JDaniels

Thanks. I think 4863 was built when in my mid 20's. It is still stored in the much Sellotaped original box.

Thanks for that. I could never understand why the K's kit and the Airfix RTR version had the same fundamental error but that certainly explains why. I should have corrected it on 4836 but in those pre-internet days it wasn't quite as easy to pick these errors up. Also it wasn't easy to get parts even if I had picked up the error. In my naive 20's I assumed they got it right.

As I write this it's pouring with rain outside so a return to modelling or rather the blog. I tend to vacate the modelling bench in the summer for other pleasures, this year a cruise round the Baltic and more recently walking the Cleveland Way. You just know it's time to get away from the television when Channel 5 do a programme "The Great Model Railway Challenge" and no I didn't watch it. As a result of these other activities I haven't even looked at RM Web for several months. Those who have read my blog will know that I was constructing the Wills 517 0-4-2T. I was able to hand this over to Geoff Haynes at Expo EM for painting and it was returned a few weeks ago. Rather than just focus on this one model I thought it might be more interesting to have a look at the five 0-4-2T locos I have which emanate from four different manufacturers and were built over a period of 40 years. Let's take the latest, the Wills 517 kit first: I'm pleased with the result but I always think a professional paint job makes a difference. This was the first loco I constructed with CSB suspension and I think in a previous blog I mentioned that I did not notice much difference in the running over a compensated chassis. Having run it in I now think that it is better than most compensated chassis and is worth the extra effort. In one respect it is far superior and that is noise level. My other locos, when running on Blagdon, are quite noisy but are quiet in the fiddle yard. This one is very quiet even on the ballasted track. The reason for this is obvious, when ballasting Blagdon I used diluted PVA which sets like cement. Under that ballast is foam underlay but it may as well not be there for all the good it does. In future I will use Copydex as suggested elsewhere in other blogs. I think the running must be quieter as all axles are separately sprung and therefore insulated, if that is the right word, from the chassis. I also used Alan Gibson sprung plunger pick-ups and they seem to have curbed any tendency to hesitate when running. The model has Ultrascale wheels, a Mashima motor and High Level 60-1 gears, the whole assembly contained within the side tanks so nothing intrudes into the cab or under the boiler. It certainly runs as well as any Portecap fitted loco. The Wills kit represents a 517 in later life, fortunately I had good photos of both sides of 848 which was auto fitted. This meant a fair amount of additional detailing was necessary in particular the cylinder in front of the right side cab sheets which may be something to do with the auto gear. This is no criticism of the kit, every 517 seemed to be different so this is not a kit that can just be assembled without reference to any photos. The other 517 is quite different as it represents a survivor that was little changed in its' later years. Number 559 always had the straight backed bunker, open cab, most unusually a round top boiler, inside frames to the trailing wheels but, conversely, acquired the modern innovation of top feed. This loco's stumpy and severe appearance makes it a particular favourite of mine although, looking at its' condition in the two photos I have found of the original, clearly not with the crews as it looks quite unkempt. This was, I think, an M&L kit which I thought was well detailed, went together perfectly and had a number of useful alternative parts. It is fitted with a Portescap RG1219 motor and runs superbly. Looking at photos of 559 and 848 you would think they were from a different class. Leaving now the 517's, we turn to their replacement the 48xx/58xx 0-4-2T. I have three of these but without doubt the best one is 5807 in as built condition: This is an etched kit from Rod Neep marketed by a model shop in York (long since closed). To my mind this demonstrates the superior appearance of sheet metal over cast white metal (or plastic for that matter); after all it's what the protoypes were made from. I've studied many photos of the prototypes and to my mind this captures the appearance of this very popular class well.This one is another favourite.The model has a Portecap RG1624 and runs superbly. I possibly could have shoehorned the larger Portescap into 559. In those days too Portescap motors were just a bit expensive, not stupidly so. Whilst I was able to construct this etched kit, I did have a lot of problems with the Mallard 517 to the extent that I gave up. This had overlays which I could not get on with so whilst I appreciate the improved appearance of an etched kit I am reluctant to go down that route again hence the pain free Wills version. The last two 48xx were both constructed from K's kits. Those younger than me (very much younger!) may not be aware that this was the first cast white metal kit introduced, I think in about 1957. You can certainly criticise the chassis and the motors of these kits but to my mind the body, with a little work, doesn't look too bad. After the flash and casting imperfections, the biggest issue is with the smokebox door which is easily replaced. Oddly the Airfix 48xx had exactly the same issue. In those days the chassis was two strips of 1/16th inch (?) brass strip with 1/8th inch holes for the axles. The K's motors were abominations, even the earlier metal ones were Araldited together and as for the plastic ones..... I guess I must have built this kit in the mid 1970's. It now has the identity 4836 and is in as built condition. It was painted by Larry Goddard (as was 559 and 5807) and has had quite a few chassis since then. It now has what I think may be a compensated Comet chassis with High Level Gears and a Mashima motor. Once I realised the issue with the smokebox I managed to replace it and match Larry Goddards' finish. Yes you can criticise it in several respects but it is a part of my modelling history. You cannot keep throwing the last kit you made away because the latest one is better. I've tried to look after it but after 40 years or so wear and tear is apparent on the paintwork. I view it not as an accurate model but as part of my past that, within the constraints of keeping the paintwork has evolved. The last of this collection is another K's kit representing the class in BR days when one worked the daily freight to Blagdon. This loco, 1463, was shedded at Bristol St. Phillips Marsh so probably did work to Blagdon. I was given the model by a friend so after applying paint stripper I did a little detailing once again replacing that awful smokebox door. As an auto fitted version the gubbins on the buffer beams and associated piping were added and this time I kept the steps on the fireman's side of the bunker. Unfortunately I did not do a good job of removing them on 4836 (on the prototype the steps were added later) and you can still see where they were. One other change that was made later was the addition of the whistle shield. Otherwise few changes were made to the class over their life, perhaps the other most noticeable feature was top feed which was added to some of them (but not 1463). This more uniform appearance makes them easier to model than the 517's. I painted 1463 using car matt black spray and of course got what I think is called an orange peel finish. Again it has an etched compensated chassis with Mashima motor and High Level gearbox. It's interesting to compare the different kits and see what progress has been made over the years. It's also interesting to reflect on my journey through this hobby over 40 plus years, I'm fairly sure the K's 48xx (4836) was the first kit I made so even if a little ropey, it still means something to me.

Hi Mikkel, Apologies for the delay in replying. I've just returned from a Baltic cruise which possibly visited your neck of the woods (Copenhagen and Skagen). We very much liked Denmark and its' very friendly people. With regard to Pressfix transfers, thanks for your comments I might be tempted to have another go. I wonder whether they have a short shelf life as the adhesive barely works at all on the admittedly old sheets I have. I got on better with the old Methfix transfers which used meths to activate the glue. I also wonder whether the panelling so close to the transfer makes it more difficult to get the transfer to "sit" properly on the coach surface. You're also absolutely correct about the Ratio coaches. They were introduced at a time when all that was available were proprietary coaches and were a revelation when they came out, particularly as they were based on an older design when all that was mostly available were BR standards. They set the ball rolling and we have no end of prototypes to choose from. I particularly liked the Slaters coaches, I have the Dean Diagram E37 composite and the D14 brake third and the combination of plastic and metal parts (plastic sides, metal underframe and bogies) to my mind is ideal. One final

Firstly apologies as I haven't looked at the blogs for a while. After the late snow the weather here has been great and the modelling has taken a back seat. My son and I walked the Limestone Way in May and I've been organising our next walk, the Cleveland Way in September. I went to Expo EM mainly to hand over the SEF 517 to Geoff James for painting. There were a number of layouts there but one that did impress was Tim Venton's Clutton. There is a trend today for layouts the area of a Corn Flakes box but here was one, 24ft x7ft, built to the same high standards as these much smaller ones; clearly requiring a great deal more time to construct. I particularly liked the fact that it was based on a prototype location so there is little opportunity to use commercially available items. What was also good to see was that features in the landscape (I recall a particular farm) were identified by notices around the baseboard edge. I can only marvel at the dedication required, the trackwork, for example, comprised individual chairs glued to plywood sleepers. I think that would have driven me insane! I also wanted to see David Geen's stand as I was hoping to purchases a couple of his wagon kits but regrettably he wasn't able to attend. It is interesting to see the trade stands though and see what is available. It's also useful to check up on the trader's websites. I hesitate to mention this as I was taken to task the last time I strayed into this field but I notice that Wizard Models, one of the traders at Expo EM, have a selection of Mainly Trains parts available. I don't know whether they have taken over and are now manufacturing them or whether this is old stock but bearing in mind that MT sold a wonderful selection of parts that no one else does I thought others might be interested. I see for example that the Cambrian 2-4-0T chassis is available, I have a vague thought about getting another to compensate it as the fixed chassis doesn't perform spectacularly well. One of the effects of visiting a show with high quality layouts and rolling stock on display is that it prompts you to have another look at your own stock to se if that passes muster. Mostly I thought it did (I was able to correct some glossy weathering on some of my 1902 wagons - solution - stir the paint THOROUGHLY!). One obvious candidate for refurbishment was a GWR T49 brake third. Last year I had a spare Ratio chassis and wanting something different purchased the sides from Shire Scenes last year. Unfortunately my painting looked as though it had been applied with a tar brush and, having Araldited the body to the chassis, one of the brake door windows fell off and rattled about inside. I manged to prise the body off the chassis, applied paint stripper to the sides and had another go at glazing, this time using Araldite rather than Superglue. This time I opted for chocolate and cream rather than all over chocolate and although still not perfect, the finish was better. The metal sides mean the surface needs priming which, for me, makes it harder to obtain a decnt finish. Glazing Shire Scenes sides is an absolute pig as the door droplights and hinges are seperate etchings that fit on the inside which therefore means that each pair of windows and every droplight has to be glazed separately. I still managed to get some Araldite