Brushs Laser Cutting and 3d Printing workbench

Simon

Flying Squad
I'd stick with the coil springs (that's how I spring my G1 stuff) but by cutting away the "top rear" of the axlebox casting/moulding and also digging out a recess for the top of the spring in the moulded leaf spring you can completely "lose" sight of the coil spring which looks a whole lot better.

I'm amazed how many folk (in G1) don't do this - it really notices on those otherwise very nice "Golden Age" pullmans at £1K a pop:eek:

It seems to me that we shouldn't be aiming for some of the "bouncing" that some folk are so pleased to achieve, but rather an ability for the axle ends to move upwards or downwards very slightly, sufficient to accomodate the variations in track "top" that will actually be met.

Driving over matchsticks is an unnecessary MRJ stunt if you ask me:))

Simon
 

BrushType4

Western Thunderer
I'd stick with the coil springs (that's how I spring my G1 stuff) but by cutting away the "top rear" of the axlebox casting/moulding and also digging out a recess for the top of the spring in the moulded leaf spring you can completely "lose" sight of the coil spring which looks a whole lot better.
Simon, that's a good idea, I'll look to try that. I had thought about weighting the trucks so that they are only just riding on the springs so that the axles are pushed down rather than pushing up if that makes sense.

Has anyone experience that they can share, especially on Parkside kits?

I think the ultimate will be to have the actual springs doing a prototypical job that I've heard MMP may supply.
 

Pugsley

Western Thunderer
My point was, Martin, that if you did the maths, it won't make much, if any, practical difference - and if a coil spring is even slightly off-centre or over compressed, it will create the same forces.
I'll have to take your word for that, I'm not in the habit of undertaking lengthy calculations to prove, or disprove, a point that doesn't really matter. FWIW, I think that Phil's coil spring setup is a neater solution.

The point is, it has been tried, tested, and it works: why question it with "theoretical" objections, especially if you don't have the inclination to learn how to prove your point.
It was, as you say, an observation. If nothing was questioned, even theoretically, would things ever progress?
 
S

Simon Dunkley

Guest
Hi Martin,

I misread your comment - probably because to produce the picture I had just used Photoshop Elements for the first time, which was fine once I found where things were which I knew must exist, but it did cause some wailing and gnashing of teeth! I look back and see a perfectly reasonable rumination. As for my second comment, I think I was feeling a bit testy at the time, which is an explanation but not an excuse. However, in the interests and spirit of free speech, you have responded, I have accepted your response and all's well and good and we can move on... I much prefer experimentation to theory, anyway - or put it another way, far more fun to find an excuse to play around with things.

The coil spring is a neater solution in many ways, but it can easily put a tilt on the axlebox: the bent wire is of the "crude but effective" school, and is really only half-springing in that it works to push the axlebox down - it won't otherwise do this with the Parkside system as the fulcrum points are the wheels, and the downward force is applied to the outside of the wheel on the rail, not the one hovering above a depression/gap/what have you. However, such an approach works very well if the bearings are inside the wheels. It's all to do with the law of moments*, and balance beams, and all that - one washer at point 10 on the balance beam requires 2 at point 5 on the other side, and that sort of stuff. On the whole, I think there is a lot to be said for working leaf springs in larger scales, but you have to choose the right material as the mass of the model is reduced by the inverse-cubic, etc...
(Apparently, 1/16" thick tufnol strips make excellent working springs for tenders in 5" gauge, for example.)

Simon
*Sadly, moments, and not "Moments", the cheesy flavoured snack that was very popular in the 80s, but seems to appear less often nowadays.
 

alcazar

Guest
Just to go back to the wire "spring", can anyone say HOW it would be fastened where it was?
And would a wire loop on the rear of the axle box, trappping it, but allowing it to slide, etc, work?

Just thinking out loud here......
 
S

Simon Dunkley

Guest
If replacement metal axelguides were used, then the spring dould be soldered at one end. Personally, I would now go for something like 4mm scale handrail knobs, via a clearance hole in the axleguard moulding, with the knobs fitted into the rear of the solbar, carefully positioned so that on trimming, the tail of the knob (ooer missus!) would look like a rivet or bolt head.

Originally, though, the wire had a right-angled bend in the third dimension to the other bends, which was inserted into a hole drilled in the axleguard moulding (the bit behind the soledars, obviously) and a few mm of the wire was gluded with expoxy. If doing something similar again, I would probably have a small pin somewhere along the way to act as the fulcrum point.

There is no need to add a wire loop or anything to retain the axlebox, as the axlebox keeps do this, but a length of tube glued to the top of the axlebox would do as well as anything else.
 

BrushType4

Western Thunderer
Thank you Mike, Simon and everyone else who passed me detailing info for the Grampus.

I decided that my method of sprung axles is the best, but thank you guys for all your builds and advice. Those methods may come in useful for other models.

So with the Grampus info that has been passed to me and the excellent Paul Bartlett site, I think I've got enough to keep me going for several versions that are possible with the Parkside kits and possibly a Rudd or two.

Version 1. First cut of paint and weathering.

IMG_0709.JPGIMG_0707.JPGIMG_0708.JPGIMG_0710.JPG

All comments and advice appreciated. :thumbs:
 

BrushType4

Western Thunderer
Those basic tones look really nice Phil :cool:.........what did you use ? :)
I thought you wouldn't ask ;)

I normally paint things to look pristine and then never get around to weathering them, so this time I knew I wanted a very worn rusty look so I thought I'd try something different.

The prototype and look I'm trying to achieve

p252205206-2.jpg

It is easy to remove the wheels, so I will tackle those individually.

I built the Grampus, then looked at the build instructions as is my normal modus operandi. :)

I noticed some missing details in the kit for the prototype I wanted. I have added rivet detail and the steel body supports to the sole bars. Bent up a bit of scrap brass for the support and storage for the additional air pipes. The air pipes will be added last once I've finished weathering. I will be using GJH resin pipes as they are cheap and effective.

I painted all over in Halfords Red Oxide Primer. That left me with a very red looking wagon.

View attachment 11240

To tone it down, I sprayed over very lightly with Precision Paints Dirty Black.

Once dry, I painted in the white steps, brake lever and dry brushed a little white here and there in a downward fashion. That's where we are now.

This is the rust undercoat, so next I will mask off a few places, for example, where the Grampus plates have been removed and overhead cables warning labels will be. Then sort of stipple/dry brush rust colours carefully. I'm looking for a reasonably even rust all over effect so I will be using quite a big brush.

This is new to me, so I may end up over doing it. :eek:

I'll keep you posted as I progress.
 

Ian G

Western Thunderer
Looking good that is. my first atempt at weathering was not good but many hours later I am still learning.

Ian G
 

westernfan

Western Thunderer
The grampus is coming on a treat :thumbs: , have you tried the weathering powers ,must admit they are a newish medium for me . the warning flash and steps will contast well with the rusty look
 
Top