7+-NGM-logo The

7-Plus-NGM Digest April 2005

Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 22:54:04 -0000
From: "srcl_24"

Subject: more photos

This last weekend, Jim Small came down from Canada to hug his engine and get some cab time. I posted 4 shots in the files section.

#7 on Woodshill branch
Jim Small and a friend visiting

Jack at New Pit on CBE branch
Jim Small next to engine

#7 at Woodshill Jct
A happy Jim with his engine and train

#7 with train on CBE
Work train

Tom Casper

Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 13:05:25 -0700
From: Trevor Heath

Subject: China trip report

A short report on my recent trip to China can be found here



Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 07:00:16 -0000
From: "Frolin Marek"

Subject: Midway Sales - website

Hi Folks,

This past weekend I saw up close a Midway Sales 'mine train'. Was the little gasoline loco, shorty ore gons and cute little caboose. So went to their web-site I had a link for from a year ago and its gone...

Anyone know of their new web-site, or if still in business?

Frolin Marek
San Antonio, Texas

Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 08:34:29 -0500
From: "Bill Laird"

Subject: Re: Midway Sales - website

They are not listed as an advertiser in the current issue of Live Steam.


Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 10:18:57 -0400
From: Arno Martens

Subject: Re: Midway Sales - website

Remove the index.hmtl and http://www.rideabletrain.com is still there but it seems to be a portal only.

Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 07:57:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: James Keeline

Subject: Re: Midway Sales - website

I don't know anything about the company but they seem to have abandoned their web site. You can see some of the old versions of the site using Archive.org's "Way-Back Machine":


Many of the pictures are gone, which makes the site a little bit of a disppointment. I note that the pages with anything seem to be from the first nine months of 2003. Later dates reflect an expired domain name.

I'd like to see some photos of their "ore car" to see if it resembles the one in my prototype, Disneyland's Mine Train Thru Nature's Wonderland (1956-1977):


James D. Keeline
San Diego, CA

Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 16:41:56 -0000
From: "traindude80005"

Subject: Re: Midway Sales - website

What gauge is the Disney Land mine train, 15"? Is there any plans available for the locomotive and tender it would make a great project. I sure am glad that I didn't buy my locomotive from Midway Sales, I was thinking very serious about their locomotive. I bought on from RealTrains instead and have been very happy with it.
Runs well and no problems.

Lee Brown

Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 20:57:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: James Keeline

Subject: Re: Re: Midway Sales - website

The prototype had a 30" gauge. As such, a 7.5" gauge would be 1/4 (3") scale.
Further, the prototype used electric motors and batteries stored in the tender; the locomotive is unpowered. For simplicity, I plan to emulate this in the model. I prefer 7.5" gauge because there are several layouts within reasonable driving distance.

I have photographs, drawings, 8mm films, audio clips, and some blueprints which may be detailed enough to construct a model. I am presently planning a model of the entire attraction in HOn30 (1/87 with N-gauge tracks) scale (7'x7' overall) circa 1960-1963. The predecessor to the Mine Train Thru Nature's Wonderland (1960-1977) was called the Rainbow Caverns Mine Train (1956-1959). The area in Disneyland is now occupied by the Big Thunder Mountain Railroad rollercoaster.

As I think I have mentioned before in this group, I volunteer with the Poway-Midland Railroad where I am a fireman and my wife is a conductor. Our 1907 Baldwin 0-4-0 is similar in appearance to the Porter-like Mine Train locomotives at Disneyland. It runs on a small 1/2-mile loop of 42"-gauge rails. We also have an 1894 LA Railways trolley, a 1906 San Francisco cablecar (undergoing restoration), and a 1950 Fairmount speeder. I'm glad to have a chance to run all of our equipment. Children of all ages, 4-94, seem to like it as well.

James D. Keeline
San Diego, CA

Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 17:43:57 +1200
From: Grant & Donna Alexander

Subject: Gauge

Gidday all from down under.

I hope this isn't another one of those mine fields that I'm stepping into.

I just finished watching the Riding Railway University (Vol 1 & 2) and found that Train Mountain run 1/8" over gauge on their mainline, and 1/16 inch over gauge on the turnouts. A recent visit by myself to a club here in New Zealand found them also running 1/8 inch over gauge on their entire layout. I only discovered this when after the third days running I found that one of my wheel sets was getting damaged.

I always thought that the gauge was measured between the inside faces of the rails. Oh yes, I understand about gauge widening on curves but surely this is allowed for in the specs on the wheel sets, e.g. flange taper, back to back measurements etc....

I have around a thousand feet of track on my mainline at home, plus the yards, storage shed track, and access lines, and it's all set to, oh well, 7" actually rather than your 7". But that aside, it's to the gauge advertised, not 1/8" over. I'm having no problems and have had a reasonable number of visiting loco's, all with no problems that I am aware of.

