Jump to content
Image restoration from pre-May 2021 continues and may take an indefinite period of time.

Any Question Answered


Pixie
 Share

Recommended Posts

Back again with more questions.

 

I have built 10 of the 2-552 RCH 7 plank bodies, and checking the parts required list:

 

image.png.088230b1233020484498560890a3d256.png

 

I bought 10 of the recommended 2-330 chassis.

 

However.....

 

IMG_20211031_165219.jpg.81a97d79b157ec4bc11336b72bddcff3.jpg

 

I seem to have a slight dimensional challenge.

 

I have already butchered some 12'Wheelbase chassis to fit some kits that I picked up at TINGS, and really don't want to butcher these chassis kits as well.

 

Should I have ordered something else?

 

Regards

 

Ian

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Ian Smeeton said:

 

I seem to have a slight dimensional challenge.

 

I have already butchered some 12'Wheelbase chassis to fit some kits that I picked up at TINGS, and really don't want to butcher these chassis kits as well.

 

Should I have ordered something else?

 

Regards

 

Ian

 

Ian,

 

I'm pretty sure that I used 2-327 for the three 1907 RCH wagons I have built.

 

Hope that helps.

 

Andy

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, 2mm Andy said:

 

Ian,

 

I'm pretty sure that I used 2-327 for the three 1907 RCH wagons I have built.

 

Hope that helps.

 

Andy


I had the same feeling. Then I couldn’t find the ones I’m pretty sure I started to check. I do have many part consumed 2-327 etches on my workbench though (the main parts and levers are being used on some 3DP wagons) and I measure the solebars as a smidge under 28mm. Hopefully that nugget of info is helpful. 

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the instructions of the 2-330 it seems that you have to shorten them to fit the 2-552 wagon bodies?

2-327 chassis seem to be for the 1887 rch wagons. Brake hangers are different on the 2-330.

 

Jan 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jan W said:

Looking at the instructions of the 2-330 it seems that you have to shorten them to fit the 2-552 wagon bodies?

2-327 chassis seem to be for the 1887 rch wagons. Brake hangers are different on the 2-330.

 

Jan 

 

I think I used 2-324.  I am slightly puzzled by the brake gear on 2-327. There are 2 different sets of archaic brakes.  There is also a more conventional set with v hanger. However there is only a single hanger on each side. If the wagon has one side brakes, which I think would be case for most of the 1887 wagons pre WW1, surely it should have 2 hangers on that side. Or have I got something wrong?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1923 RCH mineral wagon standards specify 9’ wb for both wooden and steel solebars with 17’6” over headstocks. Most BR 16t minerals used 9’ wb. 10’ wb was mainly for fitted vans in later times I believe.
 

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Izzy said:

The 1923 RCH mineral wagon standards specify 9’ wb for both wooden and steel solebars with 17’6” over headstocks. Most BR 16t minerals used 9’ wb. 10’ wb was mainly for fitted vans in later times I believe.
 

Bob

By 1923 the OH was usually 16ft 6in on a 9ft wb. As you suggest this continues for all the  about half million minerals built post war. It was only in the 1970s that a handful of mineral wagons were put on the longer 17ft 6in OH with 10ft wb from redundant Palbricks. 

 

Paul

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for everybodies' assistance on this.

 

I just went off the parts list on the 2mm shop website.

 

Thanks for the measurement for the 3-327, I have just asked Rod at Shop 2 to measure this for me.

 

The bodies are to the 1907 RCH Spec, so would the 1889 undergubbins be noticeable?

 

I measured the body, and it seems to be 15' over Headstocks, with about 28mm between the bufferbeams so the 3-327 would appear to be a good fit without  shortening.

 

Otherwise I will just have to shorten the 8 unbuilt 2-330s

 

Many thanks,

 

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Simon D. said:

Diamond cutting discs

 

Are these of any use for 2mm: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/333675570805 ?

 

Can any of our dental practitioners shed some light?

Hi Simon,

 

They will be useful for cutting things like motor shafts and hard steel rod, which can be virtually impervious to a hacksaw.  I never used them myself, preferring carborundum discs, though they are more fragile and can wear down quite rapidly.  You will also need a screw ended mandrel to mount them on.

