Whats on your 2mm Work bench

[Llangerisech]

Half expecting John (Yaxxbarl) to have done this already, but here is my experience of the Sonic Large Prairie. I had ordered 2 although I have previously used the Farish body on an Association chassis, so we have a comparison.

 

So on the right is the Farish conversion, in the centre a converted Sonic and on the left an unconverted Sonic.

So to give a bit of context, here is the Farish conversion. I re-painted and lined the model, so any livery inaccuracies are entirely mine, although it was done from a prototype photo.

 

 

It runs very nicely, if a tad noisy due to the gears. It is using 11mm driving wheels and the brake gear is notable by absence. There is a softness to the casting and the ridges at the ends of the roof are a little more prominent, but the basic dimensions and shape are pretty decent.

 

 

Then we have the unconverted Sonic model in the same basic livery, but showing some small differences. The wheels are fairly fine and the rods fairly delicate. Separate handrails give the finesse expected of modern models, but the overall shape and size are almost identical to the old model.

 

 

And finally the converted model. This uses standard Association hornblock bearings for Farish conversion and muffs plus gear and standard muffs for the trailing wheels. I used 11.5mm drivers, 6.5mm for the front and 7.5mm for the rear pony. The main chassis muffs have to be trimmed to different lengths to fit. The rear is the most reduced to give more side-play.

 

The ponies also pick up for wires sort of similar to Simpson springs and then clip into the chassis block, and also have light springs between them and the body. This means that the ponies are significant to the current collection.

 

For coupling rods I used some spare Manor items I had kicking around, although those were a smidge longer. So I filed the rear  face and soldered a crank pin washer in the correct location and then drilled through before reaming a tad. It was only about 0.2mm out, but enough to need fettling.

 

Both Sonic models run very smoothly and quietly before and after conversion and I am very happy with the simple conversion.

 

The main difference is that my Farish model weighs 67 grams and the sonic models only 47 grams. I haven't yet tested ultimate haulage ability, but with ready to run stock I don't expect any issues, but with brass coaches I think they would run out of puff before the Farish model.

 

But overall, I'd recommend the Sonic large prairie and it isn't a tricky conversion. I suspect the association chassis kit would have correct length rods as the wheels of both models lie up perfectly. It would just be a bit of a waste to get one just for the rods, so we can probably do a simple rods set fairly soon.

 

Nigel

 

 

 

 

 

[yaxxbarl]

22 hours ago, Llangerisech said:

Half expecting John (Yaxxbarl) to have done this already, but here is my experience of the Sonic Large Prairie. I had ordered 2 although I have previously used the Farish body on an Association chassis, so we have a comparison.

 

So on the right is the Farish conversion, in the centre a converted Sonic and on the left an unconverted Sonic.

So to give a bit of context, here is the Farish conversion. I re-painted and lined the model, so any livery inaccuracies are entirely mine, although it was done from a prototype photo.

 

 

It runs very nicely, if a tad noisy due to the gears. It is using 11mm driving wheels and the brake gear is notable by absence. There is a softness to the casting and the ridges at the ends of the roof are a little more prominent, but the basic dimensions and shape are pretty decent.

 

 

Then we have the unconverted Sonic model in the same basic livery, but showing some small differences. The wheels are fairly fine and the rods fairly delicate. Separate handrails give the finesse expected of modern models, but the overall shape and size are almost identical to the old model.

 

 

And finally the converted model. This uses standard Association hornblock bearings for Farish conversion and muffs plus gear and standard muffs for the trailing wheels. I used 11.5mm drivers, 6.5mm for the front and 7.5mm for the rear pony. The main chassis muffs have to be trimmed to different lengths to fit. The rear is the most reduced to give more side-play.

 

The ponies also pick up for wires sort of similar to Simpson springs and then clip into the chassis block, and also have light springs between them and the body. This means that the ponies are significant to the current collection.

 

For coupling rods I used some spare Manor items I had kicking around, although those were a smidge longer. So I filed the rear  face and soldered a crank pin washer in the correct location and then drilled through before reaming a tad. It was only about 0.2mm out, but enough to need fettling.

 

Both Sonic models run very smoothly and quietly before and after conversion and I am very happy with the simple conversion.

