Re-wheeling Tri-ang R.54 loco bogie and pony truck

[Ken-362318]

Hi again.

Ever since my parents gave me an RS. 35 “Indian Freighter” train set for my eighth birthday and Christmas (the downside of have a mid-December birthday!), Tri-ang’s R. 54 has been my favourite loco, in that case “Hiawatha” (followed by R. 351 "Electra" as my second favourite).

I think Tri-ang, in R. 54, did a brilliant rendition of the real Canadian Pacific Railroad Class G3d, no. 2335 (given their design rationale and philosophy for the time), despite a few well-known compromises for the sake of keeping production costs down. Subsequently naming it "Hiawatha" was a masterstroke.

However, although I am not a “rivet counter”, there is one very minor niggle I will now address while I am re-wheeling my Tri-ang rolling stock and tenders with RP25 metal wheels.

Bogies and pony trucks on almost all north American steam locomotives from around 1890 onwards have disc wheels, not spoked wheels.

A Hornby R 8096 12.6mm disc wheel is a close enough match for the pony truck and I fitted that using the technique in my post “Replacing Tri-ang Wheels”.

For the bogies, I had two choices in wheels and the ‘photo below shows two R.54’s, each fitted with one of those choices. My preference is the one on the right, fitted to “Cochise”, which, although perhaps hard to see in the ‘photo, is a plainer profile disc wheel, more in keeping with the real loco. The wheels on “Tecumseh” have an additional groove near the axle and will be replaced at some stage with the "Cochise" style wheels.

“Cochise” is fitted with Evermodel 36”, 10.4mm wheels (part C8724), which are a close enough match in diameter for me to the Tri-ang original spoked wheel.

Only one of the C8724 wheels is insulated from the axle with a plastic bush, so the insulated wheels from four wheelsets are required for each bogie to prevent the bogie itself from becoming electrified.

Start by removing all eight wheels from the four wheelsets. Select two axles and file down the needle points at each end and lightly chamfer one end of each axle. File the other end of each axle down until the axles are 22mm long and then lightly chamfer. This should only take a few minutes for each axle if you use a standard size file rather than a modeller's file.

Refit an insulated wheel to each axle, insert the axle into the bogie and then refit the remaining two insulated wheels to the other end of the axles until flush with the end of the axle. Check the back-to-back spacing with an NMRA standards gauge, or similar, and adjust spacing if required.

Job done.

Happy modelling!

Cheers,

Ken

[Tony57]

Hi Ken,

Great information again, however if my memory is correct the left hand side of the R54 loco is the return so it would not matter if you put an non insulated wheel on the pony or bogie on the left hand side.

I know the return switched sides so provided the insulated wheels are on the same side as the insulated locomotive wheels there should not be an issue or am I forgetting something?

I have 7 R54 locos 5 early versions and 2 with the LNER A1/3 type 8 wheel tenders.

As the chassis is a standard Tri-ang type it was used on the Princess class locos Elizabeth, Victoria and Princess Royal and Britannia class, Britannia and Iron Duke as well as R54

[Ken-362318]

Hi Tony57,

No you are not missing anything and you are quite right about the return.

However, if you fit a single insulated metal wheel set to an R. 54 (or any other loco's) bogie, then the bogie will be electrically live and will short out if coupled to a loco with a full metal chassis (e.g. R.56, R. 152, R. 355 locos, and others) if running backwards relative to the R. 54 because the return for the driving wheels will be on the opposite side to that on R. 54.

The same problem will arise with any early series Tri-ang four wheel wagons with metal underframes that have been fitted with single insulated metal wheels if placed on the track so its "return" is on the opposites side of another such wagon or the locos I mentioned above, which is why I fit Hornby double insulated spoked wheels to those, using my "Evergreen" styrene tube "bearings" method.

Of course, the situation where a short could occur may never arise (on my layout or anyone else's), but I wanted total flexibility so as not to have to think about returns or which way round a wagon is placed on the track.

It would be nice if Hornby offered 10 packs of their double insulated RP25 metal wheels in 36" size to suit the Tri-ang Transcontinental series rolling stock, but I have never found any.

BTW, you beat me by one! I have seven late version R. 54's and one with the LNER A1/3 type 8 wheel tender (that tender is just WRONG for the R.54 .... errrk!).

Cheers,

Ken

[Tony57]

Hi Ken

Good point but the pony truck and rear bogies are still live, or mine are being all metal in their construction.

Some of the early versions of the R54 had a moulded cow catcher on the front of the body so had no coupling on the pony truck, another one I have has a cow catcher as an attachment on the front pony truck over the coupling, some have working front lights other don't, I think at least one I have got has a working smoke unit.

My wish would be Hornby sell their wheel sets as a 12 pack not as a 10 pack, that way you can do three bogie cars not two and a half as well as doing them in 36 inch.

Would the 36 inch wheel sets fit the R633 freightliner flats ok or are they smaller as I would like to replace the plastic wheels and axels with metal wheels on mine wagons.?

[81F]

Slightly off topic, but sparks used top fly for exactly the same reason if you attempted to couple the old Triang diesel shunter to the Triang Hornby Pannier 8751 since the diesel used the same chassis as the pannier just the other way round!

[Ken-362318]

Hi Tony57,

 

I have never owned a R. 633 freightliner, so I can't say, but in my experience with Tri-ang, there are only three versions of the plastic 36" wheels for freight cars and wagons, the only difference between them (aside from being spoked or disc) being whether they have:

1. pin-point axles (1962 onwards?);

2. sleeved axles for use with metal bogies with open axles boxes (pre-1962?); and

3. push-on to round-ended axles, such as used on loco bogies (all years?).