 

Tim might have more to add.

 

Jim

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 01/11/2021 at 22:48, Ian Smeeton said:

Thank you for everybodies' assistance on this.

 

I just went off the parts list on the 2mm shop website.

 

Thanks for the measurement for the 3-327, I have just asked Rod at Shop 2 to measure this for me.

 

The bodies are to the 1907 RCH Spec, so would the 1889 undergubbins be noticeable?

 

I measured the body, and it seems to be 15' over Headstocks, with about 28mm between the bufferbeams so the 3-327 would appear to be a good fit without  shortening.

 

Otherwise I will just have to shorten the 8 unbuilt 2-330s

 

Many thanks,

 

Ian

 

2-327 chassis kits arrived in short order from the 2 mm shop, excellent service as always, and they fit a treat.

 

Just cursing the fact that I had already soldered in all the bearings for the 2-330 chassis before I discovered the  mismatch.

 

Never mind, I think that I have some Peco kit bodies which may fit, also a couple of the Farish Rectangular Tanks, too.

 

Regards & thanks for all the help.

 

Ian

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'm planning to start working on a few more designs for decals for private owner wagons, and quite fancy doing some for the ubiquitous Stephenson Clarke ("SC"). Browsing the HMRS photo albums, I noticed some quite attractive steel opens: https://hmrs.org.uk/photographs/stephenson-clarke-se-20t-steel-open-s-e-3051-prestomet-prevents-rust-on-side-name-address-on-end.html

 

These look very similar in design to the Dapol "20t mineral" that they've released in endless liveries including "Bolsover", which does at least look to be prototypical. (why are so many of their releases of this type weathered like an explosion at a sewage works?). https://www.Dapol.co.uk/shop/n-gauge/wagons-amp-freight/20t-mineral-wagon 

 

I seem to remember those Dapol wagons were part of a series that were "shrink-ray"ed from their OO range, which originated as Wrenn, or some other prehistoric range? The gunpowder van is quite strangely proportioned ...

 

How does the Dapol 20t mineral scale out? If it isn't too strangely proportioned, is there a 2mm etched chassis that is a good fit? 

 

The Parkside (now PECO) kit for the GWR steel loco coal wagon also looks vaguely similar, but has a very different looking end door and very chunky top rail ...

 

Cheers

 

Justin

Link to post
Share on other sites

Answering my own question here - I stuck an unpainted one of the Dapol 20t mineral opens onto an order for some other bits from Hattons. To my surprise, it scales out well against the BR diagram book posted by the Barrowmore MRC. Also, the under frame is much finer than I was expecting, and could probably easily get away with just new wheels. Perhaps especially in its unpainted state, the relief on the door opening hinges etc does look a bit shallow.

 

Prototype length over headstocks: 21'6" (43mm at 2mm/ft)

Dapol length over headstocks:       44.3mm

Prototype overall width:                  8' 7 5/6" (c.17mm)

Dapol overall width:                         17.6mm

 

So, pretty good for 1:152! I think the pre-war Stephenson Clarke wagon here is a slight bit shorter above the doors, but the end door style matches - certainly close enough! https://hmrs.org.uk/photographs/stephenson-clarke-se-20t-steel-open-25503-two-doors-each-side.html 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 17/11/2021 at 12:36, justin1985 said:

 

These look very similar in design to the Dapol "20t mineral" that they've released in endless liveries including "Bolsover", which does at least look to be prototypical. (why are so many of their releases of this type weathered like an explosion at a sewage works?). https://www.Dapol.co.uk/shop/n-gauge/wagons-amp-freight/20t-mineral-wagon 

 

 

Someone pointed to the wagon and said "The weathering needs to be more dire 'ere."

  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 19/11/2021 at 17:43, justin1985 said:

Answering my own question here - I stuck an unpainted one of the Dapol 20t mineral opens onto an order for some other bits from Hattons. To my surprise, it scales out well against the BR diagram book posted by the Barrowmore MRC. Also, the under frame is much finer than I was expecting, and could probably easily get away with just new wheels. Perhaps especially in its unpainted state, the relief on the door opening hinges etc does look a bit shallow.

