Can anybody offer advice about using the body from an Airfix 0-4-0 Saddle tank kit to build a 009 loco? Suggestions about using an r-t-r chassis and fitting in the motor much appreciated. NB I'm a beginner in 009, so prefer to avoid etched brass and solder! Thanks
My dislike for
There are a host of closet Pug-bashers here and elsewhere. There is even a thread for them in "the other place".
It can be great fun and very rewarding to bash your own pug, but, yes, Brian is right, there are better ways for a beginner to create a really nice loco these days. When you have a few idle moments, browse the other thread in the "Locomotives" section here.
Don't be put off!
Kind regards
;D
I'm one of the 'closet pug bashers'! As Brian says you'll not get a scale narrow gauge engine that way, but I think it's a great way to build a freelance engine. A pugbash will be too wide for most layouts, but it's about the right size for a big 2ft 6ins gauge model. The detail on the pug body is a little coarse, but good enough for a first model. I know I was glad to use it when I started in 009.
Two of my pugbashes are still operational, although withdrawn from active service on my layout. They are descendants of my first successful 009 locomotive built 45 years ago. I used the Minitrix dock tank chassis, but today there are better chassis to use. I haven't tried the Farish 08 chassis but it may be possible if you add cylinders and connecting rods.
The trick is to use the footplate of the kit as a starting point and cut out a hole that the new chassis will fit into. You may need to cut away some of the body parts - the bottom of the boiler/saddle tank and the front of the cab.
Fixing the body to the chassis is a challenge. I have built locomotives by cutting down the body of a complete N gauge locomotive and gluing the new body around the N gauge carcass. That will help you get the body straight on to the N gauge chassis.
Here are a few photos to help you along. Just try it - after you have done one, perhaps you'll feel confident to build something more sophisticated. If you have questions, send me a PM.
(https://forum.009society.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.009dutch.nl%2Fcdr%2Fmain%2Ffoto%2Fmotivepower%2Floco%2Fpict0345.jpg&hash=190a930ff549b9e262ad3bd624d00a3a71391c43)
(https://forum.009society.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.009dutch.nl%2Fcdr%2Fmain%2Ffoto%2Fmotivepower%2Floco%2Fpict0364.jpg&hash=4527f630653157369a027fd54756a35dc018c207)
The saddle tank is great for Peckets.
Mal.
Here is a diesel loco I built 20 years ago using the cab sides and narrowed roof from the Airfix kit. I sold this many years ago now to a member of the 009 Essex group, who repainted it. The photo was taken on a return visit a couple of years ago.
(https://forum.009society.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi663.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fuu358%2FM-e-l-l-o-w%2FNGRM%2520On-Line%2FPIC00003.jpg&hash=6abffc075da7a4e6cbb8d5e7b32d7c7f36b2fb8d)
The reason for the photo is that the coach behind is a Liliput ZB coach and you can see the loco is somewhat taller than that.
The bonnet section is from a Matchbox
https://www.flickr.com/photos/maljams/5967323567/
No problem, here's a link to one I did. The raised center section isn't that obvious.
Mal
That is a really splendid Pugbash Perckett Mal!
I've done a couple (well 3 or so.......)pugbashes and although Brian is quite right in his opinion about the pug kit being rather crude and dated etc, I wouldn't be too put off as a Kitmaster/Airfix/Dapol pug kit is a very economical way into loco building in 009 and even at today's prices, you can get a new kit and a perfectly serviceable 2nd hand 0-6-0 chassis by Minitrix. Lifelike, Atlas (occasionally) etc or build one with tram skirts and stick a Kato 11-103 or 11-104 tram chassis under it for probably less than
Quote from: Vaughan Measday on March 14, 2014, 13:47
Can anybody offer advice about using the body from an Airfix 0-4-0 Saddle tank kit to build a 009 loco? Suggestions about using an r-t-r chassis and fitting in the motor much appreciated. NB I'm a beginner in 009, so prefer to avoid etched brass and solder! Thanks
First obtain the chassis! Your search would probably be helped by working out what you want to end up with - a little shunting loco or a gradient-storming behemoth or wherever in between. It is then a case of surfing the internet and looking in books at photos of real locos (and maybe a few models too) for some inspiration, then using the parts in the Airfix kit to fit around the chassis. In general terms you'll be narrowing the width of the cab and maybe shortening the length of the tank (though may be not for the gradient-storming behemoth!), and having some styrene sheet ('plasticard') to make a footplate and cab roof, and to reinforce the joints in the cab, etc will be useful. Also, you'll probably get better results using one of the liquid solvent adhesives (like MEK) as opposed to the tubes of 'glue'.
As you'll find there are probably as many 'pugbashes' as there are 'pugbashers' so there is no 'set' way to do it - and also a lot of contention about the subject as some people love them, and some hate them with a passion!
I have absolutely no problem with Pugbashes. However, it takes a considerable degree of skill to end up with a plausible looking loco and not just a pug body sat on an N gauge chassis. Personally, I find the Dapol Drewry bashes to be unrealistic as well. Look at the size of an 03/04 and imagine that lot sat on 2' gauge track. Something that wide would be MOST unstable in real life, why do we tolerate it in model form?
Rod
Thanks Mick! To answer the original question the chassis I used was a Grafar 0-6-0. I have another one using a Bachman 0-4-0 as an 0-4-2 (this one may go back under the knife to make it more Peckettish.) With both of these the mechanism is completely enclosed within the superstructure (no motor in the cab.) So you have a lot of leeway as far as mechs go. It all partly depends on what kind of railway you want to model, a Pugbash is really too big for a small quarry line. It scales out more for a heavy mainline engine in 009.
