Stickframe Posted October 12 Posted October 12 (edited) Hi fellow modelers, So who doesn't enjoy seeing a train roll by? Nobody! that's who! 😄 And where I live, trains roll everyday - both long haul and locals. This project will focus on local service, which, like shown in these photos, is usually performed by an EMD GP locomotive variants. The engine in the upper left is GP15, run by a local shortline, while the others are GP60s, run by Union Pacific, but you can also sometimes see BNSF power. As this dio will be in 1/48 scale it will necessarily be relatively big, so rather than making a proper train with several cars in a row, it will focus on a short train, or a "bobtail" with only one or two cars making its way between buildings It turns out the area I live was once largely industrial with many trackside industries. This means in some places there are wedge shaped buildings where various spurs peeled off, in strange ways, which is reflected in development. To keep this interesting, this project will also include a wedge shaped building or two. But a key problem emerged almost immediately, in the form of finding an affordably, "O" scale locomotive that isn't ridiculously toy-like! 😄 It turns out, that yes, you can indeed find some pretty nice, and well detailed locos, but to no surprise, they are really expensive. This is particularly bad news in that this will be a dio, well - why buy a really nice new engine if it's biggest challenge will be to look great for final photos, only to then be relegated to the island of built dios??? not a good scenario. As such, I went on line and found an affordable, reasonably credible loco of course! The mighty Lionel GP38-2! What a treat! Except, well, it is soft in many details and outright bad on a few others. For example, the handrails....yeah...or the pilots!! (pilots are the parts that include the coupler, in the front and rear, so yes, very evident). But, before I get too critical, bear in mind the likely intended purpose of this 'ol girl - maybe running around the Christmas tree once a year? maybe someone's starter kit for the hobby? So in short, they are good enough for who they are for. This loco looks like a loco and is remarkably heavy and durable, which is great for the possibly intended user. But, as we are model builders, well, ha, chuckle...this toy is hardly acceptable....😄😄 On the other hand as we are indeed model builders, well, time to adapt and overcome! And another problem - while there are numerous 1/48 scale model aircraft, there aren't many options for vehicles. There are of course a few 1/48 military vehicles, very few civilian vehicles, and naturally an abundance of "cutesy" vehicles that have NO place in a proper dio! 😄 So, that will need to be addressed too.... And speaking of problems there is of course size - sheesh - this should be tiny, it's 1/48 scale.....right - no, wrong, even though this is indeed 1/48, a scale loco and one car is remarkably big, and surprisingly heavy. So rather than buying another big sheet of plywood, and starting fresh, an old dio I've been parting out will now contribute to the base! Yep, the sabre saw will be used to eat right through the old base - pavement, dirt, board, frame and all. I plan to use the left side of the base shown above to make up the new urban track section. We'll see how this goes. As always, I am optimistic, but still have a a raised eyebrow - this could quickly become a mess. But hey - the life of the model builder is tense, and this falls into that realm! 😄 I started work on this about a week ago, with updating the clunky fuel tank that came on the Lionel. Yeah, not great and I could not figure out how to fix it up in a convincing way. So, instead found this (on the right) relatively nicely detailed heavy chunk of cast aluminum fuel tank! Oh what a treat! Except, it was too long - a lot too long, to the tune of 7/8" too long. I contemplated cutting this up myself, but quickly rejected that and instead humbly went to a local machine shop to see if they could do it. Clearly they could, and they agreed to do so. Note the bandsaw, yes at least 7' tall - wow! Notice the bolts on the bench? yeah - they are about 5" across! After they cut the part as needed, the guy was nice enough to run it through a mill, so that the mating surface were made flush! Then, to reassemble (middle pic) I cut a sheet of alu to fit and used the four pre cast screw holes to make what is essentially a fish plate! yes, armed with a cordless drill, a few files and a razor saw, made it work 😄 frankly much better than I imagined, so off to a good start! Next up, making a frame, as the kit part was just too toylike. To do this I made up two alu decks. The lower deck was dimpled to allow for bolster mounting points, and the upper added for rigidity. I tied the pieces together using six set screws. Next was to make up a styrene deck which the railcar body could be attached. This whole task was pretty interesting. First