High Level 0-4-0 locomotive construction

[davebradwell]

It seems as if we're 13 years too late but filing the bearings on the gearbox off flush with the outside of its frame would be a good start. Probably just a matter of thinning axleboxes and perhaps horns a little after that. Clearance in body is troublesome, though - more filing, perhaps?

DaveB

[nigelcliffe]

...The High Level ones {Horn Blocks}look nice (not assembled them yet), but without measuring, I think they will need modification to fit the 0-4-0's. I made my own when building the 0-4-0ST, a fairly simple lathe job for the block, and a bit of T-section brass strip for the guide verticals...

I wonder how Nigel got on?

Gosh I had to dig through the archives to find what we're talking about....

The Coronation 0-4-0 was finished years (decade?) ago. Has my own hornblocks on leading axle with compensation beam in centre of axle, rigid rear axle. Has a DCC CT decoder under the motor, DCC controlled AJ couplers at each end. I'm contemplating taking it apart to fit a stay-alive as the components are smaller than they were when I built it. I've since removed the bad lining from the loco shown here:
http://nigelcliffe.blogspot.com/2008/12 ... ement.html

I've also built a GER Coffee Pot since then (and a few other things), similar approach of compensated front axle, rigid rear. This time I used High Level slim hornblocks (a new product since 2010, or whenever the quoted stuff).
That's got a Zimo decoder under the motor (in the lower boiler), stay-alive at front of boiler space, etc. I was contemplating sound in it when built, but reached the conclusion it was "sound" or "stay-alive", not both. With the new really small MS-series sound decoders from Zimo, due in the shops any day soon (so says my Zimo supplier), that may change things and both may be practical. But replacing the decoder isn't top of my list at present.
That loco is on my desk as I type, its the test-loco on a DIY Arduino RailCom reader.


- Nigel

[Will L]

It seems as if we're 13 years too late but filing the bearings on the gearbox off flush with the outside of its frame would be a good start. Probably just a matter of thinning axleboxes and perhaps horns a little after that. Clearance in body is troublesome, though - more filing, perhaps?

Yes I came round to the view that some form of hornblock could be made to work, but the gearbox is custom designed to fit the space avaible and it is really the problem of getting movement round that which bothers me.

Strange as it may seem given what I tend to pontificate about, I also decided that for a little 0-4-0 tank perhaps I wasn't that bothered about having a rigid axle. In larger loco's getting rid of the fixed axle is at the heart of my rational for fitting springs, but little 0-4-0s did visibly pitch and toss in ways large locos don't. So, for them, perhaps a rigid axle is acceptable enough not to move mountains to avoid it.

[davebradwell]

Can't have you weakening on the rigid axle, Will - they'll be in. 0-4-0s today, 2-4-0s tomorrow and who knows where it will end. Isn't this pitch and toss the excuse used by 0 gaugers for having rigid vehicles, although they've got 2 of them which is probably better.

Interesting to be reminded of the stay-alive as the pick-up on my larger RSH 0-4-0ST is not great. My latest Zimo claimed software will prevent stopping on dead spots. I'd picked up a pair of different gears from ChrisG to reduce the gearbox ratio and that lowered the motor noise significantly. It was an interesting job changing them without dismantling the loco!

Back to topic of finding space for axleboxes, it occurred to me that the frames might be widened, although this might be a big job. Just not dressing the ends of the spacers would help. Once again, though, if it hits the body.......

DaveB

[Will L]

Can't have you weakening on the rigid axle, Will - they'll be in. 0-4-0s today, 2-4-0s tomorrow and who knows where it will end.

No I wont weaken any further Dave, I promise, and I would still avoid them on 0-4-0 if it isn't too much of a faff.

[David Knight]

Well, we know that CSBs can be done with a HighLevel 0-4-0T:

http://www.clag.org.uk/coronation0-4-0.html

Perhaps it is just a question of picking the right one?

Cheers,

David

[zebedeesknees]

Well, we know that CSBs can be done with a HighLevel 0-4-0T:

http://www.clag.org.uk/coronation0-4-0.html

Perhaps it is just a question of picking the right one?

Cheers,

David

Thanks for mentioning that David, I did consider pointing it out earlier.. Some of the history behind the construction was the determination from the outset that it had to be on CSBs because I had been promoting the idea and had a point to prove - to a particular detractor and myself. Though I took the pics, I didn't get round to writing anything for the site at the time, something of which I was and am guilty!

The bearings are standard Gibson btw, the CSBs arranged as elsewhere on the Site. The main difficulty I experienced was keeping the pickups as invisible as possible without shorts; stylus style had come to the fore at the time, and hiding them behind the brake hangers works fine, but the clearances between the pull rods and the bearings was too tight to enable sufficient suspension movement. Hence the clearance Vees filed in the lower grooves of the bearings.

Now of course, it would be built with a battery, radio receiver, and a 4-6 volt tiny coreless motor, like the Husky, the Simplex, and the Billard.

Ted.

[zebedeesknees]

http://nigelcliffe.blogspot.com/2008/12 ... ement.html

That reminds me... it was you, Nigel, who got me into radio in the first place, with that uncoupler for the 2mm 04. Though I can't see it on the blog, I recall you mentioning using a flight control actuator for Microflight aircraft from a Canadian company, now gone, Plantraco.

