AR Kits 45/600 Class - New Chassis?

 
  LaidlayM Chief Commissioner

Location: Research
I bought a new AR kits SAR 600 class (604) in 2003 then bought the relevant Brasstic detailing kit from AMRM.  Last week I decided I needed a SAR loco to haul my zinc concentrate train so dragged out the BNIB untouched un-run 600 class.  I then got the AMRM issues from 12 years earlier which have the instructions for the Brasstic detailing.

Why did people make a new chassis?  My original chassis has a Mashima motor and conventional (Athearn, Austrains, Trainorama etc) type drive on the bogies, not the type found on my kit built 700 (modified 442) class loco.  It's quiet and smooth.

I am thinking that AR changed the design, if so, did they change anything on the footplate or superstructure as well?

Mark

Sponsored advertisement

  brissim Chief Train Controller

There was nothing wrong with the AR 45 mechanism. I only retired my early run AR 45s (dating from late 80s/early 90s) only a year or so ago with the arrival of my Auscision 45s. And yes as you say it was basically a mechanism made up largely - I recall - of Athearn parts with the early versions even having a flywheel and ran very well right up until the end. The flywheel disappeared in later version for the addition of extra weight over the driving bogies (actually thinking about I can't remember which way around it was - ie flywheel/no flywheel). Don't recall there was ever any changes to the topsides/body of the model which - even with the Brasstic detailing parts - is no match to the modern Auscision model.

The mechanism in the old Lloyd Model Railways 442 brass/whitemetal kit was a totally different mechanism which - again I recall - based on early K&M mechanism. Great puller but very noisy. My two examples were retired years ago with the arrival of my Austrains 442, which in turn will be retired later this year with the arrival of Auscision 442s.

Tony
  LaidlayM Chief Commissioner

Location: Research
There was nothing wrong with the AR 45 mechanism. I only retired my early run AR 45s (dating from late 80s/early 90s) only a year or so ago with the arrival of my Auscision 45s. And yes as you say it was basically a mechanism made up largely - I recall - of Athearn parts with the early versions even having a flywheel and ran very well right up until the end. The flywheel disappeared in later version for the addition of extra weight over the driving bogies (actually thinking about I can't remember which way around it was - ie flywheel/no flywheel). Don't recall there was ever any changes to the topsides/body of the model which - even with the Brasstic detailing parts - is no match to the modern Auscision model.

The mechanism in the old Lloyd Model Railways 442 brass/whitemetal kit was a totally different mechanism which - again I recall - based on early K&M mechanism. Great puller but very noisy. My two examples were retired years ago with the arrival of my Austrains 442, which in turn will be retired later this year with the arrival of Auscision 442s.

Tony
brissim
Thanks Tony,
I wonder why a new chassis was built, maybe to improve underside appearance and detail.  My 600 class does not have flywheels but DCC give me momentum anyway.  No 600 from Auscision so I will still with what I have.

Regards, Mark
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
The original model came with twin flywheels, but as 90% of the model was plastic it did not have much grunt. So a redesign was done removing the flywheels and adding weight blocks over the bogies to give a bit more grunt at the wheels. They were a good model in their time though. The major external problem was the plastic hood handrails which were made of plastic and so made oversize a bit for robustness.

The original 600 model was the 600 with the three window cab on it later AN rebuilt the cabs on the real ones into a 45 style cab with 4 windows in it. the cab and the hood handrails were easily replaced though to give a better looking model. For an original 600 in as delivered condition I think it was just a 45 class repainted though less a few detail parts like buffer plates.

They worked well enough, but even with the weight blocks in them they were still a bit light on their feet, and that might be why a new chassis was needed to made from brass to add a bit more weight to the model as well.
  br30453 Chief Train Controller

There was nothing wrong with the AR 45 mechanism. I only retired my early run AR 45s (dating from late 80s/early 90s) only a year or so ago with the arrival of my Auscision 45s. And yes as you say it was basically a mechanism made up largely - I recall - of Athearn parts with the early versions even having a flywheel and ran very well right up until the end. The flywheel disappeared in later version for the addition of extra weight over the driving bogies (actually thinking about I can't remember which way around it was - ie flywheel/no flywheel). Don't recall there was ever any changes to the topsides/body of the model which - even with the Brasstic detailing parts - is no match to the modern Auscision model.

The mechanism in the old Lloyd Model Railways 442 brass/whitemetal kit was a totally different mechanism which - again I recall - based on early K&M mechanism. Great puller but very noisy. My two examples were retired years ago with the arrival of my Austrains 442, which in turn will be retired later this year with the arrival of Auscision 442s.

Tony
brissim
The AR 45 mechanism was not Athearn parts but AR's own locally produced mechanism.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: br30453, trainsguy

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.