Triang TT Technical advice

[Robert Shrives]

Hi both chassis are really good and as a scale 08 it looks the part body is too wide and I wonder if it can be cut down a bit?

 

Robert 

[Golden Fleece 30]

I am not too confident with cutting the body down length ways Robert.  If it had been metal yes but not plastic.  For some reason I don't seem to be as good with plastic as I am with metal, maybe because any gaps etc can be filled with solder?

 

The ex LNER coach kit by BEC has made up very nicely. Although quite a long wheelbase it still goes around Tri-ang small radius curves. I was going to say it just needs windows and couplings but the photo shows the top of the solebar is maroon as opposed to black, annoying how photos show any discrepancies up. The sides look worse due to the flash but I like the gloss paint finish in normal light, it is not varnished. The photo in grey primer shows the nicely detailed castings.  A 42' bogie van, from BEC also, is awaiting some bogies to be fitted before it is completed, that is in lined maroon.

 

Garry

Edited June 28, 2017 by Golden Fleece 30

[Golden Fleece 30]

A Tri-ang TT 0-4-4 tank loco

 

I am classing this as a Tri-ang loco as everything but the rear pony truck and wheels (and pick-ups) are all Tri-ang TT. I could have used the Britannia bogie to be fully Tri-ang but I prefer the metal wheels.

The Jinty chassis has been cut and shaped as in the photos which required a new screw hole position as the original was cut into. The rear buffer beam has been cut off to use under the rear of the body. 2 Flanged wheels were removed from an axle and mounted on the centre cog one, then the holes were tapped 10BA (no drilling required). The coupling rods were cut down and the holes opened to accept some brass tube as a spacer to prevent the screws tightening on the rods. Countersunk ones were used as there was not much space behind the front steps. A new pick-up was made and the chassis was away. The last rear portion was filed to rest on the rear bogie to prevent rocking (hopefully).

The only modification to the body is that the rear of the bunker which is angled was cut off and then the whole bunker from another body was cut and glued to the main one. This also meant that the rear chassis mounting lugs still fitted as standard.

In reality it is not dimensionally correct and both sizes of wheels are too small but it kept the coupling and buffer height the same, and, was quick to do. It now needs a paint and lining session on it when time permits.

 

 

Garry

[Robert Shrives]

Hi ,

Looks the part and a fun loco idea !  runs well on the clip as well. - I guess a loop on rear coupling will suffice and the ubiquitous sub brake with three windows for a push pull coach is its future...

 

Robert   

[Golden Fleece 30]

Hi Robert, I have one of my etched couplings to fit on the bogie. You are correct about the push pull coach. Just need to get some paint for the loco and dig out a suburban coach.

 

Garry

[Golden Fleece 30]

Not so much as what I have done here but what I have managed to pick-up at a reasonable price.  These were in a collection which equated to £6 per item so the Britannia with tender and DMU set was £12 and £18 respectively and the are almost new, boxed with all paperwork as well.  The Prairie I think is a K's kit which is poor compared to BEC and GEM ones so will be discarded but the open spoke chassis is a lovely runner and will get fitted under something else.  This is the first time I have ever seen the bolster wagon with load in the flesh too.

 

I must get on with the layout though.

 

Garry

[Robert Shrives]

Garry 

DMU looks in mint condition so a good find ! The Brit is good as well, not bad for the average price !  

The bogie bolster and load is a lovely model and it si good to see mint TT still surfacing 50 years after production finished.

 

The tank is a good looking kit it just need s etched plates !

 

Robert   

[Golden Fleece 30]

Hi Robert,

 

Most of the 8 Tri-ang locos are in good to very good condition, these two being mint in my opinion. The 3 kitbuilt ones are okay with the 57xx being good, the Q1 will get a repaint and the WR tank be assigned to the despatch box probably. All the covered wagons have a light weathering to the roofs only which if they don't clean up will easily be resprayed. The WR coaches that were re-paints are okay and should be fine when lined out and satin varnished. There was another 97xx body to dispose off and a 4F body and tender but minus loco footplate which should be easy enough to make. These bodies and an unmade Peco wagon kit, about a dozen Jackson wheels and most catalogues with price lists in mint condition with a few more items were all a bonus.