of course just figuring out what in the heck I was doing, followed by the use of my less than great collection of metal working tools This boiled down to identifying precisely what the bare minimum design requirement were and how I, an unaccomplished metal guy, could tie them together in a convincing way. You can see the monster fuel tank bolted in place in the lower left - and in the upper left, what it looks like with the styrene deck bolted on. All things considered, this seems to be a fairly clean solution. And more problems. To the non-railroading enthusiast, the top pictures are of couplers, but we pros call them draft boxes. They include a central shank that is very strong. It is connected to the loco in real life in a giant bushing that allows some pulling without tearing off, and to the cars following by a coupler. How hard could this be to figure out? well, now that you ask, pretty hard. I'll curb my ramblings and say - the vertical placement on the train is important, and the length of the shank is relevant. Right - once installed I realize this kit part was not cutting it, as the model this part was attached to the truck and not the frame, meaning it was too long. Right (again) I acknowledged what I was pretending to not see all along, which is the shank was simply way too long - and not look that good. So, with the part firmly glued onto the frame, well, I cut about 1/4" out. OK fixed, except, this material is something called engineered plastic, not styrene. It couldn't be glued back together. So, out came the really small drill bit, and four holes, fitted with metal rods added - so the shank is now pinned together. Great. It's still too long - but come on!! it's good enough for who its for! 😄😄 And the body and pilots. On went a forward facing door, some shades, and the marker/signal lights cut off and plugged. And, the pilots completely reworked. Only the front so far, but the back is calling my name! Et voila! about halfway done! I found some dimensioned drawings of this - and guess what? the base kit is fairly close in some ways, but proportionally incorrect in many ways. That fact is relegate do just being the way it is! OK, on we go, and thanks for having a look Cheers Nick 🚴♂️ Edited October 12 by Stickframe text 8
dnl42 Posted October 12 Posted October 12 Well, this is seems quite different. Looking forward to seeing the wonderful things you do. 1
HK-500 Posted October 12 Posted October 12 Utterly interesting ( as were your previous incredible builds ) , I like your thinking : as a scratch builder myself and working on a tight budget, the three R (reduce,re-use,recycle) are my daily motto Wish you the best for the months to come, Nick👍 1
IMG1 Posted October 12 Posted October 12 Certainly going to enjoy and be amazed with this build, your last ones have been so real its frightening, be good to see this one from the start, the good the bad and the down right frustrating bits... 1
Stickframe Posted October 14 Author Posted October 14 @dnl42, thanks! as they say, variety is the spice of life 😄 it's fun to try something new. That said, I can already report the combination of 1/48 scale and locomotives - well, not things I am familiar with, at all! @HK-500, thanks - so far so good! While probably not the hardest thing I've tried to model (a locomotive that is) , it is indeed quite a challenge to figure out. I have discovered that while more or less to scale the base kit is not proportionally correct. I imagine this is case because it is, as intended, a relatively affordable, functional locomotive. So I also imagine the design reflects the need to make something reliable and easy to operate. But, it is proving to be a bit of a handful to convert into something that is closer to what the real loco looks like! And, along the way trying to understand exactly what I'm making! so, spending lots of time looking at pictures to try and clarify all of this @IMG1, well then you are in for a treat! As I just mentioned, this has been a bit of handful already! Getting a feel for scale has taken a while to get comfortable with. As I've built a few 1/35 projects, I can usually estimate size, materials etc in a way that is convincing, but for this, not just yet. There is in an interesting contradiction with 1/48 being relatively small, and even at this scale, the loco is huge! This has already resulted in more than a few one step forward, three step back moments - lol. Use the hobby knife to cut up and make parts, then use the same knife to cut them off or into different pieces to make them look better! 😄 I hope to have some updates posted in the next couple of days - Thanks for having a look, Cheers Nick 🚴♂️ 3