 

The main difference is that my Farish model weighs 67 grams and the sonic models only 47 grams. I haven't yet tested ultimate haulage ability, but with ready to run stock I don't expect any issues, but with brass coaches I think they would run out of puff before the Farish model.

 

But overall, I'd recommend the Sonic large prairie and it isn't a tricky conversion. I suspect the association chassis kit would have correct length rods as the wheels of both models lie up perfectly. It would just be a bit of a waste to get one just for the rods, so we can probably do a simple rods set fairly soon.

 

Nigel

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Nigel - this one's all yours for now! I'd not planned on getting a 61xx, though I have been asked about it. 2FS wheels on the 61xx do look very nice and certainly help with the somewhat racy look I've always thought these tanks have.

 

I had hoped that they'd stick with the Farish-style hornblocks and it's good to see consistency in doing so. Indeed it's arguable that they're more consistent in using Farish hornblocks that Farish, but I digress...

 

I'd also wondered as to how to do the connecting rods - on the J50 I used a combination of rods from the 3-170 etch, the wheelbase being 7'0" + 7'9" which, in raw 1:152 makes for 14mm + 15.5mm, with the Sonic Model being N it might end up with 14.5mm + 16mm, I'd measure on the wheel centres to be sure.

 

If using 3-170, there'd still be a need for the connecting from from the cylinders, it might be possible to re-use the one supplied with the model by providing some sort of insert to allow it to fit on an association crank pin, or adapt one of the longer coupling rod pairs for this.

 

Cheers,

 

John

 

 

[Chris Higgs]

On 08/07/2024 at 10:18, yaxxbarl said:

Hi Nigel - this one's all yours for now! I'd not planned on getting a 61xx, though I have been asked about it. 2FS wheels on the 61xx do look very nice and certainly help with the somewhat racy look I've always thought these tanks have.

 

I had hoped that they'd stick with the Farish-style hornblocks and it's good to see consistency in doing so. Indeed it's arguable that they're more consistent in using Farish hornblocks that Farish, but I digress...

 

I'd also wondered as to how to do the connecting rods - on the J50 I used a combination of rods from the 3-170 etch, the wheelbase being 7'0" + 7'9" which, in raw 1:152 makes for 14mm + 15.5mm, with the Sonic Model being N it might end up with 14.5mm + 16mm, I'd measure on the wheel centres to be sure.

 

If using 3-170, there'd still be a need for the connecting from from the cylinders, it might be possible to re-use the one supplied with the model by providing some sort of insert to allow it to fit on an association crank pin, or adapt one of the longer coupling rod pairs for this.

 

Cheers,

 

John

 

 

 

The coupling and connecting rods on  3-623 are correct, I can probably arrange an etch of these separately without the rest of the chassis. The coupling rods on 3-170 don't have the correct GWR fishbelly shape to them.

 

Chris

[yaxxbarl]

10 hours ago, Chris Higgs said:

 

The coupling and connecting rods on  3-623 are correct, I can probably arrange an etch of these separately without the rest of the chassis. The coupling rods on 3-170 don't have the correct GWR fishbelly shape to them.

 

Chris

Chris,

 

Yes - definitely the better solution.

 

Cheers,

 

John

[queensquare]

On 07/07/2024 at 11:08, Llangerisech said:

Half expecting John (Yaxxbarl) to have done this already, but here is my experience of the Sonic Large Prairie. I had ordered 2 although I have previously used the Farish body on an Association chassis, so we have a comparison.

 

So on the right is the Farish conversion, in the centre a converted Sonic and on the left an unconverted Sonic.

So to give a bit of context, here is the Farish conversion. I re-painted and lined the model, so any livery inaccuracies are entirely mine, although it was done from a prototype photo.

 

 

It runs very nicely, if a tad noisy due to the gears. It is using 11mm driving wheels and the brake gear is notable by absence. There is a softness to the casting and the ridges at the ends of the roof are a little more prominent, but the basic dimensions and shape are pretty decent.

 

 

Then we have the unconverted Sonic model in the same basic livery, but showing some small differences. The wheels are fairly fine and the rods fairly delicate. Separate handrails give the finesse expected of modern models, but the overall shape and size are almost identical to the old model.

