Mount Bellew, MGWR

[2996 Victor]

4 hours ago, David Holman said:

This is probably going off at a slight tangent, but does the old Wrenn/Hornby South Eastern R1 translate into anything vaguely Irish? Converted one to EM without any problems and the motor/gears were good for the day. Mind you, that was nearly 40 years ago, when I returned to model railways following the usual sojourn of pushing up the value of brewery shares and chasing girls.

 At the time, I knew almost nothing of modelling and the tool kit was vestigial, so an R1 might be a starting point perhaps and there must be a few out there second hand.

 

3 hours ago, Galteemore said:

Not a bad idea at that, David! Can’t check dimensions right now but an MGW P is close-ish….images from Mike Morant 

For some reason I can't quite now remember, I was looking for a Wrenn R1 a couple of years ago and they were still quite easily find-able on fleabay. There were also brand-new body mouldings, too.

I have a strong hankering for a P Class, they have real "presence" and with names like "Giant", "Giantess", "Hercules" what's not to like? One would be completely out of place on a minor branch-line in Galway, of course, so I'll have to invoke Rule 1  

Cheers,
Mark

3 hours ago, KMCE said:

Gotta promote the auld DSER

And why not, Ken? Speaking of which, I'm hoping this weekend to be able to make a start on those wagons you sent me

Cheers,
Mark

[Andy Cundick]

My E Class (thats the MGW one no the NER one),was built from the TMD kit now done by SSM,i don't know how much it has changed but the (about 35 yrs ago) it came with 2 chassis neither of which i was very impressed with,the fact that Gibson does the frames indicates i wasn't the only one.If you are thinking of doing a 21mm gauge one,i would suggest the best plan would be to use the Mainly  trains J72 chassis with longer axles and spacing washers.For the chassis and then have go at building your own body,its a nice simple one to do,brass tube for the boiler and next size up for the smokebox.There are drawings for the loco in Model Railways Oct 1976.For cabsides/tanks the trick is to sweat two bits of brass together then using PVA glue stick the plan onto the brass and cutout round out round it once done unsolder the two sheets and there you are both sides done at once.The trick with scratchbuilding is not to focus on the whole thing but just on the bit you're doing ie footplate that way its less daunting.Why brass and soldering? because i when you cock it up a touch of the iron and you can have another go,try that with plastic.If you do go down that route i've got the original pattern smokebox and chimney you can have which came with the kit as did 552 in the 30s so they're surplus to requirements.Andy.

[2996 Victor]

43 minutes ago, Andy Cundick said:

My E Class (thats the MGW one no the NER one),was built from the TMD kit now done by SSM,i don't know how much it has changed but the (about 35 yrs ago) it came with 2 chassis neither of which i was very impressed with,the fact that Gibson does the frames indicates i wasn't the only one.If you are thinking of doing a 21mm gauge one,i would suggest the best plan would be to use the Mainly  trains J72 chassis with longer axles and spacing washers.For the chassis and then have go at building your own body,its a nice simple one to do,brass tube for the boiler and next size up for the smokebox.There are drawings for the loco in Model Railways Oct 1976.For cabsides/tanks the trick is to sweat two bits of brass together then using PVA glue stick the plan onto the brass and cutout round out round it once done unsolder the two sheets and there you are both sides done at once.The trick with scratchbuilding is not to focus on the whole thing but just on the bit you're doing ie footplate that way its less daunting.Why brass and soldering? because i when you cock it up a touch of the iron and you can have another go,try that with plastic.If you do go down that route i've got the original pattern smokebox and chimney you can have which came with the kit as did 552 in the 30s so they're surplus to requirements.Andy.

Hi Andy,

many thanks for your reply, that's extremely helpful and very encouraging, thank you! You've convinced me to have a go at scratch-building in brass  as you say, its a fairly straight-forward loco, shape-wise, and appears to be flush-rivetted, too. I've been having a look at the current Gibson catalogue and there's a nice selection of parts available.

I've had a quick look for Model Railways October 1976, it seems a bit shy but hopefully I can find one.

Thank you very much indeed also for your kind offer of the original-pattern chimney and smokebox, which I'd very much like to take you up on, please. I'll drop you a PM.

