Modern Traction Kits

[MarkC]

One of these days I will get round to building the MTK Class 40 kit that I have - but I suspect that it will need 2 motor bogies...

[Ceptic]

I successfully motorised an Airfix (ex-Kitmaster) Battle of Britain using a Triang Princess chassis with Triang Bulleid wheels installed. I also still own a Merchant Navy made from two Airfix BoB bodies, a Wrenn/Hornby Dublo tender with scratchbuilt brass sides and a Wrenn/HD West Country loco chassis with the valve gear cut down (that's almost sacrilege except I didn't do the cutting down myself!).

 

Sorry if this is taking us away from the MTK topic a bit.

 

Merchant Navy 35015 Blue - 1 by Jeffrey Lynn, on Flickr

 

Now,  That's the BLUE livery I REMEMBER !

[Barry O]

Over the years I have built a number of MTK kits aka Modern Shrapnell...

 

A few ex LMS coaches in 00 but mainly BR DMUs

 

This includes the Derby Single Unit, Derby ""Scottish" 3 car DMU, Metro Cammell 3 Car and a Trans Pennine unit. Mike Edge drew up the Griddle Car for the Trans Pennine...Colin produced it then charged full price for one... a real character!

 

Biggest problem for all units..badly formed aluminium body shells, poor castings and those flipping awful seat strips!

 

Baz

[lapford34102]

I've built quite a number of MTK kits over the years and had met Colin more than once. I think, as others have pointed out, that what he did  needs to be seen in the context of the time. It's probably no exaggeration to say he singlehandedly kick started "modern image" modelling. His output was prodigious and whilst no-one has ever claimed his kits were perfect in terms of RTR standard of the time, usable. His cast W/M Class 74 needed two Hornby Class 25 m/bogies but would pull anything and was 40 years ahead of any likely RTR version.

Yes, the kits needed work and in those preWWW days if you needed advice you asked around or figured it out for ourselves, it was called modelling. The end result ?

Look no  further http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/95231-tonbridge-west-yard/

Final outing at the Canterbury show in Jan 

 

Stu

[hayfield]

D600  Sold for the asking price of £36 inc postage, looks to have been one of the better models with castings on the face of it not too distorted and without too much flash. If you manage to sort out the chassis will be a great mover og stock, owing to its weight

 

A Wagon Basher sold for just over £60 with postage, ready built but comes with a Branchlines Park Royal chassis and detail kits, these may have been the Items required, also how well would they fit the Wagonbasher?

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/WAGGON-MASCHINENBAU-DIESEL-RAILBUS-KIT-OO-Gauge/292883733365?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

 

Also on sale from the same person was a built was a Bristol/EWC rail car which sold for just over £82 inc postage also with the same chassis and detail packs

 

I was interested in them for the Branchlines kits, but the final prices were too high especially as I had no idea if the Branchline kits were compatible with the MTK kitsm My MTK Bristol and Anbrico AC railcars will have PCB chassis and High level mechanisms, having said this I could still use the Etched W iron method with DS10's and a cheap motor mount 

[hayfield]

I've built quite a number of MTK kits over the years and had met Colin more than once. I think, as others have pointed out, that what he did  needs to be seen in the context of the time. It's probably no exaggeration to say he single handedly kick started "modern image" modelling. His output was prodigious and whilst no-one has ever claimed his kits were perfect in terms of RTR standard of the time, usable. His cast W/M Class 74 needed two Hornby Class 25 m/bogies but would pull anything and was 40 years ahead of any likely RTR version.

Yes, the kits needed work and in those preWWW days if you needed advice you asked around or figured it out for ourselves, it was called modelling. The end result ?

Look no  further http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/95231-tonbridge-west-yard/

Final outing at the Canterbury show in Jan 

 

Stu

 

 

Stu

 

I do accept you view about them being of their time, I also like them along with K's kits for the same reason, yes he did over a very short time produce lots of models of modern prototypes when the RTR choice was very limited and to be quite frank not very accurate.

