Tender locos for a beginner?

[Another JohnSParticipant @anotherjohns]

John Alexander Stuart – The Q1 does look lovely, but by gosh the drawings are in metric…

William – I understand, coming from a country where the southern neighbours are inch-based. (I live in Canada)

However – for a bit in the '90s I lived in Europe, got a European lathe, and inch materials and BA were just not available where I lived.

I can remember looking at and trying to use this lathe, throwing my hands towards the gods, saying something quite close to "Just what the f(deleted) is a g(deleted) d(deleted) f(deleted)ing millimetre????" (there might have been more expletives thrown in for good measure) I don't normally swear, but, when times call for it…

When I figured it was close to a 10c coin, I managed, and my little Tich with BA fasteners was completed.

Now, living back in Canada, I do *everything* metric – it's so easy, in my opinion. Sure, materials come in inch, but generally one can adapt, especially if things are machined. My current project is a Martin Evans design ("Ivatt" and everything is converted to metric before I machine.

Just my thoughts on a Saturday evening.

 

Edited By John Alexander Stewart on 08/11/2020 01:09:16

[Jon LawesParticipant @jonlawes51698]

I'd check to see what your nearest track is. No point building something for a gauge which doesn't have local support nearby.

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Posted by IanT on 08/11/2020 00:24:35:

Model Engineering Societies (MES) are located in a specific location and their members are normally fairly local to that place (City/Town/County). They need to have a reasonable plot of land for the track and usually also some kind of club house and storage. Members are expected to help maintain the track, buildings and scenery. The costs of running a site can be considerable, which is either met by the membership or fund-raising – often both.

But if you want to run your loco in public you need a boiler test and insurance and the easiest way to get these is through a club.

As a member of two clubs, I cannot recommend joining highly enough.

Edited By Nick Clarke 3 on 08/11/2020 09:31:00

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

alan-lloyd, John Alexander Stuart did also recommend the Q1 – I have a feeling for 3-1/2" this might be a winner. Is there a book in the same way there is for lots of other designs? Or am I collating info from ME issues and this forum?

Perko7 – no interest at all in an American 4-4-0 although I do quite like the british (southern) ones!

[IanTParticipant @iant]

I don't disagree with you about the value of MES Nick – but my point is that joining a MES often needs more engagement and commitment from a Member than just joining (say) G1MRA. You are expected to get involved and help out (which is not unreasonable of course) but not everyone wants (nor accepts) the need to do that.

It's hard to explain the subtle differences to newcomers but perhaps one example does come to mind.

We (Gauge 3) have had people join the Society and then turn up to just get a boiler test done. We might never see them again but it doesn't seem to really bother anyone. Some very interesting engines have briefly appeared, been appreciated (and tested) before they disappeared from sight once again.

However, I'm pretty sure that some MES would not be very happy for someone to join them just for a boiler test – they have different expectations of their members. Some of those expectations can cause tensions too. I seem to recall that there were some folk who always turned up on maintenance days (to replace track timbers and cut the grass etc) and then some others who only came on running days. I think if you are joining a MES, it comes with more (not got an ideal word for it ) "responsibilities" than the less 'localised' modelling organisations. I'm not saying this is bad, just warning folk that things can be different between the two types of organisation.

It's many years since I was last a MES member. These days, I spend most of my hobby time in my workshop (which is kind of solitary) but that seems to suit me. I have enough on my plate to keep my own garden and home straight without worrying about anything else. When I turn up at a G3 GTG, I don't feel guilty about not helping to mow the lawn that morning, I'm just grateful that my Host has already done so.

It's not about being better or worse – just about there being differences.

Regards,

IanT

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

Good evening gents, I do apologise for the slightly bizarre reply above, I didn't realise we were on page 2 so I was only replying to the first page.

IanT and RRMBK – I've joined my local MEC which has a large G1 track, raised 2-1/2", 3-1/2" and 5", and ground level 5" and 7 1/4" tracks. I have checked all the MECs in my local area and where I'm looking to move in the next year or so, and all of them have 3-1/2" and 5" tracks.

