Locomotive kit recomendation for newbie

[Mike Paterson]

Hello, I am a very new member to the society who needs a little help. I have made a few kits in EM gauge. Some worked well whilst others so-so. I have used both white metal and brass. These have been both external and internal combustion some with inside cylinders and a few with outside cylinders so I am aware of the crosshead/crank pin clearance issues. I have even made a tolerable job of a couple of jidenco kits, an 02 and a Coal tank.

So to the question: Do High level kits have sufficient clearances in P4 ? Or do I start with a simple inside cylinder kit ? I have the kits, motors and gear boxes already so no major outlay apart from a set of suitable wheels. I have a couple of Highlevel saddle tanks , the RSH 0-4-0, HL 0-6-0 and the armstrong whitworth 0-4-0. For an inside cylinder 0-6-0. I have a Agenoria/CSP Hunslet Jazzer although i note that it only comes with EM frame spacers. I suspect that at this stage I will probably use conventional compensation.

I am an apprentice member of the Cornish Riviera group so have Steve Howe to call on.

Don't expect a running commentary on my first P4 build yet, but it may happen.

Many thanks

Mike

[nberrington]

For my two cents: High Level kits are wonderful to build, but the clearances on the Neilson I built are very iffy../
Chris’ instructions are easy to follow and the kits go together very well indeed. He’s also super helpful if the carpet gods gobble a piece or you bend something the wrong way……

Having said that - I would suggest looking at a Judith Edge kit - also fit well, solder well (nickel silver is easy) and they are cleverly designed. They go together quickly, so you won’t be spending months making a Harvey wallbanger……

[nberrington]

Although if you’ve made Jidencos that work, you’ll be fine!

[nigelcliffe]

High Level stuff builds fine in P4 if you follow the instructions carefully. I've built quite a few of them, including some you mention.
Some of the clearances are close, but not crazy, and I've not found anything which didn't work in them.

I didn't even find the Neilson (the GER version) a problem.

- Nigel

[David Knight]

Hi Mike,

I’ll just add my agreement to what Neil and Nigel have said about HighLevel kits. For my money they have the best instructions and drawings of any kit that I have built. The complete instructions are even downloadable for free if you want to test the waters before purchasing the kit in order to get an idea of what lies ahead. An added bonus is the fact that many of us on this list have built the kits so advice is easily obtained with a posting to this forum.

All this said I have to agree with Neil, if you’ve been able to complete a Jidenco kit you should be fine with HighLevel.

Cheers,

David

[davebradwell]

The answers so far fail to address teh problem. Clearance issues behind cranks have little to do with the source of the kit but because we are working to near prototype dimensions but fail to get them quite right. Problem is usually because we put a boss on the wheel when face should be flush with teh tyre. Further our wheels are 2mm wide when they should be 1.85, normally. Then we space our rods a little further out so they don't scrape the paint off the wheel rims on curves and wonder why we have problems. It should all be quite predictable before building starts and the dimensions worked out first.

I'll add that 4-6-0s are usually a better bet because the crosshead is in front of the leading crankpin but this can catch the end of teh slidebars, especially if of the wide Gresley type. 2-6-0s tend to the tricky end. GW types have the cylinders set a little wider apart which probably helps but it's only a problem when you don't plan for it. A 4mm Finney V2 was a particular challenge but mainly because the slidebar is wider than scale.

High Level make fine kits but have the same challenges as everyone else as they use standard wheels and crankpins.

DaveB

[Jol Wilkinson]

A quote from Chris of HL kits on RMweb on 31st May 2023 and on the HL website.

"Although we still have some original stock, we’re now starting to offer our kits in a slightly different format. As before, we’ll include a full set of etched and cast components, a custom gearbox specifically designed for that model, but so you don't have to pay twice for common parts you may well keep in stock we leave you to provide parts like brass wire and tube, nuts and bolts, and handrail knobs."

Whilst not an issue for some of us, a "newbie" will have to know where source these. Possibly from more than one suppliers and less easy since Eileen's Emporium closed.

[pete_mcfarlane]

The High Level Barclay 0-6-0T was my first P4 loco, and I had no major issues with it (including the crosshead clearances). The biggest challenge was plucking up the courage to start

[Winander]

Don't expect a running commentary on my first P4 build yet, but it may happen.