Stickframe Posted October 15 Author Posted October 15 (edited) HI Model builders, I've spent the last couple of days working on the loco, and have made some good headway. That said, I've also discovered the challenges associated with trying to convert a functional toy into a better looking static model. Lots of problems, big and small! 😄 Maybe many of you do this too, but I don't know - before getting started I look at lots of reference images, and for this project, compared my base kit to the real thing. As I'm not a railroad expert, I focused on the most obvious visual differences using this comparison: Comparing my toy locomotive, with a real one. The toy is pretty good in many ways, but equally ungood in others - so, starting with: A: The entire front needs help. The most obvious difference here is that giant gap between the stairs and gap - which leads us to the less obvious, but equally important question and problem: why is that gap there? and what is going on with the coupler? Well, the gap is there because the stairs are attached to the coupler, which is attached to the front truck and not the chassis. Hmm - not good. As I was looking at this it occurred to me that this is likely the case because this toy train could have been designed to be used on comparatively tight, layout or when compared to real life, unrealistically tight radii curves, as most people probably don't want a giant model railroad taking up large portions of their homes! So, the coupler works more like a drawbar than a coupler, thereby allowing the train to operate with tighter than real life curves, or that's my guess! Anyway, for the serious business of model building, this is a real problem 😄 B: This is a tricky problem - the model cab is narrower than the chassis, which is not the case in real life. At first I though this would be an easy fix, in that I made up a new chassis. Except, the chassis width is tied to the fuel tank and chassis widths - so, if I made a narrower chassis, the fuel tank and trucks wouldn't fit under it. Leaving me two choices: 1) widen the cab; or 2) ignore this this. C : The handrail, well they are very strong as they are metal, firmly attached to the chassis, likely quite good for hours of family fun, and awful for use in a model. So, one way or other, they will be replaced. D : These cabs (GP38-2) have an obvious forward facing door, and my base kit does not have one. I was planning to "just" cut one in - strike that - as the body and window plastic is about 1/8" thick! So, that didn't happen, and as posted above, it was applied over the body and detailed as required. E: The real engine has obvious visors on side windows. The kit has visors molded into the body, but they are flat, so some styrene to solve that, like the door. X: I don't know what model year my donor is intended to represent, but the running/signal lights are out of date so they were cut off and filled. Finally some updates: On some level, all of this must look pretty straight forward - but, it wasn't exactly/at all that for me 😄 This required a lot of head scratching, building, installing, removing and rebuilding! 😄 So after this, work on the back would certainly go smoothly right? haha - nope: An overarching challenge here is that while this is a 1/48 scale model, it's large, heavy and clunky, which counterintuitively means that the build is requiring the use of materials much larger than is commonly used in 1/35 - so there you go - lots of chunky parts to solve lots of chunky problems! 😄 OK, thanks for having a look Cheers Nick 🚴♂️ Edited October 15 by Stickframe website froze 6 3
Stickframe Posted October 18 Author Posted October 18 On we go, more progress on the GP38-2. This has been interesting to work on. Initially I thought that because this is 1/48 scale, I'd have troubles, as I usually work on 1/35 plus. This has not been the case because the model is big, heavy, and clunky! But, it has a lot of interesting details, but unlike 1/35 or even 1/24, small or not, the parts are (obviously) heavy duty, so the typical parts on this fall into the heavy parts category on 1/35 and maybe even on 1/24. That said, on I've gone, last week focusing on stanchions and handrails: Each stanchion has at least 5 parts: a metal outer piece set in a channel, a backing strip (to keep it from bending in and out) and two small plates at the base to keep if from going back and forth. This turned out to be a fairly effective solution, but it was a handful keeping the stanchions generally spaced correctly and vertical. Same thing in the back: I added the rear door on the cab while I was at it. Added the two connectors on the deck and the remnant PE bracket over the coupler. These are used to connect and store a length of cable used to connect multiple (locomotive) units, or MU connectors. I have a piece of cable for this, which I'll add after this is painted. And side views: These turned out pretty well, as they are relatively flat/straight, and as strong as can be hoped. If this were to be handled a lot, I would have made the rail and stanchions from brass. Back to the door - this was/is so obvious, I couldn't ignore it. I had passed it before because the model parts are oddly shaped and not easy to work with - but, as it's distinctive, and has that plate next to the steps, well - here it is! OK, thanks for having a look cheers Nick 🚴♂️ 6 1