Why re-invent the wheel, or rather, why start another gauge with different specifications?

Grant Alexander,
Squirrel Valley,
New Zealand.

Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:46:04 -0000
From: "a920enco"

Subject: Re: Gauge


IBLS standards chart calls for 7.50" min between the rails....with a note that "most tracks are being built to 7.5625" to 7.625" gauge to reduce railhead wear".

Wenatchee, WA

Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 17:59:53 -0700
From: Trevor Heath

Subject: RE: Making contact

He may have been in Rome for the funeral.

I do not have any other address

Can anyone else help?


Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 21:08:24 -0400
From: Arno Martens

Subject: Re: RE: Making contact

I forwarded it to member there, living locally.
You may have more luck if you actually give the mane of the person you want to contact.

I will also CC your message to [Livesteamers].

Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:10:44 -0700
From: "Bob & Faith"

Subject: Making contact


First off my thanks to Trevor Heath, Arno Marten and Fr. Jay Finelli. All got involved in my quest and I thank you.

I just happened to be going through Trevor Heaths Live Steaming web site and came upon the Waushakum Live Steamers web page. I saw a very nicely painted Rail Systems SW1500 Adirondack Southern #1137 belonging to Ken & Bobbie Nelson. I would like to make contact with them and talk to them about their unit.

Can anyone out there steer me in the right direction?

The best,

Robert N. Bowman

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:58:49 +1200
From: "Chris Draper"

Subject: RE: Re: Gauge

So the 'nominal gauge' of 7.25 or 7.5 is really a minimum gauge.

Does anyone have a figure for the maximum for both gauges?

Chris Draper
Winter Creek Bush Tramway

Auckland, New Zealand

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 06:00:12 +0000
From: "Roy Stevens"

Subject: RE: Gauge

I totally agree. Several of my press-fit wheels have come loose running on a club track that over-gauges their track. I've found 1/16" over on my tight radius curves to be more than adequete.


Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 23:39:55 -0700
From: Dennis Dalla-Vicenza

Subject: Re: Re: Gauge

Please make this read as follows.

"Accepted standards chart calls for 7.50" min between the rails, with a note that "most tracks are being built to 7.5625" to 7.625" gauge to reduce railhead wear"

But the above only works for 7 1/2" track gauge. The 7 1/4" group uses 1/16th and 1/8th over as well or I think they do and it's been a long time since I ran and worked on 7 1/4" stuff so I could be wrong.

BTW folks, IBLS never set up any standards no matter what you've been told. The IBLS thing was an attempt by a magazine editor to get the standards of one club published and accepted as the norm. I've been a member of the IBLS for a long long time and there has been no standards voted on by anyone and as a matter of fact there was no way of conducting a vote on standards in the first place. I think this was all started by "Fitt" who was the founder of Modeltec; or am I out to lunch on this name.

I have CCd this to a close (as you can get via Internet) find and former IBLS secretary and I will pass on any comments he cares to provide about the above.

kind regards

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 08:52:58 -0400
From: "Bill & Nancy Eckert"

Subject: Re: Making contact

Ken/Bobbie Nelson's email address is: pocovalley@msn.com

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 08:25:00 -0700
From: "Bob & Faith"

Subject: Thanks

Good Morning,

I want to send a very big Thank You to Bill & Nancy Eckert for sending me Ken & Bobbie Nelson's email address. This will help me alot.

Bob Bowman
Selah, WA

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:14:43 -0000
From: "chevwilliam"

Subject: Re: Gauge

I beleive the problem started with an incorrect view of the wheel to rail interaction.
From dimensions published in the LALSRM Roster for 2005, the wheelset back to back dimension is 7.12 +.020/-.000 and the flange width is .156 maximum with a flange to tread fillet radius of .094 +.010/-.010, these dimensions ar efor a nominal track gauge of 7.500 (usually laid to tollerances +.063/-.016).
If you add up the back to back +two flanges + tow fillets you would get 7.62 (using nominal dimensions). This is the point on the wheel that corresponds to the tangent point between fillet and tread and should be the same as the tangent point between rail head top and inner side radius on straight track.
the problem is that people forget to measure to an equivalent point on th erail head when laying track. This point is a distance from the inside face of the rails.
If track is laid with prototype shaped rail and track gauge is measured about .09 below the top of the rail, then the proper tangent (straight) track gauge is 7.500 nominal. This will place the tangent point of the edge radius and the rail top crown at about the same location as the tangent point between the wheel fillet radius and the tread.
Expansion of track gauge on curves is a function of the radius and the maximum ridged wheelbase intended for use on the curve. Example: an 0-4-0 of a given scale will have a much shorter ridged wheelbase than a 2-10-4 in the same scale, and require different expansion of the track gauge to operate on the same radius.
If track is being laid 1/8 over gauge on tangents, no wonder wheels are waring strangly.
I hope this is of help and of interest.
Best Regards,
William J. Stewart.