 

Prototype length over headstocks: 21'6" (43mm at 2mm/ft)

Dapol length over headstocks:       44.3mm

Prototype overall width:                  8' 7 5/6" (c.17mm)

Dapol overall width:                         17.6mm

 

So, pretty good for 1:152! I think the pre-war Stephenson Clarke wagon here is a slight bit shorter above the doors, but the end door style matches - certainly close enough! https://hmrs.org.uk/photographs/stephenson-clarke-se-20t-steel-open-25503-two-doors-each-side.html 

 

Justin,

 

I would give Dapol their due as those dimensions scale out to exact 1:148. No scale bending here! The Association does three 12' wheelbase underframes which are all 1:152. The L&Y underframe has weird brake gear and is nothing like the gear for the standard RCH 12' underframe. The GWR DC brake 12' underframe would go with the Parkside 21T kit as all the Parkside kits are 1:152. The other one is the standard BR 12' underframe with post-nationalisation axleguards unlike the more open versions on the SC wagon.

If the underframe seems to be acceptable 'as is' then I would stick with it. Having, of course, got rid of those horrendous coupler boxes!

 

David

Edited by DavidLong
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

After having fun with the test kit last month I'm going to go ahead and plunge in, I generally take more pleasure in the building than the running. Although I won't be joining the society until beginning of next year due to lack of time over the next 6 weeks or so and want to maximise shop access, I do have a couple of questions prior to deciding on the what and the where. I think I'd prefer to go with something small but diesel in terms of motive power, but steam wouldn't be a deal breaker. So onto the questions:

 

1) For a first loco I know that it is suggested to go for one of the replacement chassis kits, however, on a scale of "it'll probably be ok so long as you are patient and careful" to "heh, I look forwards to reading about your pain" where would something like the Worsley Works Class 2 land?

 

2) I've been unable to find anything relating to the construction of N or 2mm diesel bogie chassis. I have an idea of how it could be done, just have to figure out the best way to make a pivot, is there anything out there someone could point me towards?

 

3) Similar to the first question, I favour the idea of building the pointwork without jigs, that it will take longer to do so is not an issue. I was planning on grabbing a roll of rail to use for practice rather than the nicer straightened stuff. I'm assuming a couple of the triangular gauges and a single roller gauge will be sufficient for this. But same scale as before, how bad an idea is it?

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 21/11/2021 at 09:05, Argos said:

Does anyone know of a source for Commonwealth Bogie frames? 

 

I believe Ultima did some back in the day but these have been unavailable for some time. 

 

Thanks

 

I believe that currently those fitted to some Farish coaches are the only ones. So quite expensive, and only if you can find them. Keep you eyes open for cheap s/h offerings. It's how I obtained them for my class 309's. They are under some of the newer blue riband MK1's, and older Pullman restaurants. Not available as spares at the moment.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jayk said:

After having fun with the test kit last month I'm going to go ahead and plunge in, I generally take more pleasure in the building than the running. Although I won't be joining the society until beginning of next year due to lack of time over the next 6 weeks or so and want to maximise shop access, I do have a couple of questions prior to deciding on the what and the where. I think I'd prefer to go with something small but diesel in terms of motive power, but steam wouldn't be a deal breaker. So onto the questions:

 

1) For a first loco I know that it is suggested to go for one of the replacement chassis kits, however, on a scale of "it'll probably be ok so long as you are patient and careful" to "heh, I look forwards to reading about your pain" where would something like the Worsley Works Class 2 land?

 

2) I've been unable to find anything relating to the construction of N or 2mm diesel bogie chassis. I have an idea of how it could be done, just have to figure out the best way to make a pivot, is there anything out there someone could point me towards?

 

3) Similar to the first question, I favour the idea of building the pointwork without jigs, that it will take longer to do so is not an issue. I was planning on grabbing a roll of rail to use for practice rather than the nicer straightened stuff. I'm assuming a couple of the triangular gauges and a single roller gauge will be sufficient for this. But same scale as before, how bad an idea is it?

 

Thanks in advance.

Hi Jayk,

do you mean the class 22 diesel or the class 02 shunter?

The latter does only have a simple chassis without gearbox, the class 22 is body only.

Both problems can be solved depending on what experience you already have.

However, I doubt it is wise to take this choice.

Well- I did both and I´m a newbie to 2mm FS as well.