Mal.
It is an old discussion, Rod, one which we had many times before! ;D I feel you over-simplify the issue as standard gauge size locomotives have been put on to 2ft gauge track without toppling over. Here is a link to a photo I made of exactly such a locomotive (http://www.narrowgauge.nl/site/avo/avo23.jpg).
Also, allowance should be made for the fact that 009 may represent small industrial size narrow gauge, including the Corris and other midget size public carriers, and big 'main line' size narrow gauge completely at the other side of the scale. And if we accept that 009 may represent 2ft 6ins gauge in real life, then a Leek & Manifold coach or loco are wider and taller than a Pugbash. I know as I built them.
Finally, pugbashes such as Mal's Peckett look-alike, or some of the others I have seen, are very good indeed. As you say, they do take a lot more work than just fitting a chassis under an unmodified body.
But Vaughan is new to 009 and I think his first effort merits our support. I feel we shouldn't deter him from doing a simple conversion from the Pug. It is a good introduction to building your own working locomotive in 009. The material is easy to cut and shape. My own pugbashes look ridiculous to a scale modeller, due to the dock tank chassis I put under them. But they were the first 009 locos I built myself, and they ran straight away. Nothing like that for motivation.
Just wanted to say thanks to everyone who took the trouble to reply to my query. Lots of very helpful advice and comments. The topic seems to be quite a controversial one, and it has certainly made me think more carefully about what I want to do and how to go about it. What a friendly lot 009 modellers are!
For all my well known dislike for the Airfix pug kit I do own one. But it is not 009 it is 00.
It was originally built by the late Jack Carter in the 1960
Quote from: Vaughan Measday on March 21, 2014, 14:00
Just wanted to say thanks to everyone who took the trouble to reply to my query. Lots of very helpful advice and comments. The topic seems to be quite a controversial one, and it has certainly made me think more carefully about what I want to do and how to go about it. What a friendly lot 009 modellers are!
Vaughan
Don't let yourself be discouraged by some of the controversy. Find yourself a serviceable N gauge chassis and tailor the pug to it. Think of a large-wheeled six-wheel chassis, not of the small-wheeled dock tanks I used. It won't be a scale model, but the main thing to remember is that if it looks right, it IS right. ;)
I hope my previous post did not seem too negative. These kits CAN produce nice locos but they need quite a lot of careful thought if they are to convince everyone. But, at the end of the day, the only person it HAS to satisfy is you.
Rod
Echoing Ted's comments about going for a bigger chassis (6-coupled) I had a quick look on the 'net to see if I could find a shot of one of the best pugbashes I've seen...
please see reply No. 18 for corrected link
Photo by Mick Thornton, model by Charlie Insley inspired by the Ballymeana & Larne 2-6-0ST
Bit of a global link there Julien! The loco that is referred to is featured in photo numbers 025 whilst under construction and 031 in finished condition.
I would appreciate if members do publish links to my online photo sets, which is perfectly OK when done for the benefit of the hobby, they would please do it via the blogsite: http://micksrovingreporter.blogspot.com/ rather than direct to my picasaweb albums which serve as the source for the roving reporter reports in the blogsite.
This is because I can monitor visitor numbers and therefore bandwidth use on the blogsite but have no facility that I am aware of to account for hits on the picasaweb album, which I can only restrict direct access to by request as the blog albums wouldn't work if the source for the photos was locked!
Mick
Sorry Mick. I just typed "charlie insley pugbash" into Google and it took me strait to the album and I just coped & pasted the web address for the image of Charlie's finished loco. I had not realized that would cause problems for you.
To avoid any problems with bandwidth & w.h.y. I have removed the link in my original post, with a 'new' post here below:
Quote from: JulienW on March 22, 2014, 09:26
Echoing Ted's comments about going for a bigger chassis (6-coupled) I had a quick look on the 'net to see if I could find a shot of one of the best pugbashes I've seen...
http://micksrovingreporter.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/charlie-insleys-009-trains-1998-to-2008.html See photo 031 for the loco in question, and 024 for an 'under construction' photo
Photo by Mick Thornton, model by Charlie Insley inspired by the Ballymeana & Larne 2-6-0ST
Hopefully that links to the relevant page on the blogthingy... (it did when I checked via post preview).
If I'm correct Charlie's prize-winning saddle tank uses an old style Farish 08 chassis. It seems to be a stretched Pug body, with bunkers added between the cab and the tank. It's a good example of a large-wheeled chassis under the Pug body.
Thanks Julien, didn't mean to put you to any trouble. Your new link works fine by the way!
I've just done similar to you and googled "Ballymena & Larne The Bruiser" in Google Images and guess what, the first hit took me straight to a picasaweb link to photo 024 but clicking on it took me to the start of the slide show in my blogsite! Ah well, can't fight technology, I'll go and sit in a dark cave somewhere.........................
I echo compliments about Charlie's pugbash. There's a small aside on this one as I started to build a pugbash for the same 009 Society competition, based on The Bruiser and claimed "1st come 1st served" naming rights on mine being called The Pugilist, which I thought was quite a clever one, but when Charlie showed me his own started model and told me he was going to name it the same as mine, being a gentleman he very sportingly and generously conceded the name to me and called his own The Thumper instead. Charlie's loco went on to be awarded the Society pugbash competition prize, whilst my own effort didn't proceed beyond a rough work in progress balanced precariously on a Grafar prairie chassis without the rear pony truck. I have been embarrassed ever since that I pinched the best name and Charlie felt required to use a loco name that was a compromise, on a very much better model than mine would ever have been.
Mick