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 15:02:13 -0700
From: "Bob & Faith"

Subject: Question

Are there any message archives that go back from March 2000? I would like to read through them.

Robert N. Bowman Selah, WA

Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 00:12:10 -0000
From: "chevwilliam"

Subject: Re: Question

I would guess not, at least for this group, as the first message amd the first member date from then.
Best Regards,
William J. Stewart.
Perhaps one of the "old hadns" in the group may know where the group originated from (I assume it derived form an eariler group somewhere).

Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 00:25:24 -0000
From: "ddallavicenza"

Subject: Fwd: 2.5" scale supplies available.

First message to the list was made March 30, 2000 and here it is.
In 7-plus-NGM@yahoogroups.com, "Rudolph (Rudy) van Wingen" wrote:
Como Roundhouse Products supplies metal car parts and accessories for 3' gauge prototype cars and locomotives for modelers of 2.5" scale and larger. We also act as the internet contact for Conway Locomotive Company which supplies 2.5" scale and lareger locomotive kits and accessories.

Email to for catalog(s) or additional information. CRP's catalog is free ('cause that's all it's worth);
Conway's is $2.00 payable upon receipt.

We do not yet have a URL (Web Site) but we are working on it.

Rudy van Wingen
Como Roundhouse Products
David Conway
Conway Locomotive Company

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:53:51 -0700
From: Ken Burns

Subject: Re: Fwd: 2.5" scale supplies available.

Please note, Rudy is very ill and is not answering any email at the moment.
Ken Burns

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:18:52 -0500
From: "Mudhen"

Subject: RE: Fwd: 2.5" scale supplies available.

Conway is out of the business and Cole's ended up with his patterns although they have yet to offer them for sale. Too bad as it has potential. Several nice engines have been built on the West Coast from Conway's stuff although the plans leave much to be desired.

Mark Petersen

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:05:04 -0700
From: Ken Burns

Subject: Re: Fwd: 2.5" scale supplies available.

Mudhen wrote:
the plans leave much to be desired.

My partner and I have been working on the Conway C-19 for about 7 yrs.
Though progress is slow, what with work getting in the way, with a little common sense you can get through it.
We hope for steam by Christmas, operation for the third triennal at Train Mountian.
Ken Burns

Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 17:20:54 +0200
From: "Hubert Wetekamp"

Subject: Re: Question

Hello Robert,

sure we have an message archive, at least two.

At yahoo, you can search all messages, which are not deleted, on the server. Log in with your yahoo-ID, switch over to messages, and at top of the page, you can choose a message by the number, or type in a phrase and search for a special message.

And than, their is since the start of our group our own website under http://www.7-plus-ngm.org, and from their, you can click over to the message archive.

And in this monthly archive-page, their are most of the photos, which where posted during the past years, at yahoo, the file- and photo-space is limited and so most photos and files are removed over the time.

Your moderator
Hubert from Germany

Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 17:20:54 +0200
From: "Hubert Wetekamp"

Subject: Re: Question

Hi Robert,

Are there any message archives that go back from March 2000? I would like to read through them.

after reading your question again I think you are searching older messages than mach 2000.

Sorry, but their are no messages, because I founded this group in march 2000. And the absolute first message was sent out by my friend Rudy van Wingen of Como Roundhouse Products on march 30, 2000 at 07.10 pm pacific time.

Hubert from Germany

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:29:39 -0000
From: "nrwgauge2"

Subject: width of loco

can anyone tell me what the average width or largest width of a narrow gauge loco would be accross the buffers running on 7.25" track(,I am wanting to convert a 12" gauge 0-4-2 to run on 7.25" track.
The buffers are 33" wide and frame is around 68"long I am prepared to cut and chop.
33" I feel is a little to wide for the track scale or is it?
Any suggestions would be appreciated
thank you Anthony

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:47:16 +0200
From: "Hubert Wetekamp"

Subject: Re:Question


as the founder of this list I can tell you, their was no earlier group somewhere.

The reason for creating this group was the change with the 7+ Narrow Gauger. In march 2000, I got the latest issue and learned, that they changed the name to 7+ Railroader to get mor subscribers from the broad-gauge-group.

And because I'm a hard-core-narrowgauger I was really disappointed, and so I started this group to give the narrow gaugers a new home.

And thanks to my friend Rudy van Wingen of Como Roundhouse Products we had around 50 members after 1 !!! day, and we are still growing - actually over 460 members.