You might have a look at some photos earlier in this thread for the class 02. There is more than one experienced modeller who did advise to build your own chassis. The 2mm SA booklet for split frame design will help you doing so, and you might search for and find some advice here as well.

My class 22 is still lacking some driven bogies because I had to postpone this in favour of other models. Basically making bogies will not be much different to building 2 chassis for a 0-4-0 with a  underframe connecting both.

Basically- whatever you do first it will be to get some experience. 

If you want a little diesel and you want to "make it all by yourself": perhaps take the Worsley Works Class 04 Tram for the body and the 2mm FS chassis for the Farish 03 (3-680) to get a proper chassis with a useful jig. The Tram is good for covering the wheels if you end up with trouble.

For the points: Do you know the video of the fellow building his n gauge turnout with a print of a point, a dremel and a bogie only?

This works in 2mm as well, although I have to admit that the 2mm FS methods and parts are having many advantages.

 

cheers

Klaus

Edited by Klaus ojo
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Klaus,

 

Yes, sorry. I meant the class 02 for my first loco, a class 03 or 04 would be a possible and I'd either not noticed or forgotten there was a body etch available for the 04. I just like the look of the 02. I'll have to take a look back or fiddle with the search box to find the previous discussion, having to add a gearbox doesn't sound too daunting - having looked through the documentation for the societies chassis kits I can always steal their homework.

 

Using the chassis kit for the 03 (the included documentation refers to it as being suitable for both an 03 and 04) and grabbing the etch body kit could definitely be solution that scratches both itches. My alternative had initially been to get the 3F chassis kit and just grab a body from a spares site and settle for transition.

 

As far as the larger diesel chassis' go, I think we're on the same page. I was envisaging something approximating the normal rtr approach. With each bogie having a gear tower driven by a worm and then a pair of CV joints running off of the motor. It was the method of attaching the top of each tower to the main chassis frame I am unsure about. Obviously the top of the tower would have 5 closed sides to support either end of the worm as well as the tower sides and then the top spacer which would become the mounting point. I was thinking about a small (short) bolt through the top of the tower and soldered in place into a tube reinforced hole on a spacer on the main chassis and held in place with a locking nut. If that all made sense.

 

I've not seen the video on making points that you describe. The one I saw used small files and made a point about bending the end of the rails so that you didn't lose the webbing at the tip of the frog. I was thinking dremel though! Using just a bogie sounds a bit gimmicky, I'm sure it's possible but I'd definitely prefer the security of using actual gauges. I was thinking that the triangular gauges would help hold the rail in place as well as providing an increased number of spacing points and the rolling gauge has the flange gap in for placing the wing rails.

 

4 minutes ago, Klaus ojo said:

Jayk,

 

for motorized bogies perhaps have a look at Ian Smith´s stunning steam railmotor at > Modbury - Page 28 - 2mm Finescale - RMweb  <.

Here the link for the turnout video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ1I9wWJ3c8

(And the photos from my first attempts is at "What´s on my Workbench" and not at "questions" )

cheers

Klaus

 

Thank you, heading off there now!
Jayk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jayk,

N brass has a 3F body. I´m just in the midst of constructing one.

As I said: my class 22 is waiting for boies and I was thinking about something similar as you wrote. Let´s see who of us is faster and will  get a bloody nose first...:) Sounds we should keep in contact for this purpose...

For the points I´ve used the 2mm gauges as well but always with a 9mm wagon chassis at my side as well. 

 

Klaus

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I meant the Jinty. Didn't realise there was a tender 3F as well.

I wouldn't worry too much about being slower. It's taken about a month to go from finished test wagon to asking these questions and another month+ before I even order anything. Consider this timeframe as a guide for future progress :D

 

Had a watch of the video and it has some advice for the blades that I want to go back and check again. Definitely seems confident in what he's doing, it's likely that at least the first few I produce will have more checking and double checking than is necessary. At least I have that wagon ready to go for a rolling test.

 

Found your 02, it's not how I imagined the motor and gears would go. I don't think I've really understood how small it is. Looks lovely though and Ian's approach for the railmotor is looking good for any DMU stock, how much it can haul is another question though.

 

Thanks again,

Jayk

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...