Trix twin

[Keith George]

Is it possible to run Trix twin loco's on 2 rail DC.

 

Keith.

[Danemouth]

The Trix Twin I had as a boy was 14 vAC so won't run on 12 vDC and was 3 rail on Bakelite track.

 

At the start of the 60's they started a new line, I remember the Warship - not sure of the voltage but the collector shoes could be configured for 2 or 3 rail IIRC

 

Regards,

 

Dave

[Grovenor]

The original trix twin has universal motors which will run on AC or DC, to run on 2-rail you would need to modify the pickups for the centre third rail to run on one of the outer rails.

Note that the wheel profiles are such that they will not run on modern track, so you are probably better off using trix twin track anyway.

 

Even used on the original 3-rail track the reversing system is the weak point, if you are not bothered about keeping it original then the reversing relay in the loco can be replaced with a bridge rectifier. They will then be DC only but you will have positive, reliable, reversing.

Regards

Keith

[sagaguy]

If you have one of the original Hammant & Morgan Powermaster controllers,Trix Universal motors will run on 12v dc & you can use the green powerboost button to actuate the reverser,however,Trix reversers are not that reliable.

 

   Ray.

[John Tomlinson]

Bear in mind as well that around 1960 Trix made the move to 12V DC mechanisms, from the previous 14V AC. Locos built with standard DC motors include the EM1 (class 76), Warship, Western, E3001, Britania, 56xx, 73xxx (Std Class V), A2 and the Ruston shunter. These locos could be configured for 2 or 3 rail working by repositioning the pick-up shoes. The 14V ac locos as described by earlier posters were the models that whatever the numbering bore little reality to prototype, and the story goes that when Trix made the change to 12V DC, surplus (and unsaleable) stocks of these were simply dumped in a pit dug next to the factory!

 

John.

[John Tomlinson]

A further thought. Not being sure of your aim Keith, if you simply want to run some old AC locos it would be possible to pick up 3-rail bakelite track and Trix controllers quite cheaply on Ebay. As was mentioned above the wheel profile is far too coarse with the AC locos to run on modern track. Once upon a time the price of Trix secondhand was very high, and whilst rarer models in top condition are still pricey much of the regular stuff now goes for very little. Be aware too that there is a Trix Twin society which does spares if you really wanted to get into this.

 

John.

[Keith George]

Thanks for the reply's,  I was just thinking of sourcing one of their warships.

 

Are their warship models any good in appearence.?

 

Keith.

[Silver Sidelines]

Hi Keith

 

Their 12v DC models were very good for the time and the Mk1 coaches very appealing.  However they were HO / 3.5mm to the foot scale.

 

Are their warship models any good in appearence.?

 

Regards

 

Ray

[sagaguy]

Hi Keith

 

Their 12v DC models were very good for the time and the Mk1 coaches very appealing.  However they were HO / 3.5mm to the foot scale.

 

Regards

 

Ray

 I think they were actually 3.87mm to the foot in an effort to break into the 4mm market.I have one of their Mk1 coaches which needs restoring,i also had an EM1 which was a good model,sadly,i sold it in the late 70`s.A mistake!!!

 

 

 

 

    Ray Randall

[Silver Sidelines]

Thanks Ray

 I think they were actually 3.87mm to the foot

It was always a bit of a mystery - they looked good if kept together.

 

Ray

[Keith George]

 I think they were actually 3.87mm to the foot in an effort to break into the 4mm market.I have one of their Mk1 coaches which needs restoring,i also had an EM1 which was a good model,sadly,i sold it in the late 70`s.A mistake!!!

 

 

 

 

    Ray Randall

I had forgotten about the scale difference, I think I will give that idea  a miss.

 

Keith.

[corneliuslundie]

Ah, memories. My first 4mm train was a Trix Twin 0-4-0 tender engine and some 4-wheeled coaches. REALLY REALISTIC!

 

Mind you, I thought for a minute this topic had escaped from the MRJ issue 234 thread, with the mention of flanges! And even with the massive flanges they didn't stay on the track on curves - at a scale 300 mph!

 

As said above, the reversing was "interesting", and could be caused by a dirty bit of track interrupting the supply to the electromagnet and causing it to drop out and turn the contacts.