Your moderator and group-founder
Hubert from Germany

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:14:52 -0000
From: "chevwilliam"

Subject: Re: width of loco

Dear Sir,
The width you can have depends on the "loading Gauge Clearance Diagram" of the tracks you intend ot run on.
Most tracks have published diagrams of the maximum outline of equipment tha tcan run on their tracks, and still clear all the fixed structures.As an example, LALSRM has a 7.5 inch gauge loading diagram that allows up to 24 inches from center line above 12 inches above rail head. I do no tremember off hand what the maximum height is or what the side limits below 12 inches above railhead are.
As another example, a 2.5 inch scale Uintah Ry 2-6-6-2(T) would be about 26.5 inches wide and a little over 3 ft high so would easily fit within the LALSRM Clearance limits.
A 3-3/4 scale model of Sandy River and Rangley Lakes #5 has run sucessfully on LALSRM tracks.
and a 6 inch scale model of a 10 CV WWI French Trench engine has been seen running happliy at LALSRM meets (he is a visitor from another region).
I hope this is of help.
Best Regards,
William J. Stewart.

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 19:01:36 -0700
From: Trevor Heath

Subject: Centurion Live Steam Meet

A photo essay by Paul Ash on the Centurion live steam meet in South Africa can be found here.



Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:14:36 +0100
From: "Peter Beevers"

Subject: Re: width of loco


Check the loading gauge of the railway(s) you intend to run it at - 24" wide is quite common, Moors Valley uses 26" wide. I have heard of railways using 30" wide on 7.25", but that wide is rare. Also check for the amount the ends overhang as this will make the buffer beams swing out (and thus occupy a wider envelope) on curves.


Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:36:48 -0700
From: Dennis Dalla-Vicenza

Subject: Re: width of loco

I would think that the loading gauge would be linked to the minimum radius of the club layout. An 8 foot riding car has more side swing and overhang on a sharp turn than on a wide turn. One of the storage places at one club I was visiting was so tight that you can't run the long cars into the one side of the facility. They have to be placed on the outside tracks because they ram the door jamb when you try putting them away on the inside tracks. I realize this is a one sided loading gauge restriction but it is a restriction.

kind regards
Dennis, living in Port Alberni BC, Canada

Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 07:35:39 -0000
From: "nrwgauge2"

Subject: can anyone email me pics of large scale loco 3"+

O.K guys
I am having trouble getting loading clearance figures as I am not a member of a club yet.If any of you have pics of scales larger than 3" It would help me work out the size I need to covert this 12" loco to smaller gauge.I dont care what advice you have as any is better than none.
thanks Anthony

Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 15:05:16 -0000
From: "chevwilliam"

Subject: Re: can anyone email me pics of large scale loco 3"+

Dear Anthony,
We already have. Look in the Files section of this Group site.
The folder "Marek Mountain" has photos of a 'diesel' under development that is narrow gauge on 7.5 inch track and the captions give dimensions of his test design.
The folder "Meet at David Skagens" has a frontal photo of a 3-3/4 scale locomotive on 7.5 gauge track (SR&RL #24) labeled dfw2.jpg and a side shot of the same locomotive labeled dfw20.jpg.
The folder "Sandy River & Clear Lake Ry." has several photos of 3-3/4 scale equipment operating on a 7.5 gauge railroad in Michigan. The folder "Track and Wheel Standards" contains a drawing of the standards taht are applied to certain 5 scale 15 gauge railroads but is useful as it gives a good idea of what track and wheel interaction is and has a clearance limits drawing included.
The photo file "BCW NG.jpg shows some locomotives under construction on 7.5 gauge "steaming bays".

In the Photos section of this group site are various interesting photos, which will come up as small display due to Yahoo! constraints on photos loading to conserve space and bandwidth.
Look through them and you will get an idea of what is possible on most 7.25 or 7.5 gauge railroads.

I hope this is of help.
Best Regards,
William J. Stewart.

Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:20:34 +1200
From: Grant & Donna Alexander

Subject: Re: width of loco

Hi Anthony,

I understand from my research that there was an old general rule amongst those in the Welsh Vales that they didn't build anything wider than three times the track gauge. Thus for their nominally 2' gauge stuff they kept their rolling stock to about 6'. So for us, that relates to about 22 inch's for 7.5 inch track. Less of course for us on 7.25 :-)

Grant Alexander
Squirrel Valley
New Zealand.

Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 17:47:20 -0000
From: "fred veenschoten"

Subject: Re: can anyone email me pics of large scale loco 3"+

also see this site. click on "locomotives" and then click on the diferent icons. they run engines up to 27" wide and 48" high.
fred v

Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 17:53:18 -0000
From: "fred veenschoten"

Subject: Re: width of loco

the Ffestiniog has width problems because of one of their tunnels.
they had to narrow the cab of Mountianeer to fit and are now having problems with the restored Garrett and will end up running it on the Welsh Highland RR where they run the large Garretts. now those engines are over 6' wide.
fred v

Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:23:49 -0600
From: "Mike Decker"

Subject: Moors Valley Railway.....A small commercial

Hi Fred and Anthony:

If you would like to see the Moors Valley in operation, I stock a Video from Graham Whistler in England called "The Best of Miniature Railways", which features it. It's a really interesting "non-scale" 7-1/4" operating railway. I have the tapes in NTSC format for US machines, and I can get it on DVD in PAL format, which will play on computer driven DVD players, such as your computor or the small self-contained portable machines. The tape is $39.95, plus $5.00 Priority Mail.

