You are not logged in.

  • "roger vine" started this thread

Posts: 7

Location: Great Britain

Occupation: Retired Civel Engineer

  • Send private message

1

Wednesday, July 24th 2019, 4:09pm

Lenz Br 94.5

Hi everyone,
I have seen (and partially understood!) a series of posts concerning this new locomotive model from LENZ.
These are currently in the Forum section:
Spur 0 Planen und Bauen
Fahrzeugbau (1)
(DB Regelspur) Lenz BR 94 - top cylinder cover

My understanding is that there is a perceived error with the 'top cylinder cover' over the cylinders which spoils the whole appearance of the model when viewed from the front. As I read it, this unit is believed to be too narrow, giving an increased distance between its outer edge and the face of the cylinder block, and there are a series of ideas as to how this visual error can most easily be rectified.


Although it does not solve the problem of how the model looks, I believe that the cause might be somewhat different.

In MIBA 08/09 there is a review of the model. On page 47 there is a table of dimensions - prototype, true scale and model. This gives a true scale distance between cylinder centre lines of 48 mm and a model distance of 51.4 mm - an increase of 3.4 mm. This is not unusual on models to provide sufficient clearance for over scale, in thickness, coupling rods and valve gear.

If I am correct, it could be that the top cylinder cover is actually correct and the cylinders are the problem, being too far out by 1.7 mm on each side of the model - giving the same visual result, but by a different route..

This would certainly solve the comments as to the whole front aspect of the locomotive being wrong as the cylinder blocks are much larger, and hence more obvious, than the top cylinder cover.
Modifying the top cylinder cover might make matters look a little better, but not resolve the underlying appearance. Resolving cylinder misplacement would be a whole lot more difficult, if not a total impossibility

Any views from other modellers as to whether I might be correct, or at least looking in the right direction?

Please excuse this post being here, rather than in the correct thread, as it is beyond my limited German.

MfG

Roger Vine

3 registered users thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

pekay (24.07.2019), Udom (24.07.2019), hot (13.09.2019)

pekay

Fahrdienstleiter

(348)

Posts: 330

Location: Hof Bayern

Occupation: MO - FR Kfm. Leiter / SA - SO Direktor der Bahnverwaltung in meiner Spur 0 Welt

  • Send private message

2

Wednesday, July 24th 2019, 7:02pm

Hello Roger

thanks for your posting.

May be the distance between the cylinder lines is a bit too wide, but what changes the front look of the loco completely is the wrong radius of the top cylinder covers.
Please compare the radius by design, which is approximately 6 mm to the correct radius of the brass part, which is 2.6 mm





Please have a look to my patinated and customized loco here



Best regards
----------
Gruß aus Hof

Peter 8)

Das Neueste aus dem und über das AW Krögelstein kann man hier finden. Galeriebilder gibt es auch.
Über die Entstehung meiner kleinen Spur 0 Welt berichte ich in einem weiteren Thread.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "pekay" (Jul 24th 2019, 7:37pm)


6 registered users thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

HüMo (24.07.2019), heizer39 (24.07.2019), minicooper (24.07.2019), Udom (24.07.2019), CharlieOscar (25.07.2019), JACQUES TIMMERMANS (25.07.2019)

urmel64

Unregistered

3

Thursday, July 25th 2019, 10:28am

wieso immer falsche Zylinderabdeckungen?

Hallo zusammen,
ich lese hier permanent, dass die Abdeckungen falsch sind.
Gemessen an was?
Ich hörte, dass das Modell dem Auslieferungszustand entsprechen soll und laut Konstruktionszeichnungen wären die Abdeckungen korrekt.
Mich wundert es, dass Lenz das hier bisher nicht deutlich gemacht hat für die ganzen KK hier.

2 registered users thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

Altenauer (25.07.2019), berni (25.07.2019)