Kind regards,
Mark

[Westcorkrailway]

1 hour ago, Andy Cundick said:

My E Class (thats the MGW one no the NER one),was built from the TMD kit now done by SSM,i don't know how much it has changed but the (about 35 yrs ago) it came with 2 chassis neither of which i was very impressed with,the fact that Gibson does the frames indicates i wasn't the only one.If you are thinking of doing a 21mm gauge one,i would suggest the best plan would be to use the Mainly  trains J72 chassis with longer axles and spacing washers.For the chassis and then have go at building your own body,its a nice simple one to do,brass tube for the boiler and next size up for the smokebox.There are drawings for the loco in Model Railways Oct 1976.For cabsides/tanks the trick is to sweat two bits of brass together then using PVA glue stick the plan onto the brass and cutout round out round it once done unsolder the two sheets and there you are both sides done at once.The trick with scratchbuilding is not to focus on the whole thing but just on the bit you're doing ie footplate that way its less daunting.Why brass and soldering? because i when you cock it up a touch of the iron and you can have another go,try that with plastic.If you do go down that route i've got the original pattern smokebox and chimney you can have which came with the kit as did 552 in the 30s so they're surplus to requirements.Andy.

I’m tempted myself to do an SSM J26 kit, would J72 chassis really fit underneath the kit build? 

[2996 Victor]

Just now, Westcorkrailway said:

I’m tempted myself to do an SSM J26 kit, would J72 chassis really fit underneath the kit build? 

The E Class wheelbase is 6'3"+7'0", while the J72 is 6'8"+7'0", which is 1.66mm in 4mm scale. I'd guess you might have to fudge the front splasher slightly?

Gibson does custom milled frames, so I've just sent them a message asking what the likely costs might be, and giving them the wheelbase dimensions. Not sure if they'll need any other info before providing an estimate, but I'll post it here when they get back to me.

Cheers,
Mark

[Andy Cundick]

The thing with using the Mainly trains chassis is that you have all the bits and instructions which if its your first chassis will simplify things.Alan Gibson did do the frames even though they are not in there current list however bear in mind that what you get is just that a pair of frames with cutouts for hornblocks,Two tools i would suggest you acquire is an 1/8th reamer and the GW Models wheel quartering jig (makes quartering simple).Andy.

[2996 Victor]

12 minutes ago, Andy Cundick said:

The thing with using the Mainly trains chassis is that you have all the bits and instructions which if its your first chassis will simplify things.Alan Gibson did do the frames even though they are not in there current list however bear in mind that what you get is just that a pair of frames with cutouts for hornblocks,Two tools i would suggest you acquire is an 1/8th reamer and the GW Models wheel quartering jig (makes quartering simple).Andy.

Hi Andy,

Many thanks for this - it makes perfect sense and given that the difference in wheelbase is a scale 5" it's really not going to be noticeable. I'll have a look for the Mainly Trains chassis kit and get one ordered.

Thanks for the tool suggestions, as well, I imagine Eileen's would be a good place for the reamer. I've also sent an order to Poppy's WoodTech for one of their chassis building box thingies - I'll need all the help I can muster

Many thanks once again,

Mark

[Galteemore]

Post your progress here Mark. We have all had to learn this stuff. I’d also recommend Simon Bolton’s books on scratch building - very accessible and user friendly. 
 

Eileen’s is great for many things but can also be pricey. Try watch suppliers like Cousins. Metalsmith is a great place to buy your sheet metal from. 

[2996 Victor]

1 hour ago, Galteemore said:

Post your progress here Mark.

I will!  

1 hour ago, Galteemore said:

We have all had to learn this stuff. I’d also recommend Simon Bolton’s books on scratch building - very accessible and user friendly.

I haven't heard of these - quick Google search needed! Thanks for the pointer  

1 hour ago, Galteemore said:

Eileen’s is great for many things but can also be pricey. Try watch suppliers like Cousins. Metalsmith is a great place to buy your sheet metal from.

Again, thank you! I'll check out Metalsmith as well!

Cheers,
Mark

[2996 Victor]

1 hour ago, Galteemore said:

I’d also recommend Simon Bolton’s books on scratch building - very accessible and user friendly.

So I'm finding two books: Scratch-building Model Railway Locomotives and Scratch-building Model Railway Tank Locomotives. Are they complimentary or does one repeat what's said in the other? Do I need both???  