My 4-wheeled gas locomotive for my 7-1/2" gauge Erskine Tramway will be 26" wide and 48" long. With long cars on sharp curves, the overhang will be more on the inside of the curve, than the ends swinging out.


Mike Decker
Decker's Trains
Rt. 1, Box 102-E
Hot Springs, SD 57747

Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:32:20 -0700
From: Dennis Dalla-Vicenza

Subject: Re: Moors Valley Railway.....A small commercial


I have an NTSC version of a video with about 15 to 20 minutes section which is solely about the Moors Valley. I would recommend it highly to anyone interested in Narrow Gauge Railroading and ride in the cab models. It may be the same video but I can't check at the moment because it is on loan to someone a hundred and a half miles from me in Victoria.
When I get it back I will post the name.

kind regards
Dennis, living in Port Alberni BC, Canada

Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:05:20 -0600
From: "Mike Decker"

Subject: Re: Moors Valley Railway.....A small commercial

Hi Dennis:

I'm sure that is the same one, Graham's video has a long section on the Moors Valley, it is by far the best covered railway in the video. And I agree, I watch my DVD often, just for inspiration :>)


Mike Decker

Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:48:59 -0400
From: Arno Martens

Subject: (Forwarded) Re: Re: width of loco

Arno, I don't think this message will make it on to the list. FYI, the restored K1 was never intended for use on the Ffestiniog. In my correspondences with Colin Hill, project manager for K1 restoration he said that they decided early on that due to the very large changes needed to make it fit the Ffestiniog and the limitations imposed by the need to keep the historic look, it would be used on the Welsh Highland and indeed that is where it is now running. They are not "having problems" in any way.


Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 05:42:30 -0000
From: "Robert N. Bowman"

Subject: Eaton Hydrostatic transmission


I am planning on building a 4 wheel diesel switcher using a 4hp Briggs & Stratton Horizontal shafted engine. I want to hook up a Eaton Model 7 Light duty hydrostatic trannie to it. Here is the problem.

I do not know where to purchase one of these transmissions. Do any of you out there know of a dealer/dealers who handle these units? I reside in Washington State.

Help me if can.

Selah, WA

Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 00:36:05 -0700
From: Dennis Dalla-Vicenza

Subject: Re: Eaton Hydrostatic transmission



kind regards
Dennis, living in Port Alberni BC, Canada

Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 09:16:58 -0000
From: "nrwgauge2"

Subject: thank's to all

I would like to thank every one who has helped me in the last few weeks,I now know what I can and can't do,thankyou Fred for the Moors valley link this is what I needed to see,big loco's on 7.25" gauge that you can sit in and some have the same wheel arrangement,diameter length as the 12" gauge I am converting!
I am still open to any advice and suggestions as I still have a long way to go.

Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:07:38 -0000
From: "chevwilliam"

Subject: Re: Eaton Hydrostatic transmission

Also Try http://hydraulics.eaton.com/index_flash.html Which should get you to the Eaton Hydarulics home page.
there is a hotbutton link to find distributors in the header portion along with others of various product lines literature and services.
I hope this is of help.
Best Regards,
Williiam J. Stewart.

Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 22:48:22 -0000
From: "William Van Lenten"

Subject: Re: Eaton Hydrostatic transmission

Also try http://crenshawlocomotiveworks.com/index.html and click on 7.5" Gauge+


Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:29:10 -0700
From: Dennis Dalla-Vicenza

Subject: 4' 8 1/2" gauge 12" to the foot scale steam locomotive wanted.

Hi all,

A while back someone posted a link to a full size mogul and three passenger cars that were for sale somewhere in the states. I have lost it and need the link again as there is renewed interest locally of purchasing an operating steam locomotive. The mogul part is not a total requirement but the locomotive will have to cross some spindly trestles so it will have to be a light 4-6-2 Pacific or smaller. The one preference is that it be a main line type engine not a switcher.

kind regards
Dennis, living in Port Alberni BC, Canada

Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 19:10:27 -0700
From: "Bob & Faith"

Subject: trannie search

To all,

Thanks to those who helped me in my trannie search. I could not have done it without your help. Now I can look and go from there.


Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:49:25 -0700
From: "Bob & Faith"

Subject: tough question

Hello again,

Lets talk diesels for a moment.