 

Garry

Edited July 2, 2017 by Golden Fleece 30

[Robert Shrives]

HI,

Any news from the front or enjoying the seasonal weather and saving masterpiece time for normal weather !

 

Robert 

[Golden Fleece 30]

Hi Robert,

 

Making progress on my 0-4-4 which maybe finished today. The body is painted, lined and varnished it just needs a rear coupling sorting out not to be fouled by the body.

 

The 08 now has outside frames fitted and cranks are assembled. The coupling rods and axles to sort later then she should be done.

 

The standard 5 is stripped and primed but no black paint in stock, that could be a while now. That is a lovely runner.

 

A different version of the M/N has been started but has the same black paint issue.

 

42' bogie parcels needs some bogies fitting.

 

LNWR 4-4-0 stripped and unassembled ready for soldering. This is going to have a 2P chassis fitted which has been started.

 

Garry

Edited July 7, 2017 by Golden Fleece 30

[Golden Fleece 30]

Here is the "Tri-ang" 0-4-4 tank as a runner.  There is the odd little tweak to do but it runs on Tri-ang track, small radius curves and points etc.  Due to the rear buffer beam being cut off the main chassis block and fitted to the extended bunker I had to modify a rear coupling as this was mounted on the bogie.  Obviously the height meant it would be the same as the buffer beam so I had to mount it lower and bend it up slightly.  I also ground off a little from the buffer beam base.  Unfortunately due to using Tri-ang driving wheels I had to tap the holes already there and so the screw sizes are a little larger than I would have liked, one day I may return to this issue if I have nothing else on the go.  The video of her running will be later tonight.

 

Garry

[Robert Shrives]

Hi 

looks great - would hexhead bolts look neater than brass screws?  But it does look the part lined out and numbered - a great job !

 

Have say I spotted the 2P chassis on ebay - will be ordering !

 

Bryn Kits have just posted a 64xx and a coach pack - aimed at kitmasters so will see how it looks might help in the long run you never know.

 

3mm soc Mixed traffic 208  in post box when I got home so plenty of guilt to get me going.  Thanks ( I think!)

Robert 

[Golden Fleece 30]

Hi Robert,

 

Sent you a PM regarding the 2P chassis.

 

The reason why countersunk screws are used is due to clearance behind the front footsteps, I have had to take some of the strengthening mould off already and dare not risk any more.  I initially had hoped to use Romford crankpins but unfortunately the holes used in the driving wheels were too big and they just dropped in and out.   Maybe (and that is a big maybe) I will find or make some with a larger thread but same pin size. It is one of the penalties of using Tri-ang wheels I guess.

 

Look forward to seeing both the 64xx and the coach pack, is that for use as an autocoach as I think all 64xx's were so fitted?

 

Happy reading.

 

Garry

[Golden Fleece 30]

Here is the video of the 0-4-4 running.  Has anyone spotted the difference between the two sides?  At the end of the clip there is also my 4-4-0 2P chassis running.  The layout has large curves, small curves, reverse curves and pointwork in as a good test.

 

 

Garry

[Robert Shrives]

Well that as a good thrash, heart in my mouth on the back curve - right on the edge of the flat earth societies latest exhibit! and a long way down... 2P hauled a good load and not much drag through reverse curves - I guess 4 coaches the limit but semi perm coupled to a driving trailer will help - possibly more pckups? and allow a better bunker to coach coupling.

 

The 440 2P chassis is a wonder to behold . I wonder if tender connection might be arranged to allow tender to sit on the loco and thus transmitt mass onto the rear drivers- perhaps a stiff spring on the upstand peg might suffice. But certainly a good turn of speed and you have the knack of getting the design right at etch thinking  stage - I would be in too much of a rush.

 

Happy modelling and thanks for PM.

Robert   

[Golden Fleece 30]

It should not be too difficult to get the tender to sit on the loco as such, here is what the etches supplied gives and I think they are both level so bent up the tender loop a little.  I have read about using the tender weight but never tried it so something to think about.