Thanks for any advice!!!

Cheers,
Mark

[Galteemore]

Both are good. If you have to pick one, I’d go for the first one. He basically builds a GER J15 in it and guides you along the way.  It’s probably not a million miles off what your J26 would require -  a guide to building a simple six coupled loco.

[2996 Victor]

1 minute ago, Galteemore said:

Both are good. If you have to pick one, I’d go for the first one. He basically builds a GER J15 in it and guides you along the way.  It’s probably not a million miles off what your J26 would require -  a guide to building a simple six coupled loco.

Brilliant, thanks! I'll start with that one  I'll probably end up with them both.....

Cheers,
Mark

[Galteemore]

1 minute ago, 2996 Victor said:

Brilliant, thanks! I'll start with that one  I'll probably end up with them both.....

Cheers,
Mark

I did!!  And a few others - Sharman, Ahern, Williams, Holt…..

Edited May 6, 2022 by Galteemore

[KMCE]

29 minutes ago, Galteemore said:

Both are good. If you have to pick one, I’d go for the first one

Whereas, I went for the second one as I have a soft spot for tank locomotives.  My post on 458 class build

was based on Boltons second book with strong influence from Flexichas by Sharman. 

Depends if you want tank or tender locomotives, but as @Galteemore noted, both are excellent.

Ken

[2996 Victor]

7 minutes ago, KMCE said:

Whereas, I went for the second one as I have a soft spot for tank locomotives.  My post on 458 class build

was based on Boltons second book with strong influence from Flexichas by Sharman. 

Depends if you want tank or tender locomotives, but as @Galteemore noted, both are excellent.

Ken

Thanks, Ken, that's good to know! I'll probably want both tender and tank locomotives, long term. So, both it is!!! 

Cheers,

Mark

[KMCE]

6 minutes ago, 2996 Victor said:

So, both it is!!! 

Excellent.  Both have merits and depending on your preferences, either way, you will find great advice. 

I had a great fear of building locomotives and was following the route of bashing RTR locos to mimic Irish locos, but was never really happy with the results.  Having read the book (many times BTW), I decided I had nothing to lose and started into scratch building.  What I learned is that despite how complex these locos look (including mine) they are built up of small parts, each being quite straightforward to build.  No loco just appears on your workbench fully finished, but does come together as each part is built - a very satisfying process.  You don't need many tools, however there are some essentials that help in delivering good looking results (thinking of the rivet tool here).  Materials are not overly expensive so you can afford to make mistakes & try again.

I will warn you though, once you go down this route, Pandora's box is opened and anything is possible!!!

Ken

 

[2996 Victor]

11 minutes ago, KMCE said:

Both have merits and depending on your preferences, either way, you will find great advice.

Good to know I expect a combination of the two will be good for a six-coupled tank locomotive!

13 minutes ago, KMCE said:

What I learned is that despite how complex these locos look (including mine) they are built up of small parts, each being quite straightforward to build.  No loco just appears on your workbench fully finished, but does come together as each part is built - a very satisfying process

I think this is what has put me off for so many years, making the transition from raw materials to finished object. It's difficult for someone with no experience to visually break down, even compartmentalise, the various parts of a locomotive and approach them as discreet entities. I had never thought in those terms literally until I read your post!

18 minutes ago, KMCE said:

I will warn you though, once you go down this route, Pandora's box is opened and anything is possible!!!

Lol! Yes, I can imagine that.....

Thank you for your encouragement, Ken, I'm feeling quite excited to give it a go!

Cheers,

Mark

[Galteemore]

22 minutes ago, KMCE said:

Excellent.  Both have merits and depending on your preferences, either way, you will find great advice. 

I had a great fear of building locomotives and was following the route of bashing RTR locos to mimic Irish locos, but was never really happy with the results.  Having read the book (many times BTW), I decided I had nothing to lose and started into scratch building.  What I learned is that despite how complex these locos look (including mine) they are built up of small parts, each being quite straightforward to build.  No loco just appears on your workbench fully finished, but does come together as each part is built - a very satisfying process.  You don't need many tools, however there are some essentials that help in delivering good looking results (thinking of the rivet tool here).  Materials are not overly expensive so you can afford to make mistakes & try again.