dnl42 Posted October 18 Posted October 18 Ooh, you've got me very interested in your locomotive! I've wanted to do something like this in this scale for a long time. But, my Google-foo must be failing me, because when I look for the 'Lionel GP38-2', it's all quite expensive, even used. 1
Stickframe Posted October 19 Author Posted October 19 @dnl42 this is my first O scale anything, so there has been a lot of learning by doing. As it needs to be posable but not functional there is some latitude in terms of deciding what to buy. The base needed to be good enough to support some modifications and look reasonably good (not toy-like) when done. As for the price of the Lionel, I started searching a few months ago looking for something less than $100 USD ebay which I found. This worked because the year it was made, accessories, livery, etc didn't matter. I was looking for the least expensive unit I could find, and would have settled for the cheapest had I found it. I went on line every few days until I found something I was willing to buy. To your point though, high end, more detailed, operable units are a LOT more expensive - like $500 USD! which would be completely nuts for a dio!. Many others can be found in the $150+ to about $250 range, also far too expensive for my needs. All of that said, this has required a lot of styrene (some from the stash, and some new), the front and back handrails, (which in retrospect I should have made), the fuel tank, some decals....so, yeah, the cost is creeping up. I bought a nice looking Lionel Hopper car too, for $20 USD a few weeks later, which will do the trick. Since I've been looking into this, and knowing what I do now, I think it might have been OK to buy a shell only (seem to be around $50) and look for some trucks and just scratch build the rest? But, as I knew/know nothing/little about how these work, I'm glad I went for the unit I did, as it provided me with basic fixed points like bolster center lines on the frame, even though that was strange because the truck bolster pins were not centered, and were instead set back/inward. I suppose that if a guy were more familiar with locos and O scale kits, this could have been done more more cost effectively. About the price/value in general, despite "only being" (quoting myself here) 1/48 scale, this engine is over a foot long, about 3.5" wide, about 4.5" tall, packed with electronics and so forth, and while certainly clunky and with some soft details, it sure seems sturdy and is serving as a pretty good base kit. I figured the price reflects about 1.5 1/35 kits, or a 1/48 scale B17. Yes, I though about this in order to see if I would pay that much otherwise, for something else on a different project. The other vehicles on this include $20 Tamiya 1/48 scale bulldozer and a 1/35 scale excavator from the stash. The plan is to convert them to what I want - so yes, I foresee a lot more styrene cutting and challenges in my future! I found a nice 3d printed flatbed truck but man, it's expensive for something that's only about 5.5" long (plus shipping). So, I think I'll do without that for a while, as I have a few 1/48 scale military truck kits already - just the wrong vintage, so I'm not sure about what I'll do with them? Maybe one old one like Marmon in the lumber yard? OK, thanks for having a look and leaving your note! Cheers Nick 🚴♀️ 1 1
raider of the lost part Posted October 19 Posted October 19 Looking forward to see you working on this one Nick, as i have planned something similar, though in 1/87th / H0 scale. Florian 1
Stickframe Posted October 19 Author Posted October 19 @raider of the lost part, as a fellow "raider of lost (or forgotten) parts" well, this seemed ideal! The junk box does provide! This might have made more sense to make in 1/878, as there are a lot more detail parts available for raiding! As there aren't, or I couldn't find as many in 1/48, into the junk box and materials pile I went. Speaking of parts and materials, I ran out for now, so naturally concluded it would be a good idea to start on another vehicle: I purchased this Hasegawa 1/35 excavator a long time ago - just thought it looked cool, but it has sat in the stash since. But no more, now it's being converted to a 1/48 scale Cat 317. I picked the 317 because the 1/35 track and rails convert almost exactly to the scale length of the 317 - alas, many other parts don't, including the frame: The 1/35 frame was far to wide - more than a inch. So, glued the top and bottom together, then marked what needed to be removed, and out came the saw. It's now the correct scale width. I also cut out and saved the upper and lower rings, like those used on a turret. I had lot of extra .060" styrene, so I now have a stable deck While many parts won't be usable, thankfully the arm assembly can be adapted. I left the scale in the picture above, so that you can see, the scale length is almost exactly right, as it is supposed to have an overall length of just over 28' and this is just about 29' - I breathed a deep sigh of relief! I'll eventually glue this ring to the deck, but want to get the spacing right, and still need to make a few cuts to the deck This guy was supposed to be the train engineer, but as he'll be next to impossible to see there, he now ha a new job as an equipment operator! OK, on we go - Cheers Nick 🚴♀️ 7