on the glazing but as it is dark inside this shows up only as a dirty window (surely that happened even on the GWR!). Using chocolate and cream meant I had to apply the lining between the two which, I read, is not gold and black (that was only used on prestige stock) but a single yellow line. Fox transfers supply a suitable decal. Lettering is a bone of contention. I have tried using Pressfix but just cannot get on with the smaller transfers. Every time I tried to apply the class designation to the doors, the individual letters floated away when I wet the tissue paper. They work for the larger items such as the coat of arms but for class designations and numbers; hopeless. I've varnished the sides and will apply the class designation and numbers once I can find transfers that do work, unfortunately Fox Transfers only do the later post war style. I detailed the chassis with brake gear (Mainly Trains did a very useful etch) and the photo shows the result. Not brilliant but it's an interesting change from the usual GWR 4 wheeled brake. To show what a difference a decent paint job (by Geoff James) can make, attached is a photo of Ratio composite sides on a Mainly Trains chassis. I have to say I like the lake livery which to my mind looks very dignified. Finally, those who read my blog may recall how taken I was with the Dapol 'O' gauge range, in particular the Stroudley Terrier. As a GWR fan though it wasn't too difficult to put this aside, the only GWR loco they did was a quite expensve 64xx 0-6-0PT. However the range is being extended with that old favourite, the GWR 48xx/14xx/58xx 0-4-2T at the same price as the Terrier. No photos at the moment but it's bound to be excellent and also tempt a lot of people, including myself to the senior scale. i hope all RM Web users have a great summer, I'm putting the modelling away for now. See you all in the Autumn.

I noticed that whilst I included a photo of the chassis in my previous entry, there wasn't one of the almost completed loco. Now rectified. It will look a lot better once decked out in GWR unlined green. I also noticed that in my previous entry I referred to the motor as being a 1620. I should have said 1420. One small point I forgot to mention which illustrates well the frustration with modelling this particular class. There are two spare lamp brackets on the left hand side of the footplate. I had the copy of GWRJ 75 at my desk and looked at several photos showing the left hand side and in every case the brackets were equidistant from the centre of the splasher. The photo of 848 though showed the right hand side. Having fitted the spare lamp brackets I looked again at the photo on the internet showing the left hand side (taken from a RMWeb post) and the rear lamp bracket was much farther back than in all the other examples, the forward one was in the same position. A small point and one easily corrected but it shows how difficult it is to model this class. One other point that I took from the photo is the footplate piping, yes it does curve down towards the rear on the prototype. I'm also intrigued as to what the prominent cylinder is on the tank top in front of the cab spectacle plate. I can only assume it is something to do with the auto apparatus. In my previous entry I noted that with this kit I used Alan Gibson plunger pickups. I would certainly use them again as they impose no more drag on the wheels than conventional wire pickups, are probably more reliable and, provided you paint the part of the bush peeping out behind the wheel (which I haven't done) unobtrusive. It is though early days. As to CSB, yes if the kit provided for it then I would use it again. An unexpected bonus with using it on an 0-4-2T is that the drive can be on the rear coupled axle and the motor and gearbox accomodated within the tank assembly. If using compensation then the rear coupled axle is compensated with the pony truck and the drive has to be on the front coupled axle with potentially gearbox or motor showing under the boiler. CSB certainly works well on this loco, it runs very well although I had to add some lead to allow the spring steel wire to deflect sufficiently. However a compensated chassis with a High Level 60:1 gearbox will also run well. This just about finishes my modelling this season, the garden and long distance walks beckon. I had hoped to be able to experiment with wooden sleeper trackwork and some ideas I have for point construction but it looks as though that will have to wait till the autumn. Trouble is I just like fiddling around with loco kits!