Why ever not? Seeing another new member take their first steps may encourage others. One of the best things about this forum is the amount of help you can seek and receive.

[Mike Paterson]

Thank you for the replies and encouragement.
I was not expecting the curve ball from Dave B about using a 4-6-0. As our area group layout is based on GWR and to a lesser extent SR practice so a
4-6-0 would be quite useful.
A quick trip to the attic has found a Pro-Scale Saint in the waiting to be built box. This is now in my sights along with one of the High Level kits. I notice that ultrascale do wheels for its engine.
As to a build diary on the forum, I think that is a good idea considering I used to get lumbered with, sorry wrong term, mentoring our apprentices when i was at work. It may also provide some impetus to do some more modelling.

[Philip Hall]

I've never built a Proscale kit so perhaps I should be a bit careful about saying this, but I've heard enough stories about them to say that although the outcome of building them seemed quite good, the ways of getting there would put them fairly low down my list of 'desirable for a newbie' possibilities. As Dave B says, a GWR 4-6-0 is quite a good engine and clearances at the front end are better with the wider cylinders, and for a Saint the fact that the crankpin is a goodly way away from the crosshead.

Below is a picture of a Saint I had a hand in some time ago. Please forgive the paint job but that was how it came to me, with a remit to convert from EM to P4, and the paint was going to be attended to by the owner. Now this one is a Wills kit (I think) and clearances were as you might expect with whitemetal, exacerbated by the original builder's tendency to reinforcement of delicate areas with large chunks of brass. The bit that gave me most grief was between the front and middle drivers, where clearance is tight to say the least, and I had to fit some brake gear in there somewhere. Recessed Ultrascale crankpin nuts on ordinary Alan Gibson wheels allowed enough clearance with minimal sideplay on the front axle. It had compensation of a sort (I can't really remember now) but with trued up wheels it ran very steadily. It was a bit light-footed on the rear axle, and I sprung the tender drawbar down on the back of the engine which helped the balance. As a side effect of this it pulled quite a bit!

Granted you may be at a better starting point with an etched kit than whitemetal (I had no choice of course) but good luck would be useful to wish for. But, as others have said, if you have built some Jidenco kits and come out the other side, it could be that it is you who should be telling us how to do it!

Philip

IMG_2264.JPG

[davebradwell]

I must admit your suggestion was quite a surprise and is a bit stone-age. I would suggest that something with the basics of a modern P4 chassis might be easier otherwise the chassis would be a scratchbuild based on a few parts that just happen to be almost the right shape. Surely a Finney or MM would be a better bet, although the Sharman style thin hornblocks would have to go. At least with a decent kit all the parts fit together and the castings are useable. It all depends on what you enjoy.

I meant to add earlier that ChrisG isn't averse to moving out his cylinders on his HL industrials to get more clearance. OK with these but usually a sin on mainline engines as they infringe the gauge and clobber the first platform they encounter.

Final thought - it's one thing picking GW engines with their wider cylinders but do you know if the kit designer has made them the scale spacing from the prototype or just copied another model? He designed it for 00 after all. You can only make this assumption with the better kits.

DaveB

[Jol Wilkinson]

"You can only make this assumption with the better kits."

Very true, but how do you know which is a better kit?

[davebradwell]

Yes Jol, poor choice of words but not sure how to define it better. Those that take their research more seriously, perhaps but this isn't always obvious. Lack of it will be but only after you get going.

Perhaps it's those that charge more or cost more secondhand.

DaveB

[DougN]

Just having a look around for a high quality starter kit, other than others saying the High Level range which I do agree with. Would Mike be better to start with say a churchward models 45xx. Designed by Malcolm Mitchell (or so I believe) the price looks reasonable and available from Precision paints. It goes together is a nice prototype etc. at 132quid it's on the affordable side.

I think it's better however to start with a HL chassis kit then move up to full kits builds. On the other hand if Mike was to start with the saint, build it in the order of tender first then onto the loco.

[David B]

I feel the matter of clearance is a phobia, not without foundation, but looked upon as a more serious problem than it need be. It can be a problem if you don't prepare parts and think ahead.