This put me on to their website, and I ordered a 'starter kit', with transmitter, receiver and 'Bahoma' bare cell battery. Was that really 2008? (rhet).

Within a short while, I had a second Tx, with a number of Rxs and batteries. It was with these 90mAh batteries that I learned not to short them out...

The Rxs have four proportional outputs, three bi-directional but of only 200mA, while the fourth is good for 2,400mA but no reverse! I did manage to fit this arrangement into a couple of 4mm scale diesels using regulators and a latching relay to reverse the motor but the electronics in the loco became horrendous. Then DT arrived.. then small 6v coreless motors with neodymium magnets.. then a vast range of sizes of battery with integral control (safety) circuits..

Those Plantraco Txs and Rxs are now back in service.

Thank you Nigel!

Ted.

[nigelcliffe]

http://nigelcliffe.blogspot.com/2008/12 ... ement.html

That reminds me... it was you, Nigel, who got me into radio in the first place, with that uncoupler for the 2mm 04. Though I can't see it on the blog, I recall you mentioning using a flight control actuator for Microflight aircraft from a Canadian company, now gone, Plantraco.

......

Thank you Nigel!

Ted.

Oh dear, its my fault

I do see radio as the eventual future for models. Just takes a long time for things to change in model railways; a hobby which is incredibly resistant to change. I remember digital control being in the magazines 40 years ago..... And there are folks around who still think its a new fangled thing which will never work.


- Nigel

[DaveHarris]

For my first attempt at loco construction I have been looking at the High Level 0-4-0 offerings. Whilst Chris Gibbon's instructions are very comprehensive i am wondering which of his offerings would be the best starter project for a 'newbie' in etched brass loco construction?
Any thoughts/comments would be appreciated?

[Will L]

For my first attempt at loco construction I have been looking at the High Level 0-4-0 offerings. Whilst Chris Gibbon's instructions are very comprehensive i am wondering which of his offerings would be the best starter project for a 'newbie' in etched brass loco construction?
Any thoughts/comments would be appreciated?

Mr Gibbon's kits are among the best you can find, but I do have to say that I would wonder about recommending one as a first brass kit build. As they are very small prototypes have lots of detail built in, they are correspondingly fiddly.

[David Knight]

Hi Dave,

I suppose the best answer is which one appeals to you as being most useful for your purposes/time period? They are all fairly equal in terms of difficulty mostly due to their size so a review of the offerings might narrow the field a bit. I’ve done the Neilson and the RSH and built both according to the instructions with only minor diversions and found them to be very satisfying to build and in performance. There are others who have built different examples who can comment on them. If you are really nervous perhaps a chassis might be an easier start?

HTH

David

[Daddyman]

As I've said on another thread, I wouldn't advise a saddle tank, judging by the difficulties many modellers seem to have (going by the secondhand models I've seen) in forming saddle tank wrappers - and curves more generally.

[DaveHarris]

David & Will,

Thanks for your comments. Having examined some samples of the kits, i am nervous about trying them..... but one has to bite the bullet at some point!

I think the comment regarding trying a chassis kit first is probably the best as I have both steam and diesel 0-6-0 locos which need converting i think that might be the better way forward for me initially.

Thanks for the response guys

[Will L]

David & Will,

Thanks for your comments. Having examined some samples of the kits, i am nervous about trying them..... but one has to bite the bullet at some point!

Absolutely, and the thing that teaches best is doing. If you're determined and persistent enough you'll get there and acquire the skills and knowledge you need along the way. Remember that this forum is a great source of help and guidance, even if the pundits don't always agree, and, despite what a few sensitive souls have suggested, the intention is always to help and assist, not knocking copy.

[Enigma]

The hardest thing about building your first etched kit - is starting it! As Confucius (allegedly) said, all journeys start with the first step. Perhaps one of Chris's diesel kits might be a good start, no boiler, no tank forming. If you can find one, a badly built kit, purchased cheaply and dismantled over a gas ring can be rebuilt. Hopefully to a higher standard. The thing with a brass kit is that, if it goes a bit pear shaped, then it can be dismantled, cleaned up and started again.

[Daddyman]

despite what a few sensitive souls have suggested, the intention is always to help and assist, not knocking copy.

Always been my experience!

The thing with a brass kit is that, if it goes a bit pear shaped, then it can be dismantled, cleaned up and started again.

And if things go wrong and you damage a part beyond repair, many parts can be replaced. A plain, rivet-less saddle-tank wrapper, for example, is often just a square, and can be replaced with brass sheet. And in fact you can do it the other way round: make the copy before you start, practise with it (e.g. forming any bends), and then do it on the real thing. Or use the copy if things go well. These tender flares came pre-mangled for me from the kit manufacturer:

20171001_095543.jpg

This is my replacement: the flare is 5 thou and the beading is a piece of wire shaped to the original and then filed flat on the back; hopefully the light and shadow shows the evenness of the replacement curve (I know they got bent and dented in real life but not that bent):

20171017_205023.jpg