Mikkel, Thanks for your comment. I opted for CSB as the kit made provision for it but even then I had to drill new fulcrum holes as the ones provided seemed to low. I also found that the thickness, and therefore stiffness of the steel wire is critical. Too stiff and the weight of the body won't deflect the axleboxes and then all the wheels might not sit on the track. I found adding some lead to the inside of the tanks did the trick. I noticed I hadn't shown a photo of the body and chassis together. I'll be rectifying that now.

Well I've just about completed the kit and I'm reasonably pleased despite the shortcomings outlined in my earlier entry. I tried two new features (for me) on the chassis, CSB suspension and Alan Gibson plunger pickups. The CSB suspension does make life a little more complicated as all hornblocks have to move up and down (not sideways!) and unlike a compensated chassis, the suspension only works when weight, i.e. the body, is applied. I used spring steel wire but even here care is required as the gauge has to be such that it allows deflection, if the wire is too stiff the hornblocks will not move in the vertical plane. One advantage though is that the deflection is minimal. With a compensated chassis the hornblocks move to a far greater extent which can cause problems with the pickups which are at risk of "running off" the tyres. One point I didn't mention in my earlier entry was the method I use to obtain a working clearance in the hornblocks. I used High Level hornblocks which are already reasonably accurate but will require a little work to obtain a nice sliding fit. Rather than use a file I use fine valve grinding paste on a scrap of nickel silver rubbing the axlebox on it until I get a perfect fit in the hornblock. Of couse it is important to ensure all trace of grinding paste is cleaned away, I use an ethyl alcohol spray obtained from late lamented Maplin's. To ensure I always work on the two sides adjoining the hornblock I scratch "T" (top) on one face of the axlebox. The photo below shows the chassis after spraying with my usual Halfords Matt Black. The CSB beam, in reality the spring wire, is visible. The photo also shows the bush for the Alan Gibson plunger pick-ups. I had never used these before so was interested to see how they performed. It is apparent that the 2.5mm hole required can weaken the chassis if the depth is minimal. However it was difficult to see how current collectors could be arranged to bear on the leading wheels. I sprayed the wheels separately prior to fitting using Maskol to protect the treads and the back upon which the current collectors would bear. Having used the axle jigs to ensure the axleboxe centres were exactly the same as the coupling rods I expected little difficulty in getting the chassis to run freely. Not the case! I spent a long time moving the wheels imperceptibly to get the quartering correct and also enlarged the holes in the coupling rods slightly. There does need to be a little clearance between the coupling rod and the crankpin bush but too much and the chassis will never run freely. I tried the old trick of lining up the spokes but still spent the best part of two or three evenings trying to elinminate the slight binding that was occurring. One problem may have been that the Ultrascale wheels are not as tight on the axles as Gibsons. This makes them a little easier to fit but the downside is that they move too easily. Eventually when I did get the chassis running smoothly I applied a little Superglue to the axle ends to fix them permanently. Next issue was offering up the chassis to the body. For some reason the 1624 motor was now too long and protruded well into the cab. The Gods weren't smiling on me after all. I obtianed a 1620 from High Level and after some sweating trying to remove the worm from the 1624, managed to fit it to the 1620. The new High Level gearboxes are an improvement on the already excellent earlier ones but from past experience it seems the worms on the new ones are a tighter fit. The plunger pickups were assembled and following my normal practice (if possible) the rear wheel pickups were fitted on top of the chassis, thin phosphor bronze wire soldered to a piece of copper coated paxolin with a small gold plated bead in turn soldered to the end of the wire and bearing on the tread. For the first time I have a GWR tank loco where neither pickups or motor intrude where they shouldn't. The Alan Gibson plunger pickups worked very well with minimal pressure on the back of the wheels. As they are lightly sprung contact with the back of the tyres is maintained at all time although very thin wire must be used otherwise the operation of the plunger is restricted. I would certainly use them again. The photo below shows the chassis almost completed but still with the larger motor. The Ultrascale wheels look good, the small hole in the axle ends makes quite a difference. The outside bearings to the trailing wheel are a separate etching. I fitted these after replacing an ejector pipe I had soldered each side, I found that it fouled the wheels. You will also see that a little touching up is required. Fitting the completed chassis to the body resulted in further problems as the motor and rear pickups still fouled part of the inner casting of the tank sides even if they didn't protrude into the cab. It wasn't too difficult to remove the offending white metal but what was more of a problem was the clearance between the front driving wheels and the splashers. Whilst manufacturers helpfully provide alteranative frame spacers for EM and P4 the body clearances often become a problem, particularly with white metal kits where of necessity the material has to be thicker. Using a chunky file I managed to remove enough without going through the other side. Having done all this I tried the chassis and body combination and it worked very well. Unless you have used High Level gearboxes you have no conecption as to how quiet a locomotive will run. The plunger pickups worked impeccably and even my phosphor bronze wire ones at the rear needed no adjusting. Whilst the body had been substantially completed I decided to replace the etched lamp irons with flattened brass wire soldered not just to the surface of the white metal but I also drilled a hole to fix the wire more permanently. I always feel it is no use having a perfectly detailed model if over time parts drop off. Various scraps of metal were used to make the odd shaped cylinder in front of the right hand cab window and brass wire for the various pipes along the footplate valance. Incidentally if anyone thinks the wire on the valance on the right hand side isn't straight, it's exactly as it was on the prototype, it curved gently near the cab end. I fashioned the various auto fittings on the buffer beam and a brake cylinder to go under the rear buffer beam. These are very prominent on the prototype. I will be getting the body professionally painted as I feel a decent paint job really lifts a model and it's something way beyond me. Whilst working on the kit it did again make me consder the limitations of 4mm modelling where the smallest parts of a steam locomotive really can't be fashioned with any accuracy. If you want to see what I mean have a look at the 7mm models of 517's on the Lee Marsh models site. I'm not sure whether my blow by blow account is of interest but I try and detail the way I do things in the hope others might find it useful. If I've learnt by my mistakes so others won't make them in the first place.

