97xx

I've been trying them and this is the result applying them to whitemetal body directly, then priming 24+ hours later. The process was: Paint MicroSol on to body Use water to slide transfers A touch of MicroSet where they didn't look flat enough A day to dry off FWIW, I did try Humbrol DecalFix: I think it was 'better' in that the transfer carrier was less visible when dry, but the issue I found with long thin lines of rivets was that it softened the decal so much that it was extremely hard to lay straight - which is sort of what you want with rivets/welds. The tops of the cladding over smokebox and middle of boiler have arc weld line transfers, rest are rivets

Just spotted this post, and back in the 1970s as a teenager I attempted my first scratch build - which was a 36xx from, as I recall, some drawings in a Railway Modeller. (I don't suppose anyone recalls which edition?) Brass footplate, tank sides and roof. Rolled plasticard boiler (had to do the early parallel-sided version!), firebox from layered plasticard, and smokebox door fashioned from Plastic Padding. Fittings turned in my dad's electric drill from brass rod, excepting chimney and valve cover. X04 motor and Romfords. 1/16" x 1/2" brass chassis sides. I've just tidied it up - replacing the pony trucks (which were a bit of brass sheet with a U-shaped plasticard section glue over the axle) with solid milled brass ones which 'fill' the underside properly. Also put new Romfords as the mazak-centred originals had a bit of a 'wobble', and Gibson pony wheels. I replaced the coupling rods - which I remember making from a baked beans can (steel for strength!!) - with Gibson ones which amazingly fitted the chassis I drilled from a drawing with a hand drill! New pickups too. I know it's still very amateurish, but it's a nostaligic reminder of modelling days past and what can be done with a Tilley blowlamp soldering bit (!!) and hand tools. It is a very decent runner now. EDIT: found a picture of it at work in the 1970s.

http://www.leedsstedmantrust.org/drawings.html or https://www.brightontoymuseum.co.uk/index/Henry_Greenly_blueprints Drawing L.34?

Did you look here? Original maybe only? https://www.lswr.org/services/drawings/locomotives.html

Yes I was wondering of that was the case. I've been tempted by a few but the woeful quality variation in chassis of ones I'm interested in has somewhat put me off.

FWIW, they work really well applied to the cleaned WM and them primed over. Good to lift the horrendous quality of my K's Q1 tender! Applied to the 'window' lower rail and frames. Have started on the loco body which requires many many inches of transfers, and at right angles.

I should have added 4mm as I did spot JE from another post but realised they're 7mm. However, given my shoddy title, any scale as it may help others, but if we can note which one!

What (preferably brass/nickel silver) diesel kits are about out there? I'm aware that many makers seem to go in and out of business, so what is currently available? Would people be able to indicate quality/completeness as well? Thanks.

Jim - yes I'm sure you're right. The sanding out, filling and priming seems to have worked. All in all an odd experience!

@ROSSPOP A really smart shunter's truck or should I say 'Chariot'? Thanks, yes, I think I'm not short of chemicals and cleaners, just that none of them have worked on this one patch. I have to say the rest of the acrylic primer (Railmatch 2506) has stuck to the whitemetal like the proverbial to the blanket. You've prompted me to dig out my 00 one, which also shows a buffer height discrepancy - the model was built exactly per instructions and parts, but I wonder if the wheels are 1mm too big?

An update: the attempt to isolate with matt enamel varnish did not work either. There simply is a visibly porous patch that has something in it that cannot be eradicated. I was tempted to ultrasonically clean it, but with all those whitemetal soldered joints decided that wasn't likely to be a very smart move. Basically I've had to sand the whitemetal area right down and fill with Isopon P38. Hopefully this will now work...