raider of the lost part Posted October 20 Posted October 20 6 hours ago, Stickframe said: @raider of the lost partThis might have made more sense to make in 1/878, as there are a lot more detail parts available for raiding! Well, in 1/87 the challenge would be to decide for which excavator you want to build out of all the plastic and resin kits available 1/50 is quite popular for diecast collectibles of construction machinery, maybe have a look there? Florian 1
Stickframe Posted October 20 Author Posted October 20 @raider of the lost part, hi Florian, you're right - but, I like scratch building things too, so, here we are! I've thought about using die cast, but the scale difference is too noticeable, like trying to mix 1/35 and 1/32 kits, where it's too easy to see the difference OK, on we go! Cheers Nick 🚴♀️ 1
Stickframe Posted October 21 Author Posted October 21 Hello model builders, Here we are with an update on the excavator: As you can see, plastic has been cut, and parts salvaged for this conversion. At the outset I'll say the 1/35 scale Hasegawa base kit is pretty nice, as it is complex and includes interesting detail despite the orange colored plastic that suggests it might be toy-like - which it is not. After doing some scaling, it seems the Hasegawa base kit in 1/35 represents what is generally known as a mini-excavator, which happily translates generally into a 1/48 scale medium excavator. Happily, in turn, I could credibly reuse many of the kit parts. The arm assembly is complicated and requires some patience, but it does go together as the plans say it will. In real life, the Cat 317 also has stairs and a handrail to get to the upper deck, but it is entered from the side and not the front of the machine. It turns out the kit parts fit pretty well like this, requiring some cutting and adapting, but likely more convincingly that had I tried to force some step up from the side. The kit includes a nice handrail, but it, in this application, clearly looks 1/35 scale and not 1/48. So, I made this up, having just finished making the rails for the GP38-2. I used the kit part as a general template, which helped. The Cat 317 uses stamped meatal for the engine housing, so to try and match the basic look I sandwiched .040" sheet over .020" sheet. I cut patterns into the .040" sheet and filed the edges to get the look. While several kit parts have been reused to get to this point, I am not as optimistic for the next steps which will include making the cab. I think like the handrail, the parts for the 1/35 cab will be too big, so it seems it will be mostly scratch built. On we go Cheers Nick 🚴♂️ 8
IMG1 Posted October 22 Posted October 22 Nick, It always amazes me the speed and detail you add to every part of your builds, this one is certainly taking shape. 1 1
Pete in Lincs Posted October 22 Posted October 22 Nick, you seem to be flying through this one so far. I remember seeing the fuel tank, A couple of weeks ago? But now look where we (you) are. The Loco is certainly getting there. I like what you've done to it very much. To my mind it would look much less toylike without the big black couplers fore and aft. Is that feasible? Replace them with aftermarket or scratch built parts? Also, with a scale paintjob and weathering it will look more realistic. From the Few films I've seen of them they seem to get very grubby. Just to confuse matters, the trucks are called bogies over here. BTW We used to have Lorries on the roads here, but we seem to have commonly adopted the word Truck as used over there. If you watch a 1950's or earlier American film, everyone says Automobile. But 'Car' seems to have crept into use there during the sixties. When was the last time you heard Automobile 🚗? Anyway, I like the idea of reusing the base board and some of your excellent buildings. The Excavator resize is going well. Can you build the cab from clear plastic and then mask it to paint? They always have odd shaped windows 🪟 so that might be easier. All the best. Pete 1