I could be wrong, but I believe the R. 633 freightliner was first introduced in the 1967 catalogue and so I expect that it would use the same 36” pin-point axle disc wheels as all of my Transcontinental cars (hard to see from catalogue photos), despite R. 633 appearing to have a different bogie than the earlier Transcontinental bogies (which seem to be based on 1890’s style US “arch-bar” truck/bogie).

So, if the R. 633 freightliner does indeed use the “standard” 36” pin-point axle wheels, I expect that the Evermodel C8721 metal wheels will fit, but as their axles are slightly too short to drop straight in, you might need to VERY CAREFULLY bend the sides of the bogies inwards using the hot water method suggested by Threelink in his post on 24 July in reply to my post “Replacing Tri-ang Wheels” on 23 July.

The following photos show a R. 136 box car with the bogies bent inwards (a bit too much as it was my first successful attempt with the hot water method) and then with the C8721 metal wheels fitted. I applied a drop of oil to the ends of the axles with a hypodermic oiler and the wheels fit and run perfectly, with thanks to Threelink for his excellent suggestion.  

I have a large number of Tri-ang British and Transcontinental passenger cars and British tenders with sleeved wheels on rounded axles that push down into closed plastic axles boxes. I haven’t thought as yet about how to fit metal wheels to them and I’ll post any suggestions I come up with.

Happy modelling!

Cheers,

Ken

[Ken-362318]

Hi 81F,

Now that you mention it, I had a R. 041 GWR Pannier tank loco and a R. 152 diesel loco back in the 70’s and the same thing happened.  I had forgotten all about that until I read your post.

There are a lot of four and six wheel locos in the Tri-ang / Tri-ang/Hornby range that will short circuit if coupled that way.

If there are any plastic couplings available that are direct replacements for the Tri-ang X. 171 tension lock coupling, that would neatly, quickly and easily solve that short circuit problem without having to modify the loco to accept NEM coupler pockets for Hornby's range of plastic couplings.

I did find some brand new couplings advertised on ebay as “Hornby Plastic Tension Lock Couplings” to replace (Tri-ang) X. 171 and (Hornby) X8025, but when I drilled down into that ad, it said that the “Material” is metal, not plastic, so potential buyers would need to contact the seller to clarify whether those couplings are metal or plastic.

Not now being an issue for me, I haven't looked into it any further, but they may well be other plastic versions of the Tri-ang X. 171 tension lock coupling available (3D print?).

Happy modelling!

Cheers,

Ken

[Ken-362318]

Hi Tony57,

 

I have never owned a R. 633 freightliner, so I can't say, but in my experience with Tri-ang, there are only three versions of the plastic 36" wheels for freight cars and wagons, the only difference between them being whether they:

1. have pin-point axles (1962 onwards?);

2. have sleeved axles for use with metal bogies with open axles boxes (pre-1962?); and

3. are pushed-on spoked shewwl to round-ended axles, spoked and disccssuch as used on loco bogies (all years?).

As far as I am aware, "1" and "2" are disc wheels and "3" are always spoked, but all have the same diameter wheel (some pre-1959 versions also had deeper wheel flanges).

I could be wrong, but I believe the R. 633 freightliner was first introduced in the 1967 catalogue and so I expect that it would use the same 36” pin-point axle wheels as all of my post-1959 Transcontinental cars, despite R. 633 appearing to have a different bogie than the earlier Transcontinental bogies (which seem to be based on 1890’s style US “arch-bar” truck/bogie).

So, if the R. 633 freightliner does indeed use the “standard” 36” pin-point axle wheels, I expect that the Evermodel C8721 metal wheels will fit, but as their axles are slightly too short to drop straight in, you might need to VERY CAREFULLY bend the sides of the bogies inwards using the hot water method suggested by Threelink in his post on 24 July in reply to my post “Replacing Tri-ang Wheels” on 23 July.

The following photos show a R. 136 box car with the bogies bent inwards (a bit too much as it was my first successful attempt with the hot water method) and then with the C8721 metal wheels fitted. I applied a drop of oil to the ends of the axles with a hypodermic oiler and the wheels fit and run perfectly, with thanks to Threelink for his excellent suggestion. 

I have a large number of Tri-ang British and Transcontinental passenger cars and British tenders with sleeved wheels on rounded axles with bogies/underframes with closed plastic axles boxes. I haven’t thought as yet about how to fit metal wheels to them and I’ll post any suggestions I come up with.

BTW, I posted this reply earlier but it disappeared, so I have posted it again.

Mod note - It didn’t disappear it went into the queue for approval as flagged top and bottom of the screen each time you press send/post/etc. Now you have it twice.

 Happy modelling!

Cheers,

Ken

[Rana Temporia]

I think the plastic Mainline coupling is a direct replacement for the Triang version. I am not sure if Dapol and/or Replica also made this one?

[Ken-362318]

Hello Moderator,

As a relatively new user I am not as familiar with intricacies of your website as you and more experienced users would be. Some posts go up immediately, others do not. Now I know why.

I did not see the note "flagged top and bottom of the screen each time you press send/post/etc." because my PC crashed when I hit the "Post Reply" button (not the first time that has happened) and when I rebooted my post was not there and neither was that "flag". I assumed my post was lost when my PC crashed and that is why I re-did it. I stand corrected.

Given that my post has been duplicated, perhaps you could delete the second one in the interest of avoiding needless duplication?

Regards,

Ken

[What About The Bee]

Hello Ken

Just sign in, and tap the three dots at the top of your "offending" post.

A pop up menu should appear, permitting various choices. The one I favor is "edit", as I do not like my posts to have typographical errors.

Another choice is "delete", meaning you, Ken, have the power to delete any of your posts at will.

The only time these menu choices do not function is when the thread is locked. That happens from time to time and then you must obtain moderator assistance. Its rare.

Don't worry about being a neophyte, we all started out there!!

Bee