[Il Grifone]

Quoting Trix scale to 2 decimal places is rather pointless, considering their elastic ruler. In my opinion it's best to describe them as a product of their time.

 

As stated a bridge rectifier to feed the field coil ensures positive reversing. Just ensure the coil remains in series with the armature.

 

The fibre track is quite easy and cheap to obtain. If you can find the 'universal' points you can run anything on it that will negotiate a 13½" radius curve.

 

As for the appearance of the Trix 'Warship'.....

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=trix+warship&client=firefox-a&hs=GiJ&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&biw=1372&bih=799&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=NfpwVNvLGo7OaKCGggg&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ

 

and working here...

 

 

Trix connected the chassis to the centre rail, while Dublo chassis are live to the  running rails, so insulated couplings are necessary to run them together. Trix 'Warships' had a plastic thick flange, which could be removed to convert them to Dublo standards. (Removal of this lowers the collectable value, but 1. most have been done already and 2. we don't care anyway!)  IIRC later ones were available in 2 rail.

[Silver Sidelines]

Whilst on the subject I will add a little bit of history.

 

I have been researching another topic this eveing and came across a review of the latest Trix coaches in the April 64 Model Railway Constructor.  At a scale of 3.8mm to the foot the Trix mk1 will be around 12mm shorter than its 4mm equivalent.  A great pity because in other respects they were ahead of their time.  Interestingly I came across another article in the Railway Modeller from a similar date which described a 'no money spared' layout with a full Kitmaster Blue Pullman with Nucro Wheels and a Trix Warship refitted with Triang motor bogies. Looking at the above video I am not sure why the need to replace the bogies - maybe II Grofone would know?

 

Regards

 

Ray

[sagaguy]

I must have bought my EM1 in 1959/60.It was in a local fishing tackle & meccano dealer in Tottenham,N. London.It cost me £2.50(£2/10/0 shillings in real money which was a weeks wages for me then as i had only just started work after leaving school.This had thick plastic flanges which i cut off & it ran well on HD 3 rail picking up from the two running rails & the pantograph running on a short length of home made catenary.I still wish i had that model.

 

 

                          Ray.

[BR60103]

The Trix Twin demo layout at the Great British Train Show this year had 4 controllers -- 2 AC and 2 DC. Twin production apparently continued into the DC era.

 

I have a couple of Trix coaches which certainly look small next to OO mark 1s.

[Il Grifone]

Whilst on the subject I will add a little bit of history.

 

I have been researching another topic this eveing and came across a review of the latest Trix coaches in the April 64 Model Railway Constructor.  At a scale of 3.8mm to the foot the Trix mk1 will be around 12mm shorter than its 4mm equivalent.  A great pity because in other respects they were ahead of their time.  Interestingly I came across another article in the Railway Modeller from a similar date which described a 'no money spared' layout with a full Kitmaster Blue Pullman with Nucro Wheels and a Trix Warship refitted with Triang motor bogies. Looking at the above video I am not sure why the need to replace the bogies - maybe II Grofone would know?

 

Regards

 

Ray

 

Hi Ray,

 

The only reason I can think of would be to eliminate the unsightly Trix pickup shoes, though there would have been easier ways to do this. The mechanism is a good solid item, so I would doubt that would be the reason. The Tri-ang wheels would have been coarser than the Trix ones (IIRC they had traction tyres - maybe to eliminate these?) and removing the side frames would have weakened the Tri-ang bogies. Perhaps they had acquired a spare body? (Tri-ang spares were much easier to obtain than either Dublo or Trix.)

 

The Trix coaches are a bit better* than the Tri-ang and very free-running (of the 'I thought that table was level! ' sort) and I suspect they were rather dearer (normal for Trix).

 

IIRC the windows were the right size. I do have the remains of one which had a close encounter with a soldering iron or similar - not guilty as it came in a job lot, but off hand I don't know where its got to , so I can't measure it. I'll have to dig out my copy of the Dublo 'Bible' which has the comparison table from one of the magazines somewhere inside.

[Colin]

Thanks for the reply's,  I was just thinking of sourcing one of their warships.

 

Are their warship models any good in appearence.?

 

Keith.