I've just had an E-mail from Eileen's Emporium. They have now taken over the marketing of the Parkside Dundas kits from Peco. Whilst the kits are predominantly BR wagons, there are a number of GWR types there as well as the interesting SR CCT truck. I've never really thought about the Parkisde kits as they seem so hard to find but that should now change. Not sure I could justify any more wagon kits but the range on offer will appeal to many.

Hi Mikkel, Eileens Emporium have everything. First class service too, I ordered the wire in the morning and it had been sent early in the afternoon. Their website is well worth a look.

Hi Mikkel, Thank you for your comments. Coincidentally the shop I was working in was owned by Bob Wills, the owner of the kits. Iain,who lived nearby, often spent some time with us in the afternoon. He was always very entertaining but not sure if his story about K's kits was apocryphal but certainly at the time the popular feeling was that Wills kits were better. It was Iain who got me a temporary job in Hamblings (older readers may remember the wheels and Bilteezi card building sheets) and we worked together constructing a small exhibition layout for the shop. I don't think there can be any other class of locomotive that underwent so many changes through their life and I'm not surprised that model manufacturers have steered clear of them. Last night I had a look at the various collected bunkers that I have and the one that would be suitable is too wide so I'm stuck with the version that came with the kit. Yes you're right in that the more you research this, and far more photographs are now readily available, then the more the shortcomings become apparent. I daren't look again at the photos of 559, my other 517 0-4-2T. This one though, an M&L kit, didn't pretend to be anything other than a short wheelbase, inside rear axlebox loco and as I recall had separate Wolverhampton and Swindon bunkers as well as separate round and Belpaire fireboxes. I think now I'll get the chassis running using the Alan Gibson plunger pick-ups and see how we go from there.

How about the photos? Been so long since i last did an entry forgotten how to add photos!