Am on my second rebuild of 40-year old WM kits. Both were dissembled and stripped with green Nitromors, and subsequently first repainted in acrylics a month or so later which went without issue. Just trying to prime the tender of the second one - and have small patches where the acrylic primer will not dry. It almost does but has very slightly sheen in a patch - which then easily comes off with your nail. Stripped it, sanded, cleaned, degreased, and repeat - same. So, repeat but with a dusting of Upol Etch-8. Same. I know WM is porous but this doesn't usually cause issues when carefully cleaned, dried and degreased which this has been, just as was the last one I did a few months ago without issue. It was originally painted with cellulose I'm pretty sure, as was the last one I stripped and rebuilt. Usually (40-year old!) cellulose is stable if painted over - especially air-brushed thinly with water-based acrylic! Intuitively I'd blame Nitromors in the pores, but it's been apart for 6+ months, cleaned and degreased etc., blow dried (pretty hot) and so on. Last one was done the same way (probably less care) and I had no issue. It was also water soluble Nitromors I used both times. I'm at wit's end now, as the endless spraying and removing is starting to spoil the rest of the finish. Am now trying a thin coat of enamel matt varnish to see if this dries hard as a sort of 'isolator'. What worries me is if this happens with the loco body - the tender (Bulleid Q1) is devoid of any detail luckily, but the loco will have a slew of Archer rivet detail added (onto WM as this works really well) and clearly I cannot afford any sanding down on that one... Help! Thank you...

I may well follow suit. It did strike me that if I machine up my own I could (a) set the roller bearings at around 1:20 and (b) render the gauge finely adjustable. Perhaps the former might encourage central running and/or less propensity to 'climb', although I suspect the latter is far more down to eccentricity of the tyre/wheel - as soon as the wobble comes around, the tyre now contacts only one roller of the pair and this maybe reduces drag and causes the climb. Obviously I can see yours has infinitely adjustable gauge... Anyway a potentially interesting 'exercise' whilst we have time on our hands...

Thanks Alex. Wasn't sure whether this is too detailed to post and I should PM you, but as a first-time chassis builder I'm very interested in the practical issues of minimum radius. Third radius is about 505mm? So, seems impressive what your 8-coupled chassis manages. Would you be able to tell me: What the outside width of your frames plus axle bush is? What sideplay you've built in/washered for/allowed for on each axle? The axle spacing? On the compensated Q1 chassis I have just built this was a bit of a journey of experimentation to ensure it would do 24" radius if needed. I can do all the precise Versine calculations on sideplay but the practical aspects of rails and flanges and B2B seemed to show I'd have to build and test. My answers are: Frame: 11.5mm (on the two compensated axles), 13.5mm on the rigid axle which has bushes Sideplay Rigid axle: less than 0.5mm (two 0.25mm washers on a 14.5mm axle) Sideplay Compensated middle axle: 2.5mm (two 0.25mm washers on 14.5mm axle on 11.5mm frames) Sideplay Front compensated axle: < 2mm (two 0.5mm washers on ditto) Axle spacing: 32 and 34mm I've said 24", but it would appear that mine would also do 'third radius'. Be interested in what others think on issues of sideplay. Maybe I should post separately, so sorry if I'm digging too deep in wrong place.

I have the Gaugemaster built-in one but tend to find the locos want to climb off of the rollers. Sometimes I need to put a stop block of foam in 'front' to hold them. Does this happen with the TC one?

Resurrecting a very old thread, but I too have a Gaugemaster. The issue I tend to have is that the locos tend to want to climb off of it. Is that just me or is it that the rollers aren't really that well-profiled or free to roll?

It all seems to have eased after 10 mins on the rollers, rods on. I was only testing it on effectively 3m of back and forth with a couple of points so i think lack of running in was an issue. Of course, the 'running in' has only sought to remove a tight spot through wear and tear but as it was minimal enough to be OK, I think...

I might struggle to replicate as I'm tight to the backhead, but that's a neat solution.

I'll certainly do another "rods off" test and report back.

