Garden Railway Forum

Click to enlarge

This is a drawing of the chassis I will be building. Should be OK, but your comments are welcome. I should add that it's o/s frame.

Looks OK, but why not use chain drive instead of gears?

Don't know really. I've always done it this way. Maybe I ought to move on.

When you're out in the more challenging environment of the garden, KISS is everything.......................

Dear Catweasel,

The straight substitution of Plasticard in a metal frame design, even if of considerable thickness, may not be satisfactory in the long term.

The drawing is unclear, but I would assume that the ‘spacers’ were the full height of the frame and therefore act as stiffeners.

May I suggest that an additional horizontal stiffener (frame spacer) would be an advantage, positioned somewhere near the middle of the frame’s length – this would considerably stiffen up the frame.

If there is insufficient space for a horizontal stiffener near the middle then maybe one at each end – attaching to the vertical stiffeners (frame spacers) would be a bonus.

It probably would not matter if the horizontal stiffening was at the top or bottom of the frame.


JOhn

FBGR:65387 wrote:Dear Catweasel,

The straight substitution of Plasticard in a metal frame design, even if of considerable thickness, may not be satisfactory in the long term.

But didn't IP produce a plastic or plasticard chassis similar in design to the essel chassis.....???

Barry

IP do a Budget chassis, but I've never heard of anyone who's assembled it and got it to run!

MDLR:65391 wrote:IP do a Budget chassis, but I've never heard of anyone who's assembled it and got it to run!

My De Winton-alike runs on an IP budget chassis that I assembled, runs quite well too!

Well done!

Seriously though, I have heard of people who've had problems with them.

Dear Barry,

The original HP metal chassis consisted of steel side frames held together/apart by three cross sheets that were fixed with very short self tapping screws.

The replacement chassis is a single plastic casting of similar external dimensions, and as can be seen in the picture on the HP website ( http://www.ipengineering.co.uk/page121.html ) the top edges of the frame has also been flanged/thickened.

This is by no means the straight substitution of materials, but a complete redesign to suit the new material’s properties.

JOhn

The new IP deluxe chassis is all plasticard. As built it twists a bit, but once a body is on all is fine.

This one appears to be a very nice job....

http://gardenrails.myfreeforum.org/abou ... rd&start=0

Barry

That's a Deluxe, not a Basic.

sstjc:65396 wrote:This one appears to be a very nice job....

http://gardenrails.myfreeforum.org/abou ... rd&start=0

As Brian says, this is the "Deluxe" IP chassis rather than the basic one, and moreover with the older whitemetal gearbox. It runs really remarkably nicely - though the coupling rods have been replaced with brass versions. The loco itself is in bits just now for a rewire, having failed suddenly at Dave Watkins' open day last year (just stopped dead). Looks like the speed controller has died - nothing to do with IP.

Thats a very nice loco and I guess the final cost would be comparable in price to many of the IP kits. I think you've made a very good job of the body. Proportions are just right. I think I have to start saving for the chassis and see what I can do with it. Don't suppose you have any video of it running ?

Barry

sstjc:65408 wrote:Thats a very nice loco and I guess the final cost would be comparable in price to many of the IP kits. I think you've made a very good job of the body. Proportions are just right. I think I have to start saving for the chassis and see what I can do with it. Don't suppose you have any video of it running ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyoJ3PsUExo

I think these deluxe chassis now come with the new, "improved" plastic gearbox rather than the whitemetal one I have. I have not inspected one of the plastic ones, but others on this forum have given feedback that is less than 100% positive.

Well Richard, my line is scattered with the various parts of 3 different plastic "improved" gearboxes & the only loco still with an IP gearbox working (just) has a whitemetal one.  ;)

Oh & by the way, re the coupling rods. If the deluxe chassis is the same dimesions as the one under a Jessie then you can use mamod coupling rods (from dream steam) to replace them.

Pendo Pilot:65412 wrote:Well Richard, my line is scattered with the various parts of 3 different plastic "improved" gearboxes & the only loco still with an IP gearbox working (just) has a whitemetal one.  ;)

I thought you might wish to chip in at this point!

Pendo Pilot:65412 wrote:Oh & by the way, re the coupling rods. If the deluxe chassis is the same dimesions as the one under a Jessie then you can use mamod coupling rods (from dream steam) to replace them.

Useful to know - wish that had occurred to me before I made me own.

Good video - That seemed like an awful lot of railway for one thats only 6 yards long. You've achieved a fantastic atmosphere in that short space. Very impressed.

I wonder if anyone knows of an alternative gearbox that could be used instead of the IP plastic one. What a pity that the whitemetal one isn’t still available as an option.

Barry

the ‘spacers’ were the full height of the frame and therefore act as stiffeners.

The spacers I will be using are Essel's. Way back, I had a Saltford Ruston with a similar layout. I used Brian's whitemetal gears and wheels with a speed controller and 6 volt under the bonnet. That chassis was 60 thou 'card and boxed with the footplate. Strong as an ox and had pretty good haulage power. This chassis is 80 thou thick.