Re: [7mmnga] Re: Chivers W&L kit
- I obtained one last year at the AGM and, having had a good look at it, I
then put it to one side when I read Adrian's article. It is currently in
the 'interesting little job for when I have a bit more time!' pile. It's
funny how this pile seems to keep growing!
I believe the problem is that the frames are scale width (about 28mm wide),
the cylinders are scale width (about 38mm wide to centres) and the axles are
about scale length at 34mm. So far, so good (bear with me on this one or I
will get it wrong).
I recall that the prototype has the sliding bit of the hornblock guide on
the inside of the frame, so that the hornblock outside face is flush with
the frame - I'm sorry, but I am working from memory as I haven't time to go
delving into books and things at the moment (I'm just doing this between
glue and paint drying on the layout in getting it ready for Leo 2000,
Leominster, UK in a couple of weeks time).
This brings me to the problem with the kit chassis, in that the hornblocks
supplied are the standard square 'flexichassis' type which run directly in
the etched frame. These protrude by about 1.5 to 2mm from the side of the
frame. This means that the axles have to accommodate 28mm for the frames +
2 x 2mm for the hornblocks + 2 x 2mm for the cranks giving a total of 36mm
with no side-play, i.e. 2mm less than the actual axle length. This was what
led Adrian to conclude that the axles were too short. However, at 34mm plus
coupling and connecting rods there is little room available to fit in to the
cylinder centres of 38mm. This is why Adrian produced his follow-up
comments (still with me?).
The chassis is designed to be folded-up and I think it would be too
difficult for me to cut out 3 or 4mm and re-assemble accurately. I am more
inclined to cut square hornblock openings and fix new hornguides inside the
chassis, with packing to suit to bring the face of the hornblocks flush with
the chassis frame (does this description make any sense?). I will take the
opportunity at the same time to add a bit of detailing to the frame sides in
the way of bolt and rivet heads, etc.
The quality of the body and castings looks very good, as, in fact, does the
chassis. I think with a bit of time and the benefit of Adrian's experience
I should be able to produce a nice model. It just depends now on finding a
bit of time!
Hope this helps.
----- Original Message -----
From: Victor Rybacki <vrybacki@...>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 9:41 AM
Subject: [7mmnga] Re: Hello & Chivers W&L kit
> I have ordered one, but not had a go. I talked to Roger and
> understand that basically the chassis needs to be narrowed a smidgeon
> to increase the clearances.
> Having just type that, I don't understand it !! I think the clearance
> problem is between the outside frame and the outside cranks, but
> preseumably one could use longer axles, but them maybe there are
> problems with the rod from the cylinders which may start fouling the
> coupling rods etc.
> So maybe narrowing the distance between the outside frame does make
> Like David, I'd be interested to hear from someone who has built it.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
- Thanks to Robin for that explanation, that seems to correspond
with Adrian's views on the matter. Doesn't sound too difficult to
remedy, but would put the inexperienced builder off, which is a
pity. The lack of rivit and bolt head detail, is another drawback,
as it is all very obvious on this particular prototype. Also, I
believe there is little detail provided below the footplate
(pipework, brakegear etc) but again, this is probably not too great a
problem. Somebody brought a part-built one in to Shepton Mallet and
we ran it on Bridport for a while. It ran well, but needed running
in. I thought at the time that it looked a bit naked below footplate
level, but I don't know how much of the kit was still to be added.
Mr. Chivers tells me that there he has only a few kits left, so
if you want one, hurry up. The kit includes wheels, and that huge
boiler and tank assembly should be able to accomodate any motor and
gearbox you can think of.
I'm currently building a Baldwin, using a Mashima 1624 motor and
Branchlines multibox driving the rear axle, without the multibox
extension. Yes, it can be done. It may protrude a bit further into
the cab than desirable, but this should be a minor problem.
Bye for now,