 

 

And finally the converted model. This uses standard Association hornblock bearings for Farish conversion and muffs plus gear and standard muffs for the trailing wheels. I used 11.5mm drivers, 6.5mm for the front and 7.5mm for the rear pony. The main chassis muffs have to be trimmed to different lengths to fit. The rear is the most reduced to give more side-play.

 

The ponies also pick up for wires sort of similar to Simpson springs and then clip into the chassis block, and also have light springs between them and the body. This means that the ponies are significant to the current collection.

 

For coupling rods I used some spare Manor items I had kicking around, although those were a smidge longer. So I filed the rear  face and soldered a crank pin washer in the correct location and then drilled through before reaming a tad. It was only about 0.2mm out, but enough to need fettling.

 

Both Sonic models run very smoothly and quietly before and after conversion and I am very happy with the simple conversion.

 

The main difference is that my Farish model weighs 67 grams and the sonic models only 47 grams. I haven't yet tested ultimate haulage ability, but with ready to run stock I don't expect any issues, but with brass coaches I think they would run out of puff before the Farish model.

 

But overall, I'd recommend the Sonic large prairie and it isn't a tricky conversion. I suspect the association chassis kit would have correct length rods as the wheels of both models lie up perfectly. It would just be a bit of a waste to get one just for the rods, so we can probably do a simple rods set fairly soon.

 

Nigel

 

 

 

 

 

That looks great Nigel. I’ve just treated myself to one. How did you deal with the front and rear ponies which have thin (1mm?) axles. Did you open them out to take an Association 1.5 mm axle.

 

Jerry

[bradfordbuffer]

On 07/07/2024 at 11:08, Llangerisech said:

Half expecting John (Yaxxbarl) to have done this already, but here is my experience of the Sonic Large Prairie. I had ordered 2 although I have previously used the Farish body on an Association chassis, so we have a comparison.

 

So on the right is the Farish conversion, in the centre a converted Sonic and on the left an unconverted Sonic.

So to give a bit of context, here is the Farish conversion. I re-painted and lined the model, so any livery inaccuracies are entirely mine, although it was done from a prototype photo.

 

 

It runs very nicely, if a tad noisy due to the gears. It is using 11mm driving wheels and the brake gear is notable by absence. There is a softness to the casting and the ridges at the ends of the roof are a little more prominent, but the basic dimensions and shape are pretty decent.

 

 

Then we have the unconverted Sonic model in the same basic livery, but showing some small differences. The wheels are fairly fine and the rods fairly delicate. Separate handrails give the finesse expected of modern models, but the overall shape and size are almost identical to the old model.

 

 

And finally the converted model. This uses standard Association hornblock bearings for Farish conversion and muffs plus gear and standard muffs for the trailing wheels. I used 11.5mm drivers, 6.5mm for the front and 7.5mm for the rear pony. The main chassis muffs have to be trimmed to different lengths to fit. The rear is the most reduced to give more side-play.

 

The ponies also pick up for wires sort of similar to Simpson springs and then clip into the chassis block, and also have light springs between them and the body. This means that the ponies are significant to the current collection.

 

For coupling rods I used some spare Manor items I had kicking around, although those were a smidge longer. So I filed the rear  face and soldered a crank pin washer in the correct location and then drilled through before reaming a tad. It was only about 0.2mm out, but enough to need fettling.

 

Both Sonic models run very smoothly and quietly before and after conversion and I am very happy with the simple conversion.

 

The main difference is that my Farish model weighs 67 grams and the sonic models only 47 grams. I haven't yet tested ultimate haulage ability, but with ready to run stock I don't expect any issues, but with brass coaches I think they would run out of puff before the Farish model.

 

But overall, I'd recommend the Sonic large prairie and it isn't a tricky conversion. I suspect the association chassis kit would have correct length rods as the wheels of both models lie up perfectly. It would just be a bit of a waste to get one just for the rods, so we can probably do a simple rods set fairly soon.

 

Nigel

 

 

 

 

 

hard to believe we are looking at 2mm scale...wonderful....but your crocodile clips are a bit on the large side!😆

[yaxxbarl]

10 hours ago, queensquare said:

That looks great Nigel. I’ve just treated myself to one. How did you deal with the front and rear ponies which have thin (1mm?) axles. Did you open them out to take an Association 1.5 mm axle.