I will warn you though, once you go down this route, Pandora's box is opened and anything is possible!!!

Ken

 

100% agree. Any steam loco is simply an assemblage of different sized cylinders and boxes, really. Start off with something simple like a loco spectacle plate. Identify just what it is that makes this loco’s spectacle plate different from another. Look at drawings, look at photos, and try to copy what you see…not what you think you see….before you know it you will have one finished part.

[Andy Cundick]

36 minutes ago, KMCE said:

Excellent.  Both have merits and depending on your preferences, either way, you will find great advice. 

I had a great fear of building locomotives and was following the route of bashing RTR locos to mimic Irish locos, but was never really happy with the results.  Having read the book (many times BTW), I decided I had nothing to lose and started into scratch building.  What I learned is that despite how complex these locos look (including mine) they are built up of small parts, each being quite straightforward to build.  No loco just appears on your workbench fully finished, but does come together as each part is built - a very satisfying process.  You don't need many tools, however there are some essentials that help in delivering good looking results (thinking of the rivet tool here).  Materials are not overly expensive so you can afford to make mistakes & try again.

I will warn you though, once you go down this route, Pandora's box is opened and anything is possible!!!

Ken

 

Completely agree about the pandoras box,my first two full scratchbuilds were Castlederg 4 and 5,then a Rhodesian Class 15 garratt just because i always fancied one(looks a bit odd at Castlederg).Another goods source of tools and metal is Chronos  their small drills are about 2/3rdsthe price of Eileens with no minimum order and freepost.Andy.

[2996 Victor]

@KMCE, @Galteemore, @Andy Cundick - chaps, I'm convinced - I'm going to give it a go!

 

[David Holman]

Good to hear. Go for it and enjoy the journey. 

[Mayner]

I have assembled the TMD/SSM MGWR E Class kit with both the original brass and more recent nickel silver chassis both locos run reasonably well. I assembled the first kit (my first etched kit) in 1984/5 rebuilt the loco into GSR form about 10 years later and recently completed the second kit.

The kit was originally supplied with with an etched brass chassis in the same thickness of material as the body, the kit was later supplied with a etched nickel silver chassis a material which is less flexible than brass. The main drawback with the brass chassis was that it was difficult to achieve reliable running when assembled as a rigid chassis as the chassis tended to twist when both ends of the chassis were bolted to the body and the break gear/pull rods was very fine challenging to assemble, the nickel silver chassis largely over came these problems.

The SSM/TMD is a good starting point for assembling etched kits or scratchbuilding, being a very simple kit closer to pressed metal kits such as the Leinster Models O gauge E class than more complex etched kit design.

 

Underside of 553 with brass chassis, showing limited clearance between crank pins and valence in 21mm gauge. 

I will update my Workbench thread with a post on the pros and cons of assembling both types of chassis.

Applying a bit of lateral thinking Andy's suggestion of using a J72 chassis makes sense especially with the High Level Chassis kit https://www.highlevelkits.co.uk/product-page/lner-j72, the two classes are very close dimensionally including overall length, wheelbase, wheel and boiler diameter, a High Level 2 stage gearbox with one of the new coreless motors would result in a very quiet smooth running loco.

Edited May 7, 2022 by Mayner

[2996 Victor]

2 hours ago, Mayner said:

I have assembled the TMD/SSM MGWR E Class kit with both the original brass and more recent nickel silver chassis both locos run reasonably well. I assembled the first kit (my first etched kit) in 1984/5 rebuilt the loco into GSR form about 10 years later and recently completed the second kit.

The kit was originally supplied with with an etched brass chassis in the same thickness of material as the body, the kit was later supplied with a etched nickel silver chassis a material which is less flexible than brass. The main drawback with the brass chassis was that it was difficult to achieve reliable running when assembled as a rigid chassis as the chassis tended to twist when both ends of the chassis were bolted to the body and the break gear/pull rods was very fine challenging to assemble, the nickel silver chassis largely over came these problems.

The SSM/TMD is a good starting point for assembling etched kits or scratchbuilding, being a very simple kit closer to pressed metal kits such as the Leinster Models O gauge E class than more complex etched kit design.

 

Underside of 553 with brass chassis, showing limited clearance between crank pins and valence in 21mm gauge. 