This has been a frustrating project. Progress has not been helped by having to clear, and eventually sell, my mother's house. She is living with my sister and modelling has taken a back seat of late. In my last entry I commented on the difficulty in trying to find a suitable prototype. Although a large class the number of individual locos that mirror the Finecast kit is very small. I eventually settled on 848, there is a photo of this loco on the internet and, fortuitously, a photo of the other side in the GWR Journal 75. It looks as though this loco was fitted with a cab in the 1920's so had a relatively long life (relatively meaning 10 or 15 years) in this form. Some locos were not rebuilt to the form specified in the kit until the 1930's. This was also an auto fitted example which I did not really want but the numberplates for this loco are included in the kit. From this one must infer that the (accurately etched) numberplates provided with the kit (which also include 216, 519, 1164, 1427 and 1473 "Fair Rosamund") represent the prototypes covered by the kit. But they don't. In my last entry I briefly mentioned the smokebox. Looking into this more closely this seems to be significant error as in later years the locos (including 848) appeared to have a drumhead type riveted smokebox. Earlier photos show a flush riveted smokebox that appears to wrap around rather than sit on top of the cylinder casting and it is this that is provided with the kit. I know we have readers with a far greater knowledge of these locos than I and I'd be interested to know the reason for the change. The RCTS history makes no mention of this but comparing the photo with the model it does show up, particularly the lack of rivets. All of this has dampened enthusiasm to get on with the kit although as you can see from the photo the major part of the body has been constructed. If someone else is about to make the kit my starting point was to file down the floor (which acts as a spacer between the two tank / cab and bunker side assemblies) until the bunker back plate is a snug fit. Do not, as I did, attempt to fix the front buffer beam until the front part of the boiler is firmly fixed to the rear boiler / tank top. The position of the boiler, once fixed, will determine the exact position of the buffer beam as it locks the two sides in place and you would not want it pointing in a different direction from the boiler. It was quite impressive how accurately the parts all fitted together. Older readers may remember K's kits which could be an absolute pig. In a very early life I worked in a model shop on Saturdays and a regular visitor was one Iain Rice. I remember him telling me that K's kits were taken out of the mould whilst still hot which caused them to distort. Wills (as SE Finecast was know then) kits were always easier to build. I always use low melting point solder wherever possible. With a low wattage soldering iron (mine is an Antex 25w which helpfully packed up midway through construction) with a very fine tip it is very difficult to melt the white metal castings although you may see from the photo I managed to do this on the inside of the cab side top. It is also important to use a good flux, I use the appropriate Carrs one (can't remember the label colour). One advantage of using solder is that it can be used as a filler. The critical gap between the two parts of the boiler (level with the front of the tanks) was filled this way and sanded down. I'm aware though that a lot more cleaning up is needed. As you can see from the photograph, I substituted a brass dome, safety valve cover, whistles and some other small items for the white metal versions. There is also a brass chimney, all these came from Alan Gibson. I always think it best to replace any delicate white metal castings such as the whistles, smokebox door dart and steam cleaning lance with something more substantial as you just know they would break off once the model has been painted. I also had a fret of window bars from Mainly Trains and I soldered these over the rear spectacle openings. The chassis is nicely etched and very well detailed with full brake gear (alternative brake blocks are provided). I think I mentioned earlier that provision is made for CSB suspension and I opted to try this. The only other alternative to this is to have the coupled wheel axles fixed and this was unacceptable. For preference I would have used compensation. Incidentally, the chassis fret also includes some body parts, the lamp and fire irons which is a nice touch. I thought the lamp irons were overscale but comparing them with photographs it is clear that they should be fairly chunky. This CSB suspension caused a few issues as the High Level hornblocks didn't work with the settings specified in the instructions. The fulcrum points are helpfully marked but if using setting "A" as specified, the beam, in reality a length of spring steel wire, is obstructed by the hormblock guides. As the instructions state that the hornblocks should sit at the top of the cut-out in the frames I could really see no solution. I eventually opted to use the top setting for the beam ("C") and drilled new fulcrum holes above the old ones. The other issue was determing the gauge of wire to be used, Chris Gibbons said this depended on the weight of the body and the steel wire I had was too stiff. Fortunately Eileens Emporium have a choice of steel wire and I found that the thicker wire I obtained from them (still thinner than the one I used originally) looks to provide the right deflection. The wire can be replaced with a different gauge if necessary. Hornblocks were set using a jig (in reality two axles turned down to accomodate the holes in the connecting rods) but I do find that with the crankpins available reaming out the hole to provide clearance means coming perilously close to the edge of the metal. The crankpins are from Ultrascale, as are the wheels. One big advantage of CSB over compensation is the ability to drive to either axle. The ideal would be to drive to the rear coupled axle (impossible with compensation) and have motor and gears within the tank assembly. For once the Gods took pity on me, and using a High Level Road Runner + Gearbox with a Mashima 1624 motor the whole assembly fitted between the front of the tanks and the boiler backplate with no more than 2mm to spare at either end. As you will see from the photograph, a great advantage of the High Level gearboxes is the ability to place the drive to the axle under the motor making the whole assembly more compact. A piece of copper coated paxolin is provided in the kit but for the life of me I cannot see where pick-ups could be fitted. Against my better instinct I think I will have to use the Alan Gibson plunger type. I don't like anything that restricts the freedom to check the quartering and free running of the chassis which is why I have an aversion to gears that have to be glued to the axle. I believe though that the later version imposes far less drag on the wheels. So this is progress to date. I'm pondering whether it would be possible to wrap thin brass round the smokebox embossed with the rivets but I think there would be problems fixing it and it could as a consequence look worse than it does at the moment. One extreme option would be to cut off the bunker and substitute it with one of the earlier versions I have in my spares box. All of the above means I'm having difficulty in mustering much enthusiasm to get on with the job. I'll do what I always do if things aren't working out; stop and think. I'll report again once further progress has been made.