 

Jerry

Jerry,

 

That's what I did on the rear pony truck on my 56xx - at the time I widened it out by turning a 1.5mm drill in it, there may of course be better ways of doing this!

 

Cheers,

 

John

[Llangerisech]

20 hours ago, queensquare said:

That looks great Nigel. I’ve just treated myself to one. How did you deal with the front and rear ponies which have thin (1mm?) axles. Did you open them out to take an Association 1.5 mm axle.

 

Jerry

No need Jerry- the original axles have 1.5mm journals and only have 1mm stepped inners inside the muff to get the correct gauge during production assembly. Just use regular trailing axle muffs and 1.5mm association  axles fit directing into the pony trucks - dead simple.

[Llangerisech]

20 hours ago, bradfordbuffer said:

hard to believe we are looking at 2mm scale...wonderful....but your crocodile clips are a bit on the large side!😆

Well I sometimes use a jump pack to power the DCC system - no need for a mains supply. So they are car-sized clips - could jump start a Focus with that set up as well as drive a 2mm test track. Useful bit of kit. But I agree they do look a bit over-size in the photos.

[queensquare]

1 hour ago, Llangerisech said:

No need Jerry- the original axles have 1.5mm journals and only have 1mm stepped inners inside the muff to get the correct gauge during production assembly. Just use regular trailing axle muffs and 1.5mm association  axles fit directing into the pony trucks - dead simple.

That’s really useful, thanks Nigel. I’ve dug out the plates for 4103 ( a B&NS loco) which I’ve had in stock for years ready for a Farish upgrade which never happened and ordered the wheels from shop 3. 
Another diversion I shouldn’t really be pursuing…. 
 

Jerry

[yaxxbarl]

One of the projects I've had on the go for a while is converting a Hunslet 0-6-0DH shunter to 2FS and I decided on revisiting this over the weekend in order to finish it off and cross something else off of 'The List'.

 

After discussions with many on this, notably @Nigelcliffe, who's ideas on converting his Hunslet I've largely followed, I'd long decided to go down the route of using the Farish conversion hornblocks and muffs with some 7.5mm Mk5 wheels and a cut-and-shut set of coupling rods.

 

The first difficulty is that the muff under the No. 2 (short bonnet) end would foul a pinion, so what I've done is take one of the 2.3mm muffs, reduce it in length to match the Farish conversion muffs and then 'turn' it down to 1.9mm diameter over 2/3 of the remaining length. Using this allows the rear wheelset to turn whilst being held in fairly firmly. To turn it down I mounted it on a piece of 1.5mm axle rod in a mini drill and then used a chisel-bladed cutter from a lino cutting set, holding the drill down flat on the bench whilst offering the blade up the muff. Rough and ready yes, but it worked for this. I may ask someone with a lathe nicely to do a proper job at some point!

 

The geared wheelset is the Farish Jinty conversion geared muff with the plastic gear replaced with an association 14t M0.3 gear, reduced a little in width by filing it across the face with a fairly fine file. Yes, it does sound a bit crude but it works. On the geared muff I also removed one of the retaining 'lips' to the raised section of the muff to allow the 14t gear to slide on, securing it with Loctite retaining compound.

 

This is the wheelset on an initial trial fitting together -

 

When I first mounted the axles there was an amount of sideplay of them in the chassis block. Nigel had suggested to me mounting a metal strip as some sort of shim on one side, particularly on the axle with the narrowed muff. In the end for all bar the driven axle I found tinning one side with solder was enough. Only on the driven axle I did need to put in a strip of half etched nickel silver.

 

Coupling rods were the Class 08/J94 rods from the 3-205 etch cut and shut down to size, using a soldering jig made from a piece of MDF with cut-off track pins stuck through at the axle centres.

 

Also, on the plastic keeper plate I needed to file flat some of the moulding on the face bearing on to the axle block to avoid it fouling axle muffs and the drive gear.

 

Once fitted in the chassis it looked like this -

 

I've had to add washers between the rods and wheels otherwise the coupling rods foul on the brake gear.