Dave B mentions wheel bosses - remove them or at least thin them down. On crossheads you may be able to thin the backs a little, but also replace the central pin with a countersunk bolt (I have used 14BA), head thinned and the hole in the back countersunk to take the bolt head. I have done this with a small dab of solder to fix the head which can then be filed flush, so no problem there. If you use a pin, thin the head and countersink the hole in the back of the crosshead, solder the head and file flush. Coupling rods can be thinned at the back. You can create more clearance with a little thought. If you really need washers, thin them on some wet & dry.

Think ahead, fit and test pieces and you should be fine. Remember that modellers have been making P4 locos successfully for years and there is no reason you should not be able to do so as well.

[Captain Kernow]

I was wondering what exactly your concerns are, in terms of building a P4 chassis, given that you have already built them in EM?

If you've also been building whitemetal and brass loco kits for a while, then the actual act of joining bits of metal together can't be the issue?

Having read all the highly-qualified advice given so far, I was wondering if you might be more comfortable just building a chassis kit in P4 for an RTR body? My first two chassis kits were both Perseverance (you could get them more easily back then), for a 14XX and a 57XX. Both had conventional single beam compensation and used Ultrascale wheels.

One word of caution with Ultrascales, however, there is another thread on this forum outlining changes (reductions) to Ultrascale's range from the end of the year.

As you're in Cornwall, you are also most welcome (as is Steve, of course) to pay us a visit at D.R.A.G. (Holcombe Village Hall, near Teignmouoth, every second and fourth Monday of the month, 1900 hrs to 2200 hrs).

[Hardwicke]

I'd suggest
High Level
Judith Edge
Dave Bradwell
Malcom Mitchell
London Road
Rumney Models
Although I've yet to build them, Farmer Dave on RMWeb has some decent kits
If you can find any, Impetus Models were good too.

[Philip Hall]

No need to worry about Ultrascale wheels. The changes only relate to gear cutting.

Philip

[Captain Kernow]

No need to worry about Ultrascale wheels. The changes only relate to gear cutting.

Philip

That's true, Philip, but it does affect the conversion packs for RTR locos, doesn't it?

[Philip Hall]

Yes Tim, I'd forgotten that - only the gears will not be available, the specific wheels for a conversion set still will be. I don't see that as much of a problem as the gears with a RTR model are usually perfectly OK to use again, just a little more work will be needed than with a 'drop in' set.

At least the wheels are safe...

Philip

[Paul Willis]

One thing that I would note with this topic is that it is very good at answering the question in the poster's mind, but not actually answering the original question that was asked! This does seem to be one of the more charming characteristics of our Forum

If you actually read the original question, rephrased it is simply:

"I have a reasonable amount of kit-building experience and for my first try in P4, should it be:

(a) Highlevel saddle tank RSH 0-4-0,
(b) High Level saddle tank 0-6-0
(c) High Level armstrong whitworth 0-4-0
(d) Agenoria/CSP Hunslet Jazzer 0-6-0"

Note that the poster has all the relevant bits apart from wheels (so point at Alan Gibson over the counter, rather than wait six months for Ultrascales), and wishes to proceed. Clue: that means that going out and spaffing a couple of hundred quid on a new and entirely different kit at this point is probably not top of the list!

So is the answer to the question (a), (b) (c) or (d)?

Yours in humour,
Paul

[David Knight]

Point taken Paul.

Um, Mike? Go with the HighLevel RSH 0-4-0ST. A fine kit and a good little engine.

Cheers,

David

The engine in question.

IMG_0295.jpeg

[Hardwicke]

I'd go for a) as well.
0-4-0.
Having said that my first P4 loco was a 4F after a failed attempt at converting a Lima Prarie tank. After that I built a Ratio MR 2-4-0, BR class 4 Mogul, M7, B1, and a West Country, all in quick succession. I stalled on a BR 04 diesel and then got into rebuilding and converting secondhand models. It's much easier to start new.

[nigelcliffe]

I'd order them as presented; (a) first, (b) second choice, etc..
Reasons (a) is a very nice kit. (b) is also nice, but has more wheels, so a little more work. (c) is fine, but there are decisions to take on the jackshaft drive (there being many different ways to arrange that), and (d) I don't know the kit so put it last.