Looks good Mike. I guess you do have to make your own frame spacers. Even Kirstie Allsop was cutting out brass on the TV last night. Hope you didn't get through as many blades as she did.

Yes Mikkel, it's even more difficult than I imagined. I spent last night poring through photographs, and there are 10 or so prototypes that are closest to the kit although I only have photos of half the ones fitted with a Collett cab. One issue though is the smokebox, all the photos I have show that this was riveted whereas the kit provides for a flush finish. Early photographs of the class, 524 at Abbotsbury in 1908 for example, show that at least some have a flush finish with no rivets but I've found no photos of the class in the 1920's with this feature. I wondered whether the boiler fitted dictated the smokebox but think this is unlikely to be the case. When you study the photos you appreciate the variations in the class are staggering. One had a domeless boiler with a very tall safety valve cover that looked really odd. Yes it's a shame that the kit is so restrictive. The M&L kit provided for Swindon or Wolverhampton bunkers and Belpaire or round top fireboxes. As examples with the older bunkers survived into the 1930's that kit was suitable for a wide time span, say 1900's to 1930's. I've now got to select a prototype but the quality of the photo and availability of nameplates will decide which of the ten I select. But that's not till Thursday, off to Bath behind "Oliver Cromwell" tomorrow!

I've come to a dead halt with the construction of this kit. The chassis commendably includes three different types of brake shoes, two types of brake pull rods and three types of guard irons. All you need to do is find a good photo of your chosen prototype and work from there. It wasn't until I looked more closely at the kit and prototype photos did I realise that my chosen prototype, 540, was quite different from the kit. Firstly, as the kit is based on the Collett cab version initially that restricts you to those 67 examples so fitted. However even that apparently large number has to be pared back as many of these had the upper cab side corner of the bunker formed as a convex curve rather than the concake curve in the kit. Also, a few of those examples still retained their round top boiler. The biggest issue to my mind though is the difference between those examples with frames modified at Swindon and those modified at Wolverhampton. The Swindon conversions had straight steps and a very deep footplate valance whilst those modified at Wolverhampton had the more elegant steps with curved plating that the kit portrays along with a much narrower footplate valance. The steps in the kit can be cut back to represent the Swindon pattern and the depth of the valance in the kit more closely represents the Swindon conversion. Of the Collett cab versions, only 4 were modified at Wolverhampton.The impression I have from studying photos though is that the depth of the Swindon conversion valance can vary although always clearly deeper than the Wolverhampton conversions. I've attached a photo of the sides along with the chassis, smokebox and smokebox door. The valance to my mind is not as deep as it appears on some Swindon examples. Talk of the smokebox and smokebox door demonstrates another difference. Most of the smokeboxes on the 517's were riveted although clearly other photos show plain versions which is what the kit has. The smokebox door in the kit is of a plain, slightly concave, pattern as used for example on the 48xx 0-4-2T but many of the 517's, like 540, had a dished smokebox door with rows of rivets above the door itself. Finally, 10 of the Collett cab version had inside trailing wheel bearings. I already have one of these, 559, so particularly wanted the outside frame version which I think is more typical of the class. Most of the above came from RCTS part 6 which is a mine of information. I did find a photo of one Collett cab example not mentioned in the book though, 558. It's a case of finding a prototype that matches the kit, I'm spending more time looking through my books than modelling! It also needs to be a photo that shows the front of the loco. What I may have to do is use a photo of a prototype that was fitted with a Collett cab before that fitment was made but otherwise matches the kit. The chassis is an intricate fret that builds up into a sturdy frame. I have cut out all the hornblocks as I'm going to use CSB suspension. One particularly clever touch was to have the two sides of the coupling rod etched one over the other so all that was needed was to fold them back to back using the half etched lines. The two sides came together perfectly aligned for soldering. The etch also includes some parts for the body such as fire irons hooks and lamp irons. No wonder the GWR championed standardisation!

With help from my son who has a Flickr account I can now attach a better copy of my photo. The file reduction involved in putting the photos on the blog does mean some detail is lost. I have been able to zoom in to some of the detail which is quite revealing showing small flaws in the lining out. https://flic.kr/p/HDi7Sc One thing I find interesting is that despite the paintwork being perhaps 150 years old the varnish has weathered to nothing more than an off white, a long way from what we term "cream." I wonder whether the oft quoted theory that cream upper panels were based on weathered varnish involves some artistic licence, in my personal opinion cream looks better with chocolate than off white and maybe those who decided these things thought the same.