 

This is how the loco looks at the moment - the No. 2 end handrails will be refitted during weathering, as I'm likely to take the other handrails off at that point anyway.

 

 

So far in running tests it's doing very well, the very low gearing of the chassis helps anyway and current pickup seems excellent with very little stalling even on analogue DC.

 

I then need to sort out some balance weights so I'm going to be rooting though the spare etches box for any 6.5-7mm discs that can be cut up. Washers on with some etched bogies that I've seen ring a bell as being possibly suitable for this.

 

For finishing it off I'm hoping to remove the CEGB logo, hopefully there's some Orange paint underneath but if not a patch of paint in a similar colour over where the logo was won't look out of place, especially after a dose of rust and weathering.

 

Cheers,

 

John

Edited July 23 by yaxxbarl

[Izzy]

That looks a nice conversion using the Mk5/6 wheels John. Didn’t realise the Jinty/4F gear muff wouldn’t work in it so that’s good to know. These do run nicely thanks to the default fitted stay-alive alongside the CT decoder and allied to the gearing. 
 

Bob

[Chris Higgs]

On 07/07/2024 at 11:08, Llangerisech said:

Half expecting John (Yaxxbarl) to have done this already, but here is my experience of the Sonic Large Prairie. I had ordered 2 although I have previously used the Farish body on an Association chassis, so we have a comparison.

 

So on the right is the Farish conversion, in the centre a converted Sonic and on the left an unconverted Sonic.

So to give a bit of context, here is the Farish conversion. I re-painted and lined the model, so any livery inaccuracies are entirely mine, although it was done from a prototype photo.

 

 

It runs very nicely, if a tad noisy due to the gears. It is using 11mm driving wheels and the brake gear is notable by absence. There is a softness to the casting and the ridges at the ends of the roof are a little more prominent, but the basic dimensions and shape are pretty decent.

 

 

Then we have the unconverted Sonic model in the same basic livery, but showing some small differences. The wheels are fairly fine and the rods fairly delicate. Separate handrails give the finesse expected of modern models, but the overall shape and size are almost identical to the old model.

 

 

And finally the converted model. This uses standard Association hornblock bearings for Farish conversion and muffs plus gear and standard muffs for the trailing wheels. I used 11.5mm drivers, 6.5mm for the front and 7.5mm for the rear pony. The main chassis muffs have to be trimmed to different lengths to fit. The rear is the most reduced to give more side-play.

 

The ponies also pick up for wires sort of similar to Simpson springs and then clip into the chassis block, and also have light springs between them and the body. This means that the ponies are significant to the current collection.

 

For coupling rods I used some spare Manor items I had kicking around, although those were a smidge longer. So I filed the rear  face and soldered a crank pin washer in the correct location and then drilled through before reaming a tad. It was only about 0.2mm out, but enough to need fettling.

 

Both Sonic models run very smoothly and quietly before and after conversion and I am very happy with the simple conversion.

 

The main difference is that my Farish model weighs 67 grams and the sonic models only 47 grams. I haven't yet tested ultimate haulage ability, but with ready to run stock I don't expect any issues, but with brass coaches I think they would run out of puff before the Farish model.

 

But overall, I'd recommend the Sonic large prairie and it isn't a tricky conversion. I suspect the association chassis kit would have correct length rods as the wheels of both models lie up perfectly. It would just be a bit of a waste to get one just for the rods, so we can probably do a simple rods set fairly soon.

 

Nigel

 

 

 

 

 

 

You will notice a difference in the rivet pattern on the coal bunker area, which IIRC means the Farish model is based on an 81XX. This shows how important rivet counting is.

 

www.gwr.org.uk/no-prairies.html

 

Chris

Edited July 23 by Chris Higgs

[Michael Edge]

5 hours ago, yaxxbarl said:

One of the projects I've had on the go for a while is converting a Hunslet 0-6-0DH shunter to 2FS and I decided on revisiting this over the weekend in order to finish it off and cross something else off of 'The List'.

 

After discussions with many on this, notably @Nigelcliffe, who's ideas on converting his Hunslet I've largely followed, I'd long decided to go down the route of using the Farish conversion hornblocks and muffs with some 7.5mm Mk5 wheels and a cut-and-shut set of coupling rods.