 

The trouble being that many who bought these kits had little or no ability to find assistance in building them, additionally the chassis MTK designed for these were unbuildable. Today we have the internet which is full of good tutoring posts or sites like RMweb where assistance can be sought. As I said the availability of seemingly unlimited  unbuilt old kits is a testament to the issues faced by modelers in the 60's, 70's & 80's. Too many failed at the first hurdle partly by being too ambitious on their first choice of model, but the majority were defeated by badly designed and made kits.

 

I belong to a large club, there are a few good modellers, most though just buy RTR and devote their modelling time to the scenic side and running trains. Finding mentors to teach building techniques is still very difficult, but whilst buying online is far easier these days that the old fashioned mail order or ordering from the model shop, most modellers do not have the luxury of going back to the shop for advice.

 

Having said all of this its good to see many still enjoying the challenge of building them, I am firmly in the camp that the enjoyment of the challenges that are thrown up building them outweigh their faults   

[reevesthecat]

I seem to remember he did a Blackpool centenary tram, I think I saw one in tower models around the time of the tramway centenary. Does anyone else remember this and know if I can get one anywhere? Purely for nostalgia don't think I would have the skill to build it!

Cheers

Mark

[hayfield]

Despite my dislike of MTK steam outline locos, I may have inadvertently bought one. There was a body and chassis kit of a whitemetal kit built loco without motor, wheels and gears. My first thoughts was that as it was a whitemetal kit not resin it could have been a Wills kit, but it looked wrong for a Wills loco. Firstly the style of the chassis also the proportions of the loco.

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/A-4mm-SCALE-KIT-PART-MODEL-OF-A-U-S-A-DOCK-TANK-/113467145323?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&nma=true&si=3lCZ0YNx7Qndt%252B4H1UdZwPRXp0Y%253D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc

 

As soon as I put in a cheeky bid of £20 the penny dropped, in the back of my mind I thought MTK did a version also perhaps Q kits did one, both kits being of the same quality. It had a bid of £7.95 but came with free postage, so I was not in for much money. Thankfully the other bidder thought the same and their top bid was £8.33. Mine for £8.83 which included postage, I tend to value postage at £4.50, so to feel better the true cost after postage is £4.33

 

The first job will be to to access the loco, I think the chassis if the loco is to be kept is to bin it and invest in a Southeastern Finecast chassis kit, I doubt the running quality (or longevity) of a whitemetal chassis especially with whitemetal coupling and connecting rods. A Southeastern Finecast chassis kit is £37.50 and I guess has the cylinders included, If I bought a set of Gibson Coupling and connecting rods/valve gear would set me back £13 without crossheads and no guarantee they would work with the whitemetal chassis.

 

At worse I could put a package together with wheels, motor etc. Take some decent photos and sell it on with a better description and recoup my outlay (cannot describe it as an investment)

 

Still I will wait patiently for a few days and see what arrives. I guess at worse it could be a static model to occupy a bit of space in the motive department (if I had one) Still this is the joy of discovering Items on the net

[kevinlms]

Stu

 

I do accept you view about them being of their time, I also like them along with K's kits for the same reason, yes he did over a very short time produce lots of models of modern prototypes when the RTR choice was very limited and to be quite frank not very accurate.

 

The trouble being that many who bought these kits had little or no ability to find assistance in building them, additionally the chassis MTK designed for these were unbuildable. Today we have the internet which is full of good tutoring posts or sites like RMweb where assistance can be sought. As I said the availability of seemingly unlimited  unbuilt old kits is a testament to the issues faced by modelers in the 60's, 70's & 80's. Too many failed at the first hurdle partly by being too ambitious on their first choice of model, but the majority were defeated by badly designed and made kits.

 

I belong to a large club, there are a few good modellers, most though just buy RTR and devote their modelling time to the scenic side and running trains. Finding mentors to teach building techniques is still very difficult, but whilst buying online is far easier these days that the old fashioned mail order or ordering from the model shop, most modellers do not have the luxury of going back to the shop for advice.