Would any of you out there happen to have any pictures of the Roll Models Transfer Switcher, gas powered hydrostatic version, with the upper hood off. I would like to take a good look at one. This is for reference only.


Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:11:11 +0000
From: "Roy Stevens"

Subject: RE: Tough Question

I don't have one of those, but I have an Easlon davenport with a 5hp Honda electric start and a hydrostatic transmission that is currently without a top and up on a stand. Makes for easy picture taking if you think it could help.


Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 17:58:48 -0700
From: "Bob & Faith"

Subject: tough question

Hello Roy,

If its not too much trouble send me a few pictures. At this point in time anything would help me out.


Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 15:50:50 -0700
From: "Michael Lavrich"

Subject: Narrow Gauge Trucks

Some months ago I saw that someone was producing ready to run 2 1/2" scale trucks for under $500 a pair. Can anyone help me out with contact information? Has anyone tried these and have comments on how well they work?
Thanks in advance for any info,
Michael Lavrich

Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:35:13 EDT
From: Lineshaft@aol.com

Subject: Re: Narrow Gauge Trucks

Is this what you were looking for?

Craig Adams Arched bar Trucks
2-1/2" scale arch bar trucks for 7-1/2 " or 7-1/4" gauge. They have the bearings in their axle, and have great articulation for bad rail. All cast iron construction, 40 lbs. each for good stability. They are also, "BIG", with 5-1/2 dia. wheels on a 10-1/2 " wheel base. and an overall length of 16".
$495.00 per set ready to run. craig@microkart.com

The web site is Discoverlivesteam, and there web site is
I believe these have cast side frames. A little weird if you ask me.

Dave Fontes

Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:43:54 EDT
From: nashnash@aol.com

Subject: Re: Narrow Gauge Trucks

I have three pair and have run them many miles at Train Mt with no problems.


Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 23:49:42 -0000
From: "Josh"

Subject: Re: Narrow Gauge Trucks

I agree. I have a pair and they have performed very well, and they are well worth it. They are a great, simple design. And they don't look bad either!


Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 19:22:22 +1200
From: Grant & Donna Alexander

Subject: Safety Valves question

Hi Guys,

I have a little loco that is not behaving when it comes to safety valves.

Simply put it blows at the correct setting (100psi) but does not settle till about 70psi. Most frustrating, and enough to make you watch the preasure gauge with an eagle eye.

Some more info, it's a bagnal style boiler, no specific steam dome, but still quite a large steam collection area directly below the manifold and safety location.

There are two safeties on the loco, and if I fire it hard enough to get them to both go off, one settles back down quite quickly (about 5psi differential) but the second always takes the boiler down to 70psi before settling. And, it doesn't matter which settles first, the second one always takes 30psi out of the boiler. We bought a brand new tested safety valve and this performed the same as my ones. We sent it back to the manufactorure and he retested it on a test boiler and it had a differential of 7psi, not the 30 I was experiencing.

There was thought that it might be venting water and this was holding the safety open, but this is not the case. Firstly there is a baffle in the boiler directly below the safeties and manifold, and secondly, we reproduced the fault with the boiler water level right at the bottom of the glass, a good 4 inches below the safety. And, there isn't a column of water abaove the safety that you'd expect if this was the case.

If I gently push the top of the safety down when it's blowing off, apart from scalding myself, it settles straight away, securly.

Any thoughts from the steam guru's out there?

Grant Alexander
Squirrel Valley
Cambridge, NZ..

Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:35:43 -0000
From: "chevwilliam"

Subject: Re: Safety Valves question

Some guesses based in insufficient informationand some inferences.
It sounds like your safety valves may have a capacity and flow passage interaction problem(s). The fact that the 'last' open safety can be seated properly if 'the top is gently pushed down' may indicate that the ratio of flow areas in the open position is slightly off, especially if it is venting 'wet' steam. I do not mean priming and venting solid hot water but do mean that there might be suffcient superheated water entrained wiht the steam to increase in volume as it flows through the safety valve passages and experiences a slight pressure drop in the process. the increased volume would keep the valve from seating longer, until the overall opening force (static plus dynamic) on the bottom of the valve component drops below the closing force of the spring.
The point that if two safties lift, one seats at the proper blow down pressure and the other does not but it is not consistant in which is which indicates the flow velociety through the open safety is too high for your boiler capacity, that the dynamic force on the bottom of the open valve component is much higher than intended.
When two valves are open the total flow may be about the same, but the flow velocety through each valve is slightly lower.
How quickly will the last safety seat if you remove the fire as soon as it lifts?
What happens if you are feeding water to thre boiler at the time the safety lifts?
And until it reseats?
When you get both safteys to lift, do they open one at a time, and with an appreciable delay between openings?
If you keep a high fire and add water to the boiler during the time the safties are lifted what happens?
You did not say what design of safety you are using.
A ball type safet valve could be mis sized or mis ported, so that the seat diameter is too small relative to the ball diameter, the venting method may have a restriction near the ball maximum diameter when valve is open, which would increase the dynamic force on the ball during venting.
Commercial (full size equipment vendors) steam safety valves in the sizes usable on our 'model' boilers have rathere large venting passage area relative to the seat area, with a 'blowdown adjustment 'feature that is tuned to restrict the flow just enough to give the dynamic force to hold the valve open below the opening pressure.
Well made scaled model steam safety valves seem to have a very good repeatability and reliability. I have seen them consitantly seating at the adjusted blowdown setting for several years in operation, probably similar to full size usage gained in a year of revinue running, and if Iremember correctly, full sized steam safety valves were removed and retested, serviced and adjusted, annually.
I hope my 'runnimations' are of help in diagnosing the root cause of your problem(s).
Best Regards,
William J. Stewart.

Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 19:38:48 +0200
From: "josef wagner"

Subject: Re: Safety Valves question

no alexander
the problem is due to a poor design of the relief valve itself immediately after opening just for same fractions of the total lift the steam flowing with sonic speed through the seat opening and is creating here a certain dynamic force.
this force can totally unballance the valve seat or piston.
basically relief valves have a setting differency of about 0,2 tpo 0,4 bar that is 2,8 to 6 psi.
closer differency can only be achieved with pilot operated and controlled safety valves. that is done by axelson very high straight through flow gas relief valves sized 6x18 or 8 by 24".
the "back swiich differency" can only be reduced with correct designed, ballanced valves and spring.
if you are faced with the problem of too high pressure loss in the boilder - use smaller valves and staggered settings.
best greentings from old austria
josef wagner

Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:45:32 EDT
From: kennarwing@aol.com

Subject: Re: safeties

I'm ignorant so I probably shouldn't open my mouth, but if the foot goes in, so be it...

If I understand Mr. Stewart's post, a possible temporary solution might be to open the blowdown valve just as the first safety closes (or when the first one opens, if only one opens). This may reduce the flow velocity through the single safety enough to let it close after a short pressure drop. If it works, it would lend confirmation to the flow-velocity explanation.

I don't know what a "bagnall" boiler is, so if it doesn't have a blowdown valve, perhaps there is another steam consuming accessory on the boiler (whistle, pump, blower, etc.) that would accomplish the same purpose of robbing some flow velocity from the single safety.

Let us know how your experiments turn out.
Ken Wing

Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 14:58:47 -0600
From: "Chuck Hoelzen"

Subject: Re: Re: safeties

You may consider an orfice in front of the pop off valve.
A reduced diameter would limit the mass-flow through the valve. It would not change the pop pressure. CAUTION!
don't make it too small or it will not be able to blow off enough to keep ahead of your fire.
Try it on one valve and set the other 5 psi higher.


Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 01:26:33 -0000
From: "chevwilliam"

Subject: Re: safeties

A blow down valve would vent water and sludg from the nether regions of the boiler, very little effect on the steam volume near the top. I do not know of any accessory that is designed to flow enough steam, other than the main throttle and prrpperly sized safety valves, tha twould allow such a test. However, if there is a top outlet that can be temporarily fitted with a medium sized quick acting valve, it might be worth the experiment.
Best Regards,
William J. Stewart

Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 18:49:22 +1200
From: Grant & Donna Alexander

Subject: Re: Re: Safety Valves question

Thanks for the replies,

William, yes you are correct, they are ball valves, in the style of "pop" valves. And they are set to "pop" at different settings, 100psi and 105psi. I swapped their settings around to get the other to settle down first.

I haven't tried removing the fire as soon as the safety lifts, but have cooled the fire as quick as I could as well as pumping "cool" water into the boiler with a donkey engine, and even opening the main boiler blow-down to drop pressure quicker, but, the safety still didn't reseat till 70psi.

As for putting more fire on, well, if I'm pulling up a hill when it happens, well the safety seems to never reseat!! Effectively making the fire draw harder, as you suggest.

Yes, the ports on the safeties are very small, as is the ball and seat, but the brand new one supplied by a reputable dealer here in New Zealand and supposedly being suitable for my boiler size wasn't a great deal bigger inside.

My loco is regularly in revenue service, and these safeties have seen probably 15 years service. I have owned the loco for a little over 2 years, and it came with a rod for reseating the safeties, but this is a practise I refuse to do. Yes, it's always done this as long as I am aware, certainly for the past few years.

Josef, yes the safety's release settings are already staggered, and the valves are probably already quite small. Certainly the port sizes inside are less than those recommended by some of the "fathers" of our hobby in their great reference books.

Still looking for ideas, but reluctantly might have to consider re-engineering the existing safety's.