I get the point however, that the running of a 3-1/2" and 5" loco mandates a MEC membership and the associated anciliary time and expenses to contribute towards having that track available to run on. It is also very interesting re: the comment about 3-1/2" and 5" being effectively the same complexity/cost, just that one is (from a performance perspective) objectively superior.

Jon Lawes , the Martin Evans William is a indeed interesting (my namesake!), I think visually I prefer the Jubliee but with piston valves and a tapered boiler it does seem like it could be a significant step up.

I am really pleased to read a little of the information around the number of parts, time to completion, and relative cost of a given locomotive. Is there also a metric which suggests how much longer a tender locomotive takes compared to a tank? I'm speaking of course of opposite ends of the scale – a G3 4-6-0 against a 5" gauge Pannier or Saddle tank!

[IanTParticipant @iant]

We have members who can build a large G3 loco in a year or less William – but I'm not one of them I'm afraid

It's about discipline and focus – and some folk are much better at staying focused and 'on track' than others.

So I'm not the best person to ask about "how long" – but obviously, a tender has six wheels, six axle boxes, frames, plate work (etc) to make before you even start on the engine itself (many folk seem build the tender first). Against this, the smaller engine will tend to be a bit simpler than the larger one.

Regards,

IanT

 

 

Edited By IanT on 08/11/2020 20:32:03

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

I have to admit that the loco I am building (7 1/4" Tich) is making very slow progress – put it down to a day job and living as a single parent of an autistic daughter of 22 – and I am autistic myself.

But I am having fun!

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

IanT I was just giving context about scales, I appreciate each has its idiosyncrasies but yes, mainly concerned with the time for tender Vs tank. Presumably incrementally more, rather than half again or double the time?

[RRMBKParticipant @rrmbk]

You mentioned in the first post that this is your first loco. One big advantage of a tender engine is that you can build the tender first which gives you a feel for how you like to work and to what degree of accuracy / realism.

It also normally gives you a ready made boiler test facility with the pump and tank for when you make the boiler.

I suggest that a rough timescale of 1/4 tender , 1/4 boiler and fittings, 1/4 loco chassis and running gear and 1/4 platework, finishing, painting etc is realistic for a tender engine. For a tank engine your plate work will be a bit more but you still have to make the pump, valves and pipework, along with any additional trailing truck and mountings, so its probably realistic to say 1/3 of the total time each for chassis, boiler and platework.

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

I'm still poring over my options in the larger gauges, but I wanted to ask – is it worth me building the G1MRA project regardless of what comes next? Or in theory is it possible to go straight for G3, 3-1/2", or 5" ?

[IanTParticipant @iant]

If you plan to go to the larger gauges William, my advice would be to do exactly that. A Project will take time and some money and unless you plan to stay & model in G1, then I'm not sure there's much point.

You asked about Tender vs Engine build 'proportions' and I think RRMBK has given as good an estimate as is possible. It does depend of course on what you decide to build – and the level of complexity and detail.

Several posts ago, I recommended Martin Evans "Eagle" as a simple 2.5" loco for a beginner – here is my friend Roger's version of it. He built it some years ago and it always runs very well. It's an attractive engine, simple and reliable to run. The tender is fairly basic and the loco has twin outside cylinders and is coal fired.

But if you want something more challenging in G3/2.5" – then you could go for something several steps up in ambition and build something like this rebuilt Merchant Navy class. This engine was shown at a small G3 gathering earlier this year and is really a superb example of what is possible in Gauge 3.

It would certainly make an impressive ornament for your mantlepiece too.

My advice is this – think carefully about what you would really (really) like to build and eventually own.

It's going to take you a lot of time, much devotion and some money whatever that is. So choose something that you will love doing – not what others think you are capable of or need. Then just get on with it – small steps, first foot forward and all that!

Regards,

IanT

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

Thank you all so much for your kind help and assistance. I think it's important to me to make a locomotive that I personally either have a connection to, or want to see – I just don't have the enthusiasm for a little 0-6-0T no matter how much I want to Based on what's available in drawings and castings, there are really only two locos that are up for consideration for me after a hard reflection – one of the SR 4-4-0's in a larger scale, or a King Arthur in a smaller one.

I have a couple of questions and I think then I'll be well on the way to making a decision.