 

Having said all of this its good to see many still enjoying the challenge of building them, I am firmly in the camp that the enjoyment of the challenges that are thrown up building them outweigh their faults   

I don't know, but the photo of the original kit cabs in post 16 lower photo, makes me wonder if its worth the effort.

 

A challenge is one thing, but a kit is supposed to be buildable.

[hayfield]

Kevin

 

The top kit was far worse as far as the window frames on the loco fronts were not formed. Thankfully they have been replaced

 

The bottom kit should be far easier to remidy, the cab sides are nice and square. One front is far worth than the other, the benefit of white metal is that it is when warmed quite mailable. At worst if it breaks it can be repaired with a bit of solder

 

Soldering white metal may be quite daunting to those not competent with this material. On the other hand those who are very competent even use solder as a filler to repair castings. The trick as usual is to have the right tools and materials, knowledge of how to use them and practice.

 

In my opinion soldering is the best construction method for all but the smallest parts. Provides the strongest joints, which sets almost instantly and if 70 degree solder is used the joint can be unsoldered easily with a bit of steam. Far quicker than waiting for glue to set fully and no sticky residue. Joints can be beefed up if required with additional solder. Castings can be reformed if required. There are a few downsides but nothing is perfect

[hayfield]

 

Loco arrived less the coupling and connecting rods, certainly I think not a Southeastern Finecast, nor made in the style of MTK, just a complete guess a Q kit?

 

 

Built quite well, but as the chassis is whitemetal and the axle holes not bushed I dont think its worth investing too much time using it 

 

 

No idea if its very accurate, have a couple of plans and sections in the 2 books. Looks OK with the exception of one cylinder looks bent

 

 

Or if a Southeastern Finecast chassis will fit, I am in two minds whether to have a go as the valve gear is very complicated and no Idea if the SEF chassis will fit

[mike hughes]

Has anyone got a list of what O gauge MTK allegedly produced? 

 

Michael

[BernardTPM]

There's an MTK Class 25 on ebay at the moment, passably built, in BR TOPS Blue, described as a Class 20 (even though it says 25 208 on the side!). A friend of mine used to have one of these too; it was massively heavy.

[great central]

Mentioned earlier in thread, this is an MTK standard class 5 bought from York show club sales stand many years ago when I was rather tight for money. Being out of work at the time the trip was something of a treat anyway, there was also a DJH one available, they were priced at £10 and £20 if memory serves correctly. Would have preferred the DJH one but the MTK looked quite well cast so went with that. It was around 1980 I think.

It came with etched coupling rods I think, the rest of the valve gear from odds and ends possibly Nu Cast?

Intended to use the then current Hornby tender drive set up from Evening Star, along with other parts of the valve gear I decided to modify it for loco drive as I couldn't afford an Evening Star to chop up. It utilised an XO4 from one of my Triang locos.

Finished as the loco to work the final South Yorkshireman along the GC route, it went on to become one of the last standard 5s running in the North West.

The proportions look a bit off, photo taken on a phone, it looks better in real life I think.

 

[roythebus]

Mentioned earlier in thread, this is an MTK standard class 5 bought from York show club sales stand many years ago when I was rather tight for money. Being out of work at the time the trip was something of a treat anyway, there was also a DJH one available, they were priced at £10 and £20 if memory serves correctly. Would have preferred the DJH one but the MTK looked quite well cast so went with that. It was around 1980 I think.

It came with etched coupling rods I think, the rest of the valve gear from odds and ends possibly Nu Cast?

Intended to use the then current Hornby tender drive set up from Evening Star, along with other parts of the valve gear I decided to modify it for loco drive as I couldn't afford an Evening Star to chop up. It utilised an XO4 from one of my Triang locos.

Finished as the loco to work the final South Yorkshireman along the GC route, it went on to become one of the last standard 5s running in the North West.

The proportions look a bit off, photo taken on a phone, it looks better in real life I think.

 

IMG_20190106_184327765.jpg

 

That doesn't look too bad, apart from appearing to sit a bit high at the back, the footplate isn't level.

[E3109]

I think it was MTK who did an EM1, whoever it was had clearly used the Trix version as a master.