Stickframe Posted October 22 Author Posted October 22 Hi Pete @Pete in Lincs, about those couplers....and their gigantic size. Yes, that was a sticking point for me for quite a while and it took some pondering to figure out just what is going on with the base model (or other model locomotives) and real life. I concluded that the degree of track curvature has the greatest influence on how model trains set up their couplers. In real life, track curves are remarkably shallow, of only a few degrees, even on local or inner city spurs. As such model railroads use what amount to ridiculously tight curves, which makes sense, as unless a model railroader were willing to give up very large portions of their home to accommodate the scale equivalent of 1:1 curves 😄, real life curves won't work out that well, if at all. In 1:1, couplers, shanks, and draft boxes are attached to the rail car and locomotive chassis ends, for obvious enough reasons. My base model kit does not do this and instead, the coupler and shank is attached directly to the truck, or as you refer to them bogey. By doing this, the truck works as a drawbar, like you would see on a horse drawn cart. This mechanism allows the model loco/truck to navigate the tight curves while coupled. This is not always the case though, as in HO scale, couplers are attached to the chassis. In O scale though, that does not seem to be the case, and even more expensive units just provide a better illusion of being more technically correct: Though a bit hard to tell in the image above, the shank is attached to the truck using a pivot, as you can not clearly see on the left side And if you look at the coupler and shank from the more typical view, you can see it emerging from the underside of this locomotive, and not attached to the frame! I on the other hand, not fully understanding how this works, opted to make this: Ahh, the visually correct back side of a locomotive - perfect! 😄 Except, mercifully along the way I decided to test this out, and see if I could indeed connect to a railcar and promptly discovered that the long shank, that has the movement of a drawbar, is necessary, or, guess what? Without it, is not possible to couple the car and loco on a curve! Another unfortunate circumstance is that I bought two curved sections of track for this project, because I thought they look more interesting than a straight run! I made this clever decision thinking about what I see around here, which includes some pretty snappy trackwork on spurs like this: How nice - a GP-15 switcher making it's rounds with the north tower of the Golden Gate Bridge in the distance! beauty. Alas, a 1:1 train can navigate these curves, which in this picture look pretty flat, when in fact, they aren't. But, a typical O scale model train can usually only do this (even when using scaled curves) if the couplers and shanks are attached to the truck. So, we have a compromise! fancy front and rear chassis, and slightly odd looking, long shank couplers. As I was not thrilled by the look of the couplers from the beginning, I purchased a set of fancier/more realistic looking couplers (happily not that expensive) to change in. All good. Except, it turns out the couplers on the one car I purchased, also use the drawbar set up. This is good and bad. On the good side, well, at least I can couple the car with my donor loco. Bad because to convert the car to use a frame mounter coupler would be more work than I think it's worth. So, from now on, you are no longer allowed to mention my clunky couplers! 😄 As for the excavator cab, that is is a good idea! but, it's too late, as I'm well into adapting base kit parts. This might have been more work than it will be worth, as the basic frame, which has two key pieces, have now been shortened, and had multiple parts cut out, and reassembled to make it narrower - another great idea! 😄 but, it's coming along - Thanks for dropping a note! Cheers Nick 🚴♂️ 6
Stickframe Posted October 23 Author Posted October 23 @Pete in Lincs, no worries, Pete - that coupler problem really annoyed me! Eventually, I needed to pick a solution and move on. And, in case you're wondering why I am spending time fooling around with the excavator, fair enough. First though, while I was out on my bike this morning I came across these: First up, a CAT 326 with a bucket set up with a thumb, and then, an apparently Dude approved, CAT mini excavator: The CAT 317 I am building is the size between these, as shown below: Ahh, the majestic CAT 317 with a crusher attachment! and my version, has a grapple, for now that is. It could be converted to a thumb and bucket, or, to a crusher! And why is the attachment relevant? well: Maybe it will be demolishing something of course! this big? smaller? I don't know just yet, but something will be in some state of demolition for this project! Cheers Nick 🚴♀️ 4 1