On the face of it in 2-1/2" Gauge the Don Young "Elaine" seems like it could be a winner – straight boiler and firebox, castings and drawings available from Reeves, etc. – similarly for Eagle. I think my main concern is running it. My (for now) local club has a 2.5" gauge track but I don't know of any others in Sussex/Kent. I'm going to assume at 15' minimum radius running the loco so potentially could have a home track, but I would be mostly dependent on get togethers. How achievable is a coal-fired Elaine or Eagle in 2-1/2" for a first loco? While this is possible, it still seems the least feasible of the options…

In 3-1/2" Gauge Don Young's 2P seems highly lauded and so if I could amend the platework to represent an SR L1 class (spectacle plate, splashers, tender top) it would be a front runner – . I assume converting a 2P to an L1 is aesthetic exterior change, so the chassis/etc. can be built as designed? As a fall back, the Martin Evans William fits in here – probably behind all other options in terms of desire but maybe higher up in practicality.

In 5" Gauge, the two front runners are the LBSC "Maid of Kent" and Martin Evans "Stowe". The MoK with square firebox and inside cylinders as per an SR L1 looks like it is the highly recommended. Are there the corrections available for the MoK inside-cylinder issue? Presumably the Schools would be discouraged due to the internal third cylinder? How much complexity does a third cylinder add when taken in the context of a full loco build?

For both of these locos, can the machining for a 5" SR L1 or Schools be done on an ML7 / vertical slide / drill press, or does it need a larger lathe/mill?

I think that should cover it and give me a very strong pointer.

Edited By William Ayerst on 11/11/2020 12:43:44

Edited By William Ayerst on 11/11/2020 12:46:28

[Dave WoottonParticipant @davewootton]

William

It is quite possible to build a large 5" gauge loco on an ML7 and vertical slide, plenty have done it in the past and are probably still doing so, but it is a slow and tedious way of building. I built Rob Roy entirely on one, and most of a 5" Simplex ( the hornblocks and axleboxes were done on a friends mill) but it was painful at times. Before you embark on something like that you have to do a bit of honest heart searching, and work out if you have the patience to complete it, I'm not sure if I could do it now, having been spoiled!

Good luck with your choice it's something you will have to live with for a long time.

Dave

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

Posted by Dave Wootton on 11/11/2020 13:01:02:

William

It is quite possible to build a large 5" gauge loco on an ML7 and vertical slide, plenty have done it in the past and are probably still doing so, but it is a slow and tedious way of building. I built Rob Roy entirely on one, and most of a 5" Simplex ( the hornblocks and axleboxes were done on a friends mill) but it was painful at times. Before you embark on something like that you have to do a bit of honest heart searching, and work out if you have the patience to complete it, I'm not sure if I could do it now, having been spoiled!

Good luck with your choice it's something you will have to live with for a long time.

Dave

Thank you Dave – I'm not adverse to getting a mill at some point, but as previously mentioned it's one of those things which adds yet a higher cost onto a potential locomotive build. Don Young's writeup of his 3-1/2" 2P speaks only of a vertical slide but presumably there's less shuffling around a limited size of table in the smaller scale?

[RRMBKParticipant @rrmbk]

I have a couple of questions and I think then I'll be well on the way to making a decision.

On the face of it in 2-1/2" Gauge the Don Young "Elaine" seems like it could be a winner – straight boiler and firebox, castings and drawings available from Reeves, etc. – similarly for Eagle. I think my main concern is running it. My (for now) local club has a 2.5" gauge track but I don't know of any others in Sussex/Kent. I'm going to assume at 15' minimum radius running the loco so potentially could have a home track, but I would be mostly dependent on get togethers. How achievable is a coal-fired Elaine or Eagle in 2-1/2" for a first loco? While this is possible, it still seems the least feasible of the options..

Eagle is a straightforward locomotive and all castings are available from the Association at n25ga.org

Elaine is a bit more complex and has some unusual main horns which can be awkward to machine. It also doesn't have an axle pump but two injectors instead, which puts some people off. Drawings and castings are available from Reeves. Don Youngs write up for this is available from the 2 1/2 G Association and is based entirely on using only a lathe and .vertical slide. I am currently building an Elaine but mainly fabricated and intending to incorporate different horns, an axle pump and using todays metric material for frames which requires minor dimension changes. Elaine also gives the option of 6 or 8 wheel tenders and two cab types Urie or Maunsell. If you are considering this option then feel free to PM me.