It was to the same dodgy scale, 3.8mm/ft and recommended a Hymek chassis, whose bogies are too short.

[Craig Watson]

I have quite a lot of MTK units in my collection, the late Andy Elliot had a huge collection which he'd finished superbly, when he died myself and a mate bought up most of the EMU's and DMU's keeping a large chunk of the collection together.

 

From memory between us we have class 100, 105, 108, 126, 303, 314, 320, I also have a class 91.

 

There were also quite a few unbuilt and part built models which I also picked up, I've since built an Ayrshire class 126, finished the last car of a 6 car E&G Swindon, the second car of a 127 parcels unit and I'm currently working on another 314, I still have an unbuilt 101, 3 cars of an E&G Swindon and 2x 150/1!

 

I also have unbuilt kits for both class 210's 4 car 210001 and 3 car 210002, the parts for these have sample etched on them, I believe Andy Elliot built some models for Colin at MTK back in the day too.

 

I'll have a dig over the next few days and get some pics up.

[Clive Mortimore]

A couple of weeks ago I dug out some MTK DMUs I have had for years, I motorised them for the first time. It was great seeing them run. One day I will finish them.

Derby 114

BRCW 104

A eight car train composed of a Cravens 105, A Gloucester 100, a BRCW 104,  and a Tri-ang Mk1 conversion to a Cravens 105

 

Same train from the other end. The Tri-ang Cravens was started 32 years ago and ran for the first time last month.

[Chris M]

 

My MTK class 22 which gave plenty of good service. I sold it with all my other 00 stock back in the 1990s. I wonder if it still exists somewhere?

 

MTK kits were a quirky but very useful source of loco types that weren’t available in rtr form.  You always got a great sense of achievement from completing one.

Edited March 8, 2019 by Chris M

[Ravenser]

On 28/12/2018 at 23:46, lapford34102 said:

I've built quite a number of MTK kits over the years and had met Colin more than once. I think, as others have pointed out, that what he did  needs to be seen in the context of the time. It's probably no exaggeration to say he singlehandedly kick started "modern image" modelling. His output was prodigious and whilst no-one has ever claimed his kits were perfect in terms of RTR standard of the time, usable. His cast W/M Class 74 needed two Hornby Class 25 m/bogies but would pull anything and was 40 years ahead of any likely RTR version.

Yes, the kits needed work and in those preWWW days if you needed advice you asked around or figured it out for ourselves, it was called modelling. The end result ?

Look no  further http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/95231-tonbridge-west-yard/

Final outing at the Canterbury show in Jan 

 

Stu

 

 

I'm sorry, but this is too positive.

 

MTK , seconded by Q kits, systematically poisoned the wells of good  modern image modelling over 2 decades

 

The fact that modern image is largely dependant on RTR is because MTK ploughed salt into the furrows . Whatever the subject , Colin Massingham had done a kit - and it was a crude misshapen lump and unbuildable.

 

Thus nobody who could actually produce a buildable kit of any merit ever produced modern image kits in 4mm . Consequently there were and are virtually no modern image kits to build in 4mm...... 

 

This did not encourage modelling . It compelled box-opening

 

Edited March 8, 2019 by Ravenser

[Clive Mortimore]

8 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

I'm sorry, but this is too positive.

 

MTK , seconded by Q kits, systematically poisoned the wells of good  modern image modelling over 2 decades

 

The fact that modern image is largely dependant on RTR is because MTK ploughed salt into the furrows . Whatever the subject , Colin Massingham had done a kit - and it was a crude misshapen lump and unbuildable.

 

Thus nobody who could actually produce a buildable kit of any merit ever produced modern image kits in 4mm . Consequently there were and are virtually no modern image kits to build in 4mm...... 

 

This did not encourage modelling . It compelled box-opening

 

I beg to differ if it wasn't for MTK I don't think "Modern Image" would have been taken seriously.

[John Tomlinson]

My own recollection of the early '70's - I was a teenager at the time - is that the enthusiast body to a large extent considered the world had stopped in 1968. I attended meetings of the RCTS in Preston, which were held in a room in the station above the central platform, and despite a steady passage of 50's (often in pairs), 40's, 25's etc., the general reference if at all was to diseasels. Interest was zero. Model magazines were generally the same, save IIRC an article around 1972/73 in the RM of a large "N" gauge layout using Minitrix 27's and Warships.

 

So I think Clive is right. Whatever the faults of MTK, they broke the ground in establishing that "modern traction" might be worth looking at, as opposed to the standard modelling mantra of the GW, usually a branch line, preferably pre-1948!

 

John.

 

 

[Chris M]

49 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

Whatever the subject , Colin Massingham had done a kit - and it was a crude misshapen lump and unbuildable.

 

 

 

 

If I can build one then they were buildable. In terms of what was available RTR at the time, MTK kits could be made into reasonable models. Just think of some of the RTR models that we were using. The Tri-ang class 37, the Trix Warship etc. When it came out the Lima Western was an amazingly good model. Things have changed a little since then.

[Signaller69]

I only met Colin once, at Wigan Show in the late 80s iirc, his stand was literally piled high with kits and he certainly had enthusiasm for the hobby, producing so much that just wasn't made elsewhere, regardless of the quality.

 

I built several MTK kits in my youth including a Derby Lightweight set, the Departmental class 150/950 and a 158, all of which turned out reasonably well for the time and taking my skills into account, the Derby set in particular. I used Lima power bogies in all of them. Sadly all long since sold on.

 

I remember seeing one of the late OO scale MTK kits - the class 14 - advertised, was somewhat put off to discover it was designed to fit a Jouef HO scale RTR chassis, which although of similar jackshaft drive style was way out dimensionally and the wheels way too small, so I didn't bother - though I guess it would have run reasonably at least!

[hayfield]

20 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

I'm sorry, but this is too positive.

 

MTK , seconded by Q kits, systematically poisoned the wells of good  modern image modelling over 2 decades

 

The fact that modern image is largely dependant on RTR is because MTK ploughed salt into the furrows . Whatever the subject , Colin Massingham had done a kit - and it was a crude misshapen lump and unbuildable.

 

Thus nobody who could actually produce a buildable kit of any merit ever produced modern image kits in 4mm . Consequently there were and are virtually no modern image kits to build in 4mm...... 

 

This did not encourage modelling . It compelled box-opening

 

 

If MTK was that bad then why did Alistair Rolfe take over the range and selected what he thought was worth saving and reintroduced some of them, improving some at the same time, these kits are now available through Phoenix Precision 

 

True some of the Steam outline locos were extremely challenging. The coach kits were fine and went together just as well as the Westdale (?) and Hobbytime/BSL kits, the EMu & DMU kits were much the same only requiring decent motor bogies.  The whitemetal diesel kits went together requiring a bit of filing and filling as did the rail cars, which now are correctly described as scratch building airs, rather than complete kits. The kits were certainly beyond novice builders abilities, but not as you claim unbuildable . A MTK diesel well built with a decent mechanism would certainly pull more stock than its plastic equivalent. But then as said it was at a time when this part of our hobby was not being addressed by the RTR trade, if you wanted modern image this was the route you went down, 

 

 

 

Here is a MTK Wagon basher built many years ago (still waiting for glazing and the roof fixing), agreed not as good as the latest RTR models, but built 20+ years ago using a DS10 motor on a simple chassis made from PCB board with etched W irons. I bought off Alistair a Bristol Railcar 10 + years ago, still waiting to be built this time with a High Level Pacemaker gearbox/sub chassis

 

What I can say is, these kits are buildable by modellers with a basic skill set, and far more pleasing when built yourself than just getting your credit card out

 

As for your rant "Colin Massingham had done a kit - and it was a crude misshapen lump and unbuildable, here are 3 photos of a MTK kit I bought off eBay which was professionally built and clearly shows the opposite, 

 

Clearly shows in the right hands high quality models can be built

 

Edited March 9, 2019 by hayfield