Stickframe Posted October 25 Author Posted October 25 On with the excavator - this time, working on the cab and operator's work area. Happily for me, the donor kit includes a fairly nice cab and operator's area. So, I kept and rescaled as much of it as I could - which translate to a lot of cutting, filing and adapting. The operator was to supposed to be used in the locomotive, but, well, you can actually see him here! He served as a useful template for scale as well. I'm planning to cut off his head and reset it looking either forward or to his left, but way too early to be worrying about that! And the cab: I built the cab before making the interior, as its size is set by the space left on the deck with the arm in place. As such, the overall size of the cab, defines the maximum size of the operator's area. As you can see (actually you can't really see, but the back piece is from the kit) I reused two kit pieces. Each needed to be shortened and narrowed. The narrowing was a bit tricky as it required four cuts, in order to keep a slot and tab in place, which also allowed me to keep the nice detail on the roof. The rest is built using many small pieces of styrene cut and layered as needed. As this has oddly shaped windows, I went ahead and made templates for the "glass": While a bit tedious, I am hopeful these pieces will make for easier cutting of acetate "glass" panes. I hate it when homemade glass has really big gaps or ugly corners. I'm currently working on converting the grapple into a concrete crusher which is going reasonably well, and like the cab, is turning out to include several layers of small pieces cut, filed and sandwiched together - OK, on we go Cheers Nick 🚴♂️ 3 2
Stickframe Posted October 29 Author Posted October 29 Hello gents, On we go - adding another vehicle: On the left is a 1/48 scale Tamiya Komatsu WWII dozer, and on the right a modern CAT D1. It turns out they are pretty close in size, so the plan is to make this conversion. While the presence of the D1 is relatively diminutive when compared to the majestic CAT D6, 7, 8, or 9, this is not a garden tractor, weighing in at just over 19.000 lbs - so small, but not that small, and useful for my purposes. Task 1 was to adapt the frame and tracks which went reasonably well - adding orbital gears to the final drives and raising the frame. But, it turns out the Komatsu is pretty narrow, which makes sense as it was designed for airborne mobility. So, as you can see in figure 3, the tracks were widened. This is necessary so the modern C frame, used to hold the blade, can be located between the rails and the chassis - so a bit tricky, but not hard to do - all good. Well, not that good. As I was laying out the cab it didn't look right - hmm. Ahh, right - the chassis was about a foot short! Crap. So, out came the saw, and the tracks and chassis were cut, and lengthened. Like widening the tracks, this wasn't hard to do per se, but it did involve the use to numerous small bits of styrene to make it work. It's a bit hard to tell in the pictures, but it worked out pretty well. You can also see the C frame, which tilts up and down, and the blade back and forth. This mobility may be short lived, as it still needs four hydraulic cylinders, which is fine, but I'm not sure if I want to deal with keeping them posable - which requires a fair amount of tedious work! Next up will be back to the cab. Thanks for having a look - Cheers Nick 🚴♂️ 5
raider of the lost part Posted October 29 Posted October 29 great work lengthening the tracks there! 1
Stickframe Posted October 30 Author Posted October 30 @raider of the lost part, thanks - this little blunder had me a bit worried! But, why fret when it's easy enough to just fix it? As for the dozer, I've been pushing along! Sorry, had to say that 😄 While this has been challenging enough at the outset, getting acclimated to 1/48 scale has taken some effort - maybe why I didn't "see" the 1 foot error in the overall length, until it was built! As the cab geometry is a bit complex, it's built in three modules, a base, operator area, and body. This allows the parts to be painted separately and glass installed once the parts have been painted. Using modular construction has allowed the parts to be adapted as the build moves along, including the operator, who had bad posture! He was slumping in the seat, so he was straightened out, and then arms widened a bit, so they can reach the controls. As you can see, I need to add some putty to the body work to cover up a couple of seams. There are small doors in the areas that project outward from the cab - and for these, rather than trying to carve them into the body work, I might apply .010" sheet over the body work - which might be just fine at this scale. Same approach applied to making and installing the engine, which in real life is a CAT C3.6. This includes a cut up 1/24 scale GT40 transaxle, some kit parts and styrene - chosen and installed so they fit, rather than being particularly accurate. This engine won't be clearly seen, but, as the hood has large screened vents, it will be evident - so it needs to look convincing. The C frame adapter is wrong, as the blade connecting pivot sits too high. Rather than tearing this apart (as it works as-is) I'll add some more plates and a few gussets to the underside and hope to make it more visually convincing. Once again, my misreading/understanding 1/48 scale is the root of this problem! OK, thanks for having a look and on we go Cheers Nick 🚴♀️ 7
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now