reuse the Dapol motor as it is the same size, although I would hardly recommend it. Class 03 - 3-257 or an 8mm coreless motor Class 08 and 57XX - the above or 1016 coreless motor. The 08 may well take even bigger motors, such as the Tenshodos. I think you will find Julia was owed a favour by the Ixion/Dapol conglomerate, whereas you probably are not. Chris

Yes, but that was as a one-off. If ten people come asking the same question, the answer may well be different. Chris

Possibly for the GWR locos - although I understand there is another solution under development for the Manor. Almost certainly not for the WD, as fancy valve gear is not in my scope, and we don't have the wheels either. The only one I have done any work on is a chassis for the Farish 61XX - that would provide all the common parts for GWR locos such as the 43XX, Manor and Hall. Also in my mind are the Farish Jinty, Dapol Q1, and the Farish Bulleid pacifics. Chris

The 57XX, 14XX and 03 are all very close now. These are my priority as they are the easiest to get bodies for. At least, the 57XX you can buy from BR Lines or others, and the other two are at least cheap if you have to buy the whole loco. The Class 08 exists only as computer artwork. So a while away as there will be one or two test etches to do. There are plans for more.

I would have to check if the gearbox fits inside a Dean goods firebox. It was specifically designed quite high to match the height of the driveshaft on an Ixion/Dapol 3500 gall GWR tender.

Far too much work for far too few sales, I fear. The Peco one is indeed non-typical, as it's ficticious!

They were happy enough to supply Jubilee bodies, I have a box full to prove it. Still. we shall see. I think it depends on whether they have bodies over when they decide to stop production, which it is rumoured they will.

As I mentioned in the first post, the motor is just there for testing, and so see if the same gearbox design will work OK in a tank engine. In the final loco, it will be in the tender, with a UJ to the loco. Let me know how you get on buying a number of bodies from Peco. When someone else iterested approached them, they soon starting backtracking after hearing we wanted more than one. Which is whty the design has not progressed very fats, it dosen't get much priority if there is no chance of me getting a body to match it. Chris

Yes the hidden end of the gearbox has a bearing just like the end you can see.

Hmm, interesting. I have just followed what almost everyone else is doing in 2mm, using the 100DP wormset (the only ones available) followed by the 64DP final drive. There are 100DP spur gears available, although I worried about getting them meshed OK given that the design does not provide any means of adjustment. Plus the 100DP gears are made by hand, and could disappear along with their maker if he is no longer able to continue. Wheeas the 64DP are beibng replaced by the almost like for like MOD 0.4, and a finer range of MOD 0.3 (around 80DP) introduced. I shall have to think about the decision again. Chris

Just in case anyone wonders whether I ever do any work on my promised loco chassis, here is the test build of the chassis for a Peco 2251. OK, the motor should not be there (it will be in the tender) but I am just trying out how the gearbox design will work in a tank engine. Somehow I have to mount it at the far end, but Mick Simpson says just to use very heavy gauge wires from the motor to the frames. And here are a couple of shots with wheels in (only for show) I am pretty happy with the gearbox - it does still flex a little but achieved the goal of not needing any fettling to get the gears to mesh and run nicely.

Ah, now if they were into doing that we would have got see-through steam loco wheels from the start, wouldn't we? As well as crisper paint jobs, much higher proportions of models that don't need sending back, etc etc. I like my Dapol HST (glue on window aside) a lot but it doesn't hold a candle to the Fleischmann 146 Electric I bought this week. Chris

I think my caption on the collection makes that clear: "Photos of MSW overhead electriciation at Broadbottom, and the similar equipement on the GE section at Stratford"

Actually, technically speaking she is the one who broguht it up. 2mm FS modelling is about whatever you want it to be. Imüpession making, or fine detail, that's up to you. But if its no extar effort to get it right, then why not do it. Chris

I don't think that's quite true. As far as I understand it, BR adpoted a wartime LMS design as its standard. Swindon however seemed to have simply ignored this and continued to use the GWR design on WR lines. However, looking at the prototype photo of Delph in your previous post, the bufferstops in question seem to be of the LNWR design (or one of them at least). This is quite similar to the GWR design, but at the bottom of the vertical rails there is a mounting plate instead of the rail being joggled out. This is nicely masked by the mound of coal in the photo! Seems like I cannot post photos here, otherwise I would illustarte the various types. If you send me a message offlist, I can send them to you. In the course of researching some 2mm kits, I have so far amassed information on over 20 different types of rail-built bufferstops. Chris Higgs

Certainly a characteristic part of the Manchester scene. But that's a Class 100, not a 104. Chris

I dug out the photos of that day. Here you will find the most awful photo, buts it definitely a Peak, and definitely on Woodhead. and here is some scenery the view off DInting viaduct and the Trans-Pennine unit - complete with Oxford University Railway Society headboard Chris

Yep, I remember making a trip up specially from Oxford to travel Picadilly - Sheffield (reversing in the remains of Victoria to get back into Midland) and back in what must have been 1980. Trans-Pennine unit both ways. The trip was also memorable for long delays sitting in Crewe on the way back. Train was over 2 hours late by the time we reached Stafford, at which point the guard announced he had received a new running schedule, so we were now on time! Chris

Yes, I see it now. And the "Inter-City" is printed higher up the body than on the Dapol loco hauled stock. Although I am not sure if that is an actual difference between the prorotypes.