I will update my Workbench thread with a post on the pros and cons of assembling both types of chassis.

Applying a bit of lateral thinking Andy's suggestion of using a J72 chassis makes sense especially with the High Level Chassis kit https://www.highlevelkits.co.uk/product-page/lner-j72, the two classes are very close dimensionally including overall length, wheelbase, wheel and boiler diameter, a High Level 2 stage gearbox with one of the new coreless motors would result in a very quiet smooth running loco.

Hi John,

many thanks for this: your thoughts on the TMD/SSM kit are very welcome! I'd noticed the High Level Chassis Kit and that they do a package with a gearbox and motor - next question is what's the best gearing....??? Almost unanswerable, I know, but I suspect of the three available, 60:1, 80:1, 108:1, that 60:1 or 80:1 would be the most useful. And which motor? 

Cheers,
Mark

[Galteemore]

Rough guideline is lower the speed you want, the higher the ratio. Over 100 ideal for a small shunting layout.

[2996 Victor]

1 hour ago, Galteemore said:

Rough guideline is lower the speed you want, the higher the ratio. Over 100 ideal for a small shunting layout.

Hmmmmm.....not sure if 80 or 108, then! Have to think about that  

[KMCE]

6 hours ago, Galteemore said:

Rough guideline is lower the speed you want, the higher the ratio

Agreed, however you do need to consider the speed of the motor also.   High Level does provide a speed calculator on the Help tab.  I can't link to it here as when you click on the link it downloads a spreadsheet. 

This is a very useful resource as it will help you with gearbox selection - for example a motor speed of 15000 RPM with 108 ratio gearbox will give a very similar speed to a 10000 RPM motor with an 80 ratio gearbox.

This is particularly relevant for me at the moment as I am trying to change away from 12V motors to 3.7V motors to suit the LiPo batteries & there is a bewildering array of motors from 8000 RPM to 50000 RPM to be had.  So this calculator has been essential to getting correct speeds to match the gearboxes I already have.

Hope that is of assistance.

Ken

[2996 Victor]

11 hours ago, KMCE said:

Agreed, however you do need to consider the speed of the motor also.   High Level does provide a speed calculator on the Help tab.  I can't link to it here as when you click on the link it downloads a spreadsheet. 

This is a very useful resource as it will help you with gearbox selection - for example a motor speed of 15000 RPM with 108 ratio gearbox will give a very similar speed to a 10000 RPM motor with an 80 ratio gearbox.

This is particularly relevant for me at the moment as I am trying to change away from 12V motors to 3.7V motors to suit the LiPo batteries & there is a bewildering array of motors from 8000 RPM to 50000 RPM to be had.  So this calculator has been essential to getting correct speeds to match the gearboxes I already have.

Hope that is of assistance.

Ken

Thanks, Ken, that's extremely helpful!

Not ever having tried this before, it's truly bewildering - obviously, the lower the gear ratio the slower the speed for a given rpm, but having reference to motor speeds is essential.

Greatly appreciated as always!

Mark

[Mayner]

21 hours ago, 2996 Victor said:

I'd noticed the High Level Chassis Kit and that they do a package with a gearbox and motor - next question is what's the best gearing....??? Almost unanswerable, I know, but I suspect of the three available, 60:1, 80:1, 108:1, that 60:1 or 80:1 would be the most useful. And which motor? 

Cheers,
Mark

Both the 60:1 and 80:1 gearbox and High Level 10x20 FE or 12X19 C (both 17,000rpm) motors should be suitable for a loco like an E on a fiddle yard to terminus layout.

80:1 should result in a slightly lower top speed than a 60:1. 

108:1 is only really suitable for a shunting loco like a Pug, 03 or 08 diesel

 

[2996 Victor]

3 minutes ago, Mayner said:

Both the 60:1 and 80:1 gearbox and High Level 10x20 FE or 12X19 C (both 17,000rpm) motors should be suitable for a loco like an E on a fiddle yard to terminus layout.

80:1 should result in a slightly lower top speed than a 60:1. 

108:1 is only really suitable for a shunting loco like a Pug, 03 or 08 diesel

 

Brilliant, thank you!  

[David Holman]

High Level gearboxes are very good too.