Funnily enough I found a picture of a Warship in a very old RM recently - frankly I think you'd probably be better off with the Lima/Hornby Railroad Warship, despite its many faults! The Trix model, apart from any scale issues, suffers from the front valance and a big chunk of the lower cab being fixed to the bogies and pivoting with them, causing a very unrealistic and unsightly gap on curves.

I had a Trix Western years ago which was a lousy runner from day 1 (it eventually expired and ended up on the scrapline), so based on my own experience, I wonder if Warship survivors in might be hard to find in good mechanical order.

[Il Grifone]

I've found the table of Mk I models in the Dublo book, which quotes Tri-ang (Hornby) as 4' x 3' 7" and Trix as 4' x 3' against the prototype dimension of 4' x 3' 1½". (I assume the different scales were taken into account.) The overall width (9') is slightly wide (1") on the Tri-ang and rather more on the Trix (5"). This latter presumably necessary to accommodate 1:76 buffer spacing on a 1:80* model.

 

* I'm never sure as to Trix's scale - in their own literature it varies from 1:90 to 1:76.

 

Prices are quoted as Tri-ang 11/6d and Trix 12/6d. Kitmaster were rather less (6/6d IIRC). Three guesses are not needed as to which I bought!

[GoingUnderground]

The late Tony Matthewman, the authority on Trix Twin in the UK, gave the scale as 3.8mm:1ft in his book on British Trix. The Western was originally planned to be true 4mm scale, but the stock of 3.8mm coaches meant that it was produced to the smaller scale. The Western and the Trans Pennine units were the last locos to be produced at 3.8mm:1ft. The Class 81/AL1, was produced in true 4mm scale, as were the last 3 locos produced by Trix, their A2, A3 and A4 models.

 

The non-OO models look OK if you don't mix them with OO stock in the same rake.

 

The Trix collector shoes can easily be unscrewed and replaced with wire wipers contacting the back of the wheels.

[sagaguy]

The late Tony Matthewman, the authority on Trix Twin in the UK, gave the scale as 3.8mm:1ft in his book on British Trix. The Western was originally planned to be true 4mm scale, but the stock of 3.8mm coaches meant that it was produced to the smaller scale. The Western and the Trans Pennine units were the last locos to be produced at 3.8mm:1ft. The Class 81/AL1, was produced in true 4mm scale, as were the last 3 locos produced by Trix, their A2, A3 and A4 models.

 

The non-OO models look OK if you don't mix them with OO stock in the same rake.

 

The Trix collector shoes can easily be unscrewed and replaced with wire wipers contacting the back of the wheels.

Fitting p/u wipers to th e bogies is what i did eventually.After the demise of British Trix,I think it was Micheal Castalani of the Bala model shop who was assembling Lilliput class 87`s which apparently was Trix tooling.

 

 

 

                           Ray.

[John Tomlinson]

Funnily enough I found a picture of a Warship in a very old RM recently - frankly I think you'd probably be better off with the Lima/Hornby Railroad Warship, despite its many faults! The Trix model, apart from any scale issues, suffers from the front valance and a big chunk of the lower cab being fixed to the bogies and pivoting with them, causing a very unrealistic and unsightly gap on curves.

I had a Trix Western years ago which was a lousy runner from day 1 (it eventually expired and ended up on the scrapline), so based on my own experience, I wonder if Warship survivors in might be hard to find in good mechanical order.

The Warships had a similar bogie/motor to the EM1 and in my experience ran very well. The Western was quite different, and mine never ran that well either - it was one of the self assembly jobs - "Footplateman?" series, so maybe that was why!

 

The Warship had the front in the original pattern fitted to D800 - D811, without headcode panel. Whilst not to today's standards it was a good model for its time and the motor was powerful and well made.

[Il Grifone]

I've just run my digital caliper over one of my Trix 56xx. Apart from the rear coupled wheelbase*, it measures out at quite well at 1:80 (3.8mm to 1 foot).

 

* The model is missing the rear bogie, so I'm not sure here, but the overall dimension is correct. The rear coupled wheelbase measures out at 8' 3" in 1:80, so it looks like they (wrongly) assumed that the 56xx wheelbase is the same as other GWR tanks at 7'3" + 8' 3", whereas it should be 7' 3" + 8' 0".