Anyone got prices on safety valves to suit a 22 litre boiler with a grate area of 44 square inch's, and 1/2"BSPF thread in the bush....


Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 08:43:39 +0100 (BST)
From: stephen hardin

Subject: Re: Re: Safety Valves question


I am not an expert on safety valves but have a friend who has helped me with a problem on the safety valves on my Thomas 2, they were ball valves and were sticking and had to be tapped to get them to seat. Two problems were evident when we looked at the valves 1. The clearance between the spring and the valve stem was too tight so that when the spring compressed it was binding against the stem, with the added friction it would not seat properly. 2. When the valve was lifting it did not lift the valve stem 100% vertically and cocked it over by maybe only 1/2 a degree, again enough to cause the stem to rub against the side of the guide hole and add extra friction. I will not go into flow through the valves etc because I don't know anything about this.

In the end he redesigned and followed an industrial design and went away from ball valves completely. Hope this helps and gives you an insite into some other causes of problems.

Steve Hardin

Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:04:48 -0000
From: "chevwilliam"

Subject: Re: Safety Valves question

Does anyone of your local aquaintance have a"Superscale Locomotive Company Scale Pop Safety installation?
Would they allow you to borrow one to try on your boiler?

The Superscale safety is a scaled down WORKING model of full size USA practice ;ocomotive safety valves. it has a poppet valve with feather guide, an adjustable bolwdown skirt, and adjustable, over a selected range, popping pressure.
Superscale also has a scale muffler for the safety.
the design uses a separate 'base adapter' that threads into the boiler and onto which the safety proper is threaded. This allows for hydrostatic testing of the boiler and safety settings without trying to 'hold the safety valve closed' between the safety setting and the minimum boiler test pressure by the simple expedient pf removing the safety and installing acap on the 'base adapter'.
I have seen these safties used on locomotives from 7.5 inch gauge 1.5 inch scale 4-4-0 and 0-4-0 up to 1.6 inch scale 4-8-8-4 (five of the safties were used, just like the prototype, with staggered opening pressures) adn a few on 2.5 inch scale locomotives.
These are NOT cheap, mine cost US$160.00 each in mid-1980s. but are the best design out still.
Another possibility is to try a small 'Kunkel' steam safety valve, this is a full size boiler safety valve maker and they do sell valves sized for small commerciql lqundry boilers in the 1 to 5 hP reted range, but they are NOT scale, it would be around 2 to 2-1/2 incgh overall diameter.
I hope this is of use.
Best Regards,
William J. Stewart.

Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:16:40 -0000
From: "chevwilliam"

Subject: Re: Safety Valves question

I just Googled and find Superscale Locomotive Company has a web address/sight at "http://www.superscale.biz" with down loadable catalog and price lists. The web page has a photo of the safety valve so you you can see it's appearance.
Best Regards,
William J. Stewart.

Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:43:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Elaine Kallaus

Subject: For Sale

I have a beautiful engine for sale please contact me if you are interested

Mason Bogie

7.5" gauge 2.5" scale

The engine is new ran less than 20 hrs With 10 years of building time I used the best materials available A lot of the steel parts are heat treated The boiler is made of certified 8" boiler tube with copper flues Safety valves are set at 120 - 125 lbs Propane fired I used Cole's Power Models plumbing (valves, fittings and brass pipe) and model bolts It has a Chicago type injector 2 piston axle pump and a hand pump in the water tank

Mason #44 was built in 1879 bought by Denver South Park & Pacific Railroad to run from Denver to Lake City but never laid track and was scrapped in 1889

Price is $65,000.00 which included engine, boxcar, roll around stands for engine and boxcar transfer racks that fit in a 1/2 ton full size pickup all spare parts and delivery in the continuous United States and Canada

Richard Kallaus
124 West Ave F
South Hutchinson KS 67505

Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 21:42:39 +0200
From: "Johan"

Subject: RE: Re: Safety Valves question

Hi Everyone,

Grant's question :

> Anyone got prices on safety valves to suit a 22 litre boiler with a grate area of 44 square inch's, and 1/2"BSPF thread in the bush....<

Prompted me to ask if there is anyone on the list (forum) who could supply me or possibly the "list" of information regarding the sizes of safety valves.....or a formula....for various size boilers?? Obviously in the 7.25"/7.50" Gauge range.
Your info and help would really be appreciated.
Thanks in anticipation,

Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 16:38:31 -0700
From: "Howard Springer"

Subject: note to "John" and "Josh"

In several recent posts, I have seen messages from both of you apparently referring to some 2.5" scale NG trucks. But I haven't found the original post indicating where they were built. I am in need of several sets for my current project - can you clue me in ?

Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 20:47:52 EDT
From: nashnash@aol.com

Subject: Re: note to "John" and "Josh"

Go to this link and look down on the left side for "Arched Bar Trucks"