 

Now the 4-4-0 chassis has proved itself I will be doing the 14xx in a similar style.  I will make the oil boxes a little larger as on the drawing they look big but when etched are quite small.
 

 

but semi perm coupled to a driving trailer will help - possibly more pckups? and allow a better bunker to coach coupling.

 

I have thought about this but at the moment my thoughts are to be able to use the loco for light freight as well as local passenger so a Tri-ang style coupling needs to be used.  The extra pick-ups would be good though.

 

Garry

[NCB]

You're right about the Prairie, a K's. Designed to fit the Castle chassis.

 

Must take a look at the Brynkits 64XX. They were intended for push-pull use, especially for more demanding lines such as the South Wales valleys where the larger-wheeled 54XX might have struggled. But I believe they ended up being used for other purposes as well. It might be possible to use the kit for a 74XX, which wasn't push-pull fitted and was intended as a general purpose branch line engine.

[Robert Shrives]

NCB,

Hopefully in next few days the 64xx will have landed and lets see what we get and hopefully a pic or two.

 

Robert 

[Golden Fleece 30]

Sorry Robert,I forgot to add the photo about loco to tender coupling mentioned earlier.

 

Garry

[NCB]

Looks neat. If you wanted to experiment with the tender bearing on the engine rear a simple spacer on the pin would do it.

 

Edit: maybe that would cause unwanted friction though.

Edited July 10, 2017 by NCB

[The Dorset Wanderer]

Like this one? This is our own 3D printed effort.

Steve.

[Golden Fleece 30]

Having dug out a BEC 2P I bought a while ago I noticed that whoever had it before had drilled the Romford wheels mid way between the centre and the boss which will have been to alleviate the crankpin/footplate issue.  These were only very small so I have drilled and tapped them for the Romford crankpins, made up another chassis and will see how this works.  The wheels did look the "Tar Brush" chap had been at them so I have cleaned the treads and face slightly in the lathe for now.  This loco came un-motorised and looked like it had the tender drive fitted at one time but now it will get a motor like the earlier chassis made.

 

Garry

[Golden Fleece 30]

Here is my second 2P chassis, this time fitted to a second hand loco from New Zealand a few months ago. The body and tender were stripped and as the parts had been glued I managed to clean them up then solder together. The tender at the moment is a 4F one. The new chassis went together just as nicely as the first one but this time I used the wheels that came with this loco body. This was because the wheels had been drilled half way between the centre and the standard position which I guess was due to the clearance on the footplate. I found out it ran well fitted to the body with no clearance issues GREAT.

 

NOW A PROBLEM, the chassis jumped up and down each revolution as one of the wheels had a flat tyre which when ran was worse than I thought. How this happened I have no idea but on trying to turn it down in the lathe the square locating part wore down to round so the wheel slipped on the axle. Luckily I found two more wheels and hoped I could drill and tap in the same place without a means to measure. Thankfully it worked and the loco runs a treat on the test track so hopefully a video will appear tomorrow.

 

Garry

[Robert Shrives]

Hi ,

That looks very good and better to read of adversity overcome! Still  to lookout my 2P.

 

happy modelling and looking forward to moving pictures !!

 

Robert 

[Golden Fleece 30]

Due to the clearance issues with the first chassis I made and the footplate curves I made a second one using wheels that were drilled and tapped mid way between the axle centre and the Romford locating pip.  As can be seen here it works well and pulls 3 Tri-ang coaches fitted with metal wheels (not pin point though) comfortably.  Two Tri-ang coaches with plastic wheels and not too free running were all it could manage as original style coaches. For some reason a couple of bogie wheels would derail on the points and reverse curves so I swapped them over from the first chassis (wheels only not bogie as well).  No idea why as they are the same.  I will say that the Romford wheels are not always keen on the Tri-ang track but can work.  One day I may get to turn them down a little.  No doubt if I ever got chance to weight the chassis with lead it would also help.

 

At least if it runs on Tri-ang track it should work fine on larger radius points etc.

 

 

Garry