 

The first difficulty is that the muff under the No. 2 (short bonnet) end would foul a pinion, so what I've done is take one of the 2.3mm muffs, reduce it in length to match the Farish conversion muffs and then 'turn' it down to 1.9mm diameter over 2/3 of the remaining length. Using this allows the rear wheelset to turn whilst being held in fairly firmly. To turn it down I mounted it on a piece of 1.5mm axle rod in a mini drill and then used a chisel-bladed cutter from a lino cutting set, holding the drill down flat on the bench whilst offering the blade up the muff. Rough and ready yes, but it worked for this. I may ask someone with a lathe nicely to do a proper job at some point!

 

The geared wheelset is the Farish Jinty conversion geared muff with the plastic gear replaced with an association 14t M0.3 gear, reduced a little in width by filing it across the face with a fairly fine file. Yes, it does sound a bit crude but it works. On the geared muff I also removed one of the retaining 'lips' to the raised section of the muff to allow the 14t gear to slide on, securing it with Loctite retaining compound.

 

This is the wheelset on an initial trial fitting together -

 

When I first mounted the axles there was an amount of sideplay of them in the chassis block. Nigel had suggests mounting a metal strip as some sort of shim on one side, particularly on the axle with the narrowed muff. In the end for all bar the driven axle I found tinning one side with solder was enough. Only on the driven axle I did need to put in a strip of half etched nickel silver.

 

Coupling rods were the Class 08/J94 rods from the 3-205 etch cut and shut down to size, using a soldering jig made from a piece of MDF with cut-off track pins stuck through at the axle centres.

 

Also, on the plastic keeper plate I needed to file flat some of the moulding on the face bearing on to the axle block to avoid it fouling axle muffs and the drive gear.

 

Once fitted in the chassis it looked like this -

 

I've had to add washers between the rods and wheels otherwise the coupling rods foul on the brake gear.

 

This is how the loco looks at the moment - the No. 2 end handrails will be refitted during weathering, as I'm likely to take the other handrails off at that point anyway.

 

 

So far in running tests it's doing very well, the very low gearing of the chassis helps anyway and current pickup seems excellent with very little stalling even on analogue DC.

 

I then need to sort out some balance weights so I'm going to be rooting though the spare etches box for any 6.5-7mm discs that can be cut up. Washers on with some etched bogies that I've seen ring a bell as being possibly suitable for this.

 

For finishing it off I'm hoping to remove the CEGB logo, hopefully there's some Orange paint underneath but if not a patch of paint in a similar colour over where the logo was won't look out of place, especially after a dose of rust and weathering.

 

Cheers,

 

John

Looks quite accurate with the narrow frames, like most Hunslets the axleboxes are on the outside for standard gauge in these locos.

[yaxxbarl]

2 hours ago, Michael Edge said:

Looks quite accurate with the narrow frames, like most Hunslets the axleboxes are on the outside for standard gauge in these locos.

MIke,

 

Yes - when I had the wheels out, there is a representation of the spring axleboxes on the chassis casting. Indeed, the 2FS conversion hornblocks are deeper than the N Gauge originals so this perhaps accentuates it!

 

Cheers,

 

John

[Revolution Ben]

20 hours ago, yaxxbarl said:

 

For finishing it off I'm hoping to remove the CEGB logo, hopefully there's some Orange paint underneath but if not a patch of paint in a similar colour over where the logo was won't look out of place, especially after a dose of rust and weathering.

 

Cheers,

 

John

 

Hi there,

 

That looks like a great job!

 

If you're wishing to debrand the model, then if it helps the orange used is RAL2003 Pastel Orange.

 

Having said that, photos I have seen of Hunslets repurposed for use elsewhere suggest that such debrandings and renumberings can be a fairly 'rough and ready' job; for example the logo and number simply overpainted with a roughly square black patch and then the new ID stencilled on in white.

 

Might this save the effort of trying to strip markings and colour-match the orange?  

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

Edited July 24 by Revolution Ben

[yaxxbarl]

9 hours ago, Revolution Ben said:

 

Hi there,

 

That looks like a great job!

 

If you're wishing to debrand the model, then if it helps the orange used is RAL2003 Pastel Orange.