Sorry I haven't mastered the art of copying photos.

Pete, Thanks your comments. The photo I took was at the other end of the coach where the number is clearer. Having looked more closely at the lining yes it could well be dark brown but it's so thin that you wonder why they bother. The coach is a remarkable survivor. I never realised it was in the museum, we only went in because of the transport connection although my wife would rather have gone shopping. Hopefully my photo appears below but it loses something because of the reduction in file size. I spent some time studying the coach as it gave a vivid impression of what travelling on the GWR in the 19th century must have been like. Let's hope it's back on display soon.

Mikkel, This is very interesting, thanks for the effort you have put into this, as has been observed elsewhere this is a great forum for sharing information. It does seem that in these accounts personal views seem to take priority over methodical accuracy but I suppose the people writing this would never have believed that 100 plus years on modellers would be debating the minutae of railway liveries. With regard to the coach livery, some time ago I attached a photo of the BG coach at the Bristol Transport Museum. I gather that, very regrettably, this is now in store but as I recollect, when withdrawn it was made into a house (hovel may be a more appropriate word) and panelling was applied over the coach side. As a result, when discovered, the side was in exactly the condition it was when withdrawn. The original photo, before the file size was reduced, shows that the coach numbers were in the typeface as described by K14, but yellow with a reddish brown, perhaps slightly lighter, shading, and located in a panel over the door window. Incidentally, although difficult to differentiate between yellow and gilt the numbers on the Bristol coach (319-D) are distinctly more yellow than the gold "First" lettering. The "First" etc. lettering style looks to have never changed until WW2 when a more modern typeface was introduced. The upper panels were white rather than cream but then it's well known that this was a result of the varnish aging. The upper panels had very thin black lining, it wouldn't be noticeable in 4mm, whilst the lower panels were lined in black with a thin white line either side. Bolection mouldings were unpainted mahogany. Incidentally, what did the "D" after the coach number denote? Fortunately a lot of your research backs up what is already known and I think the Moores Monthly Magazine was a reference used in the RCTS GWR livery publication. The GWR magazine must also be a mine of information on these matters. Thanks again for sharing this, it's much appreciated.

Thanks Don, I still have the instructions for the Mallard kit. Like the SEF kit that only comes with the later bunker. I hated the kit, in particular the overlays. Rather than using a punch to knock out the rivet details, the Mallard kit comes with a thin NS overlays that goes over the thicker NS body. I couldn't satisfactorily bond the overlays to the body and ended up throwing the thing in the bin as my efforts began damaging the parts. I think it's the only kit I've actually thrown away and it put me off buying another etched kit. I did though summon up the courage to try again and was pleasantly surprised, the two I have made, from Peter K and Puffers (Rod Neep) were a pleasant surprise and went together well.

Thanks Mikkel No not quite that quick. I need to get the gears (High Level) but SEF did supply a Mashima motor. They have some in stock, as do High Level. One problem I had with the M and L kit was a driving wheel loose on the axle. It slipped too easily. In a fit of extravagance I ordered Ultrascale wheels to replace the Gibson ones but have discovered that my temporary solution of superglue seems to have cured the problem. The Ultrascale wheels can go on the SEF kit. They are supposed to be good, at that price they should be solid gold!

To add to my recent blogs on the subject, attached (I hope) are photos of my 517 0-4-2T, 559. This was built many years ago and has a Portescap motor with the MJT gearbox conversion.

Hi Mikkel, I'm afraid the firebox is cast integral with the boiler and tank tops. The M & L kit, if you can get it, would be ideal for you as there were two separate fireboxes in the kit. Just to be different I modelled mine on 559 which retained the round topped firebox to the end and also, unusually, had top feed appartus. I committed the cardinal sin of modelling a particular example of the class based on one indistinct photo claiming to show 559. When I did acquire two much better photos I was relieved to see that the model was accurate in most respects although one showed the Swindon bunker with an internal box like arrangement, the other without. I'll put a photo of 559 on my blog.

I've just had a closer look at the contents and the chassis in particular is very impressive. The kit even includes the "glazing" for the spectacle plates. Also included are proper handrail knobs, not those split pins although perhaps that really does show my age! Also, the bunker sides are cast with the valance as one piece and it would be a brave person who decided to cut those off and replace them with an earlier style of bunker. It would have been easier if the bunker was a separate casting. So really, if you didn't want to do too much work on the kit you're restricted to a 517 in it's later guise, say from 1924 onwards. I can't help feeling this is a missed opportunity, perhaps a version could be produced with an earlier style of bunker, most of the rest of the kit would be unchanged.