Just built a compensated chassis and am using a Hiflier HL gearbox with Mashima and a 12mm flywheel. It's constructed to instructions, with axle bushes soldered and reamed into the box frame. The 'box sits between the etched frames which are also bushed and reamed through. There's less than 0.5mm max sideplay between 'box and frame bushes. As many will know, the motor is cantilevered up and forward (on mine as driving rear axle) and in mine arranged slightly on an upward axis versus boiler centreline - mainly to keep underboiler clear as much as possible. On supporting the motor/'box: the negative wire is 0.6mm brass wire coming from the frame with a 'loop' in it to give a little flex. The positive was initially a thin multistrand. What I've noticed is that the motor/'box assembly noticeably tries to 'torque steer' off of the centreline if viewed overhead. This mechanically makes sense but I was slightly surprised by how much given it's all in fixed bearings (my one fixed axle). It was contributing to a slightly 'binding' running. So, I've replaced the positive with an insulated 0.6mm brass wire pretty much straight up from the pickup. This has improved the running. However, as a first attempt I wonder if I'm missing something? What do people recommend please? A couple of questions come to mind: Should I dispose of the 'loop' and basically hardwire the motor/'box assembly to the frames? I'd still use brass wire so there'd be a very small amount of give which seems sensible - so as not to twist the box on the axle. I built the 'box per hL instructions but would I be wise to add a bit of bracing to the top near the axis of the worm? (P.S. I've carefully checked the rods for freedom - they are all broached and polished - cocktail stick and honing paste. I used a 6" fretsaw blade - so really sensitive and flexy - to tickle each rod when I saw what looked like a tight spot - but each rod moved freely).

Lovely job. Yes, I'd certainly be interested in the chassis. Did you go rigid, or compensated in some form? What minimum radius did you design/build for?

Agree fully re usefulness of the circles - like target shooting with diopter sights, where the eye has a natural ability to 'centre' circles within circles. All I would add is that once punched, it's the Devil's own job to persuade the drill to another place...!

As a beginner into chassis building, I would endorse the 'making frames fit rods' approach, and the excellent suggestion to 'pin' things through into a block of suitably hard wood. I found that particularly sensible to ensure rod etches were sweated precisely together too. On the subject of centre punching in the 'right' place, I've done metal machining for quite a while and still find that it can be troublesome to pop right on the intersection. It's surprising/annoying how often one can end up punching very fractionally off centre! Two things I use that help: 1. Automatic centre punch I bought one which is small and lightly-sprung (adjustable as well). It is really useful for getting down to the workpiece and seeing exactly where the punch is going without having to wield a hammer at the same time. 2. Optical centre punch See pic below. At the outset, let me say it's not ideal for small items, but I have used it on chassis sides. Probably obvious how it works but: (a) Place brass holder over hole (my 'not ideal' comment is because the holder is ca. 3/4" dia) (b) Insert perspex alignment plug and look down it (the shoulder gathers light so you can see the hole area 'illuminated') (c) Align the etched cross-hair on plug with precise hole centre (d) Hold brass holder, withdraw perspex plug, and insert hardened punch (e) Tap and you're done. Needless to add there's nothing like a pillar drill or milling machine to get all axle centres perfectly aligned - back to the principle of at least all three are in the same line, be it spot on or not. It's what my chemistry teacher used to describe as 'exactly about' when referring to weighing out reagents - e.g. if you need 2g, it doesn't matter if its 1.99g or 2.00g or 2.01g provided you know what it is...

I remember as a boy using an Archimedean drill to make handrail knob holes. Now I'd use a pin chuck and a swaged bit of the 2.x mm down to 0.5mm or whatever as they're more resilient. However, fancied getting another one for the 'number' drills and sub 0.5mm stuff. Was surprised to find how cheap they are - around £4. However, the one I got, from a very well-known supplier, is utter rubbish. It was annoyingly fitting with a return spring which was so strong you'd break the bit straight off if you tried to use it, so that came off. What I was left with was still useless - the bits just were not being held concentrically, which is critical with tiny bits. No wonder when you look at how the collets have been cut. So, I managed to find a decent one - made by Horotec for all of £9. Super true, and rather better made. I never wanted a 'cheap' one, I wanted one that works... We are submerged in a sea of counterfeit/dangerous/useless rubbish from China - I am now going out of my way to avoid the badge of shame "Made in China" wherever possible.

Nearly ready for primer...