For 2 1/2 gauge have you considered Ayesha? it is a proven straightforward design with lots of successful builds running around the world, with again the option of 3 different mainline loco designs..It also has a wide firebox which is generally easier to fire than the narrow fireboxes of Elaine and Eagle.

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

Maybe Ayesha in LBSCR guise as a Marsh Atlantic could work if you strongly recommend that over an Elaine – I'd be interested in hearing opinions of the various 3-1/2" and 5" gauge options too.

Edited By William Ayerst on 11/11/2020 14:14:15

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

(I say that as it would appear that a 2-1/2" loco can be slightly less of a singleton than a 3-1/2" or 5" loco, I would probably shy away from Eagle or Ayesha in 3-1/2" for that reason)

[IanTParticipant @iant]

Are we homing in on something like this then William?

IanT

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

Well, I'm still not sure about 2-1/2" given the lack of tracks in my area – but in principle, yes!

• 2-1/2" LBSC Ayesha or 3-1/2" Maisie as an LBSCR Atlantic
• 3-1/2" Gauge Don Young 2P with some aesthetic changes to represent an SR L1 or even ideally a SECR L

I was really struck with the Maid of Kent but the sheer cost of castings and materials has put me off completely – maybe a solid second project ?

Edited By William Ayerst on 11/11/2020 16:28:22

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

I guess another question is – while it seems that the Maid, 2P, Ayesha and Maisie are all well served for castings, should I generally work on the principle that I should mostly be looking at cylinders and wheels as the two main casting purchases, with the rest fabricated?

If that's the case the Maid of Kent is slightly more feasible since it's a one off cost of an extra £300-400, instead of multiple thousands. I'm still quite unsure about the cost of a boiler for any of these…

[WearyParticipant @weary]

Whilst considering Maisie don't overlook that castings are also available from GLR/Kennions and GS Model Engineering and it will be worth your while comparing prices.

Some of your other candidate locomotive castings may also be available from other suppliers apart from Reeves..

Regards,

Phil

[William AyerstParticipant @williamayerst55662]

Ah, interesting. I will look at those sites also. My question still stands however, how much should I expect to feasibly fabricate vs buying as castings (regardless of prototype or gauge, and obviously – on average. I'm sure it will vary from person to person but a thumb-to-the-air estimate will be very helpful)

[Nigel McBurney 1Participant @nigelmcburney1]

Another more mercenary way to look at model building would be to consider if you finish building a loco or indeed any model,is can it be easily sold at some time in the future,lots of circumstances occurr which can force the model to be sold,it may simply to finance the build of another model.or other reason. Perhaps a chat to dealer might reveal a model or models which is/are popular and saleable, Or find out from the boiler makers,some sample prices,an engine design may look nice,but could have a boiler which is difficult to make. I have always thought that it would be best to build the tender first,the main expense would be the wheel castings and brass sheet for the tank,the rest would be easy to fabricate, If you find that you can build a decent tender,you then carry on with confidence to complete the loco or if you decide engine building is not for you the outlay to gain the experience is relatively small compared to the materials for a loco.

[Dave WoottonParticipant @davewootton]

Nigel is quite right about building the tender first, from bitter experience i built a 5" Brit that never got a tender, by the time I'd finished to the steaming chassis stage I was so fed up with it all it ever got was a Walls ice cream container and a length of rubber pipe to the injectors! Fortunately a friend loved it and bought it. My current project is a 5" gauge Aspinall A class, I'm sure there's as much work in the tender ( which is known to be a pig to build) as a small tank loco.

The Ayesha design is a good one, wide firebox, slip eccentric valve gear, the couple I've driven have been great fun, and castings are reasonably priced from the 2 1/2" gauge association, Yes I'm a member so very biased.

Theres also the 2 1/2" Crab design by the association, mines pictured in my album, just waiting for the end of covid to run the boiler drawings past the inspectors, not too big or complex. this time i finished the tender first!

Dave

[Author]

Posts