 

Having said that, photos I have seen of Hunslets repurposed for use elsewhere suggest that such debransings and renumberings can be a fairly 'rough and ready' job; for example the logo and number simply overpainted with a roughly square black patch and then the new ID stencilled on in white.

 

Might this save the effort of trying to strip markings and colour-match the orange?  

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

Ben,

 

Yes, I think that's the way I'll go as with trying to strip the markings there's a risk I'll go all the way through. Also, even if I do use an orange of some sort, a slight mismatch will be in keeping with the look of such locos in the 80s.

 

Cheers,

 

John

[Izzy]

The paint finish is very thin on the cab. Since it’s over a clear shell overpainting will produce a darker patch as there is no base colour but might be better than trying to rub it off using such as a fibre pencil etc. This is what I tried with mine and of course all the paint coat came off. Luckily I was fitting home brew inkjet monograms which covered the area. These are great models it has to be said. A real credit to the NGS. 
 

Bob
 

 

Edited July 24 by Izzy

[Chris Higgs]

On 10/07/2024 at 09:09, yaxxbarl said:

Chris,

 

Yes - definitely the better solution.

 

Cheers,

 

John

 

I have now prepared some artwork for 61XX coupling and connecting rods. But could some kind soul please measure the precise spacing of the axle centres so I can check they match.

 

Chris

 

[Llangerisech]

2 hours ago, Chris Higgs said:

 

I have now prepared some artwork for 61XX coupling and connecting rods. But could some kind soul please measure the precise spacing of the axle centres so I can check they match.

 

Chris

 

Hi Chris,

Front 14.5mm rear 16.1mm Looks the same as the Farish conversion chassis, with just a smidge longer on the rear w/b but only a hair.

 

regards

Nigel

[Chris Higgs]

51 minutes ago, Llangerisech said:

Hi Chris,

Front 14.5mm rear 16.1mm Looks the same as the Farish conversion chassis, with just a smidge longer on the rear w/b but only a hair.

 

regards

Nigel

 

14.43 and 15.95 are what are on the chassis etch, which are prototype 7'+7'9" in 1:148

 

Chris

[Bryn]

 

45T Class B Insulated Tank Wagon Design Code TTO66C. Stephen Harris etches and a custom body drawn by Tom Everitt.

 

[DavidLong]

On 21/09/2023 at 13:41, yaxxbarl said:

So... after getting an EFE J94 thoughts soon turned to converting it. On disassembling it, is soon became apparent that none of the currently available conversion bearings were going to work, due to the design of the axles, which is akin to those used on the Dapol 57xx -

 

 

After measuring the inside of the bearing and the diameter of the narrow part of an association drive bush they were near enough a match, so thoughts turned to how to fit the drive bush in the bearing. I decided the narrow the bearing down to provide adequate room for the muffs, and fashioned a filing jig from a few bits of tufnol sheet I had to hand -

 

 

This shows a, unadulterated drive bearing, a J94 chassis bearing, a filed down bearing and the filing jig. The hole on the lower layer of tufnol is sized to take the wide end of the drive bearing.

 

I took some 3mm muffs, in the bearings they are a snug fit, far too tight for free rotation, so I reduced them in length to 4.5mm and in diameter to about 2.7mm, the diameter reduction done my sticking them on a piece of 1.5mm axle steel, putting it in a drill and then rotating it whilst using a file to 'turn' it down.

 

For the geared axle I did similar, again reducing in length to 4.5mm, mounting a 20T M0.3 gear in the middle, mounting on a piece of axle steel in a drill and filing down the exposed parts of the muff to 2.7mm diameter.

 

With hindsight I would use shortened Farish conversion muffs for the outer axles!

 

I then was able to press fit the filed bearings in the EFE bearings from the squared/outer end of each, using a bit of Loctite 638 to help retain them in. I did have to turn a triangular file around the inside of the outer ends of the EFE bearings to help the filed bearings fit in, using a small vice as an improvised press to drive them home.

 

I was then able to re-assemble the axle sets and mount them in the chassis for a test fit -

 

 

This all seemed to work so far, even to the point of the centre driver rotating when I applied power to it on a rolling road. So, next to coupling rods - I used the old Farish 08/J94 rods on the 3-205 etch as a basis, reducing the length between the rear two wheelsets by the 'cut and shut' method I used for my Pannier Tank wheelsets. I was able to use the EFE rods to derive the centres and mark up a soldering jig made from an MDF offcut with cut-off track pins driven through at the centres.

 

I quartered the wheels, mainly by eye and sheer luck, and then secured some crankpins in the wheels using Loctite 638, cutting them down on the rear two drivers due to lack of clearances between the mid footstep and the injector pipes respectively.

 

At this point I threaded in the coupling rods - and realised I'd made my first set 0.5mm too long between the rear drivers, so I re-checked the jig and made a second set - this time they were right!

 

Once these were fitted, a final bit of fettling to the quartering was done and I soldered some crankpin washers to the rear wheels, allowing for easy removal for painting.

 

 

...and here's the proof of this proverbial pudding - the loco in action on the rollers!

 

 

It also sauntered nicely up and down the test track. It'll do for now anyway, it's enough to go on the demo stand at Stafford after which it will go into the paint and detailing shops to come out at Cromford & High Peak stalwart 68012, oval buffers and all!

 

Cheers,

 

John

 

Hi John. 

 

Just having a look back at your J94 conversion. You didn't mention what size wheels you used. Technically 8.5mm is correct but I suspect that the flanges then make them too big which would imply the use of 8mm wheels. Which did you find suited the conversion best?

 

David

[Lacathedrale]

One of the major drawbacks for Hennock was the vestigial nature of the off-scene connection, and proper fiddle yard design was something I wanted to establish early on my FiNescale layout, Addington.

 

For Hennock I laid my track on 2mm thick grey cardstock, and so my fiddle yard cassettes were simply more of the same material with some track glued to it, with positioning effected by bent wires bearing on the outside of the fixed rail ends. Power was fed to the single cassette by a fly lead. There were numerous drawbacks with this system:

• There was no latching or securing of the cassette to the tracks
• The cassette-layout joint occured underneath the side backscene aperature, so was difficult to ensure proper alignment
• The cassette itself was terrible: flimsy, single-purpose and single-ended.

Reviewing Jim Watt's articles in the 2mm Association Magazine Feb/April 2009 I felt like I had a basis for a solution - the running rails on the cassettes would consist of aluminium angle, with a short transition from running rail to angle on-layout. The alignment, securing, and power transmission from the running rails to the cassettes would be effected through steel bulldog clips across the top of the angles, as is tradition.

 

While Jim used plywood, I felt I could use 3D printing to achieve the same effect, and as a result have come up with this design:

 

Angle is inserted into the block, the vertical side between hooked overarms and the sides, and the horizontal side laying flat on the shelf. The overarms are sized to hold the angle flat and to the correct gauge, and have a close fit, though could be further secured with glue for more robustness. The relieved corners are to mitigate the round-over nature of filament printing.

 

 

 

The overall length of each section is 40mm, with a bare section on either end to recieve bulldog clips for power transfer. The recessed centre of the design is provided to insert a plain track section in, the recess is the correct depth for Finetrax/FiNescale rail-head matches the height of the aluminium angle naturally. Additional sections can be slid on to the angle at desired intervals for additional rigidity. There are both horizontal and vertical through holes - the former for providing a traditional plug-in alignment option, the latter as fixing holes for clamping inserts for gluing, end stops for use during transport or re-railers (produced but not yet pictured).

 

Currently at version 13 or so, I'm very pleased with how these have come along so far. I would be very happy to share the files if anyone is interested. At about 20p per set plus £2 per metre of 10x10x1mm angle, these are very cheap and I'm considering them effectively disposable.

 

[Caley Jim]

Since writing that article I've made a couple of amendments to my arrangement.  On our last group layut, sauchenford, accurate alingment of the cassettes was an issue and we solved that by fitting small pieces of pcb (happened to be the right thickness) 9.42mm wide, with flangeway recess cut into them, into the layout connections.  On Kirkallanmuir I had a slight problem in that the connections to the cassettes were rather close together and the adjacent clips were liable to touch one another causing a short.   Recently I've done away with the clips by fitting brass strips under which the ends of the cassettes slide providing electrical connection.

 

Jim