Hornby T9

williambarter
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:23 am

Re: Hornby T9

Postby williambarter » Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:55 pm

Well, the tender has gone just fine, thanks for all the good advice. There is plenty of clearance between the frames, and the guard irons are now at the right end.

Extra things to note are that it is necessary to create a bit more clearance for the tender wheels in the cutouts in the horizontal part of the tender chassis, and that once the side-frames are the right way round one of the little bracketty protrusions conflicts with the securing screws so needs to be removed.

Whichever way round the side-frames are, the cut-out in the upper surface at each end puzzles me. As you mention, Philip, you can see the buffer tails through it. Was this cut-out actually a feature of the prototype, or just something that Hornby have put in for no very good reason? Even with the side-frames the original wrong way round, it didn't seem to provide clearance for anything.

Thanks again,

William

Philip Hall
Posts: 1580
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: Hornby T9

Postby Philip Hall » Mon Oct 26, 2020 11:43 pm

William,

I don’t know about the cutout. I don’t think it was on the prototype, and on my 700, which has the same (or similar) tender, I have glued a small rectangle of 5thou styrene over the hole on the outside, and chamfered the edges so with a bit of paint and weathering it looks almost like a single sheet. I suppose I could have also used cigarette paper which would have been thinner.

I think Hornby must have put the cut out to clear the buffer tails, which wouldn’t be there on the real thing. When the frames were the original distance apart there wasn’t much clearance there. Maybe when you reassembled the frames there was a tad more clearance, so the cutout didn’t seem necessary.

I believe that Hornby used the wrong wheelbase for the 6 wheel T9 tender but then a few years later produced both wheelbases for the 700! Not sure which one I’ve got on my 700, but I know the T9 was wrong. Not that it’s obvious of course.

Philip

williambarter
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:23 am

Re: Hornby T9

Postby williambarter » Tue Oct 27, 2020 5:34 pm

Thanks for the tip about Peter's Spares, as it turns out the rear motor mount is already broken.

Tender wheelbase appears to be 26mm + 26mm, which by chance I think is right for the locos sent to Kent in the 1920s, as their 8-wheel tenders were swapped with 6-wheel from the 700 class.

Would you advise doing anything to the bogie other than replacing the wheels? That looks easy enough but the narrowness of the OO bogie frame may look a bit odd.

William

Philip Hall
Posts: 1580
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: Hornby T9

Postby Philip Hall » Tue Oct 27, 2020 9:13 pm

Hello William,

I’m not surprised about the rear motor mount. When I was speaking to Peter’s Spares about the mounts, they said that they had dispensation from Hornby to produce the brass cradle for the motor, but they didn’t bother about the rear mount as there were plenty of spares about. The rear one is easier to produce from sheet if you had to anyway, but I laid in a stock for all my T9s just in case, along with the customers’ ones I still have to do. The brass one needs a bit of fettling, but if your diecast one hasn’t collapsed yet, it’s easier to make a good copy from the brass casting.

You’ve been lucky that your prototype requires a 13ft wheelbase tender. I was speaking to Mike King this afternoon and he confirmed Hornby had chosen the 13ft wheelbase tender, even though the 14ft would have been more accurate for most T9s, in particular the one fitted to 729, their first chosen example. Then Hornby went and did both of them for the 700! He also thought that the little cutouts in the frames were fiction to allow for the buffer tails.

Have a look in my article in MRJ 213 - I might have mentioned the bogie in there. If not, then there’s the M7 article in MRJ 205 when I did describe how to widen the bogie. I can’t quite remember what I did to the T9s, but I think I only added overlays to the side of the bogie and some overlays to the front of the chassis between the bogie wheels. I have a jig for the chassis overlays (having done so many!) so could cut out some for you if that helps; just PM me with your address in case I’ve lost it, and I’ll pop them in the post. The chassis does not need widening between the drivers as once you’ve relocated the injectors the right way round you can’t really notice the gap behind the wheels.

I think I might not have rebuilt the bogie because although it is almost exactly the same as the M7, the support arrangement Is slightly different with a gap above it and a spring in between, which helps to push some weight back on the drivers. The tension of this spring is important - too stiff and it will stop the front drivers from sitting down properly and too slack and the engine might nosedive. The weight distribution is quite critical unless you only want to pull two or three plastic carriages. With some tender weight added and the eight wheel tender rebuilt as in the article (or the little spring arrangement I wrote about earlier For the 6 wheel one) a decent train is possible.

It will be interesting to see the result, as I have only done one 6 wheel tender version and have mine still to do.

Philip

Philip Hall
Posts: 1580
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: Hornby T9

Postby Philip Hall » Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:04 am

William,

I've just looked out the enclosed picture of the front of an EM T9 and it does look as though I didn't widen the bogie, merely added an overlay, because the detail on the overlay is not quite as tidy as the original! It also looks like I put the overlay on the top half of the bogie only. You can also see the widened frame between the wheels above the bogie. Hope this helps.

Philip

2010 04 21_3086.jpg adj.jpg


Return to “Steam Locomotives”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests