1950's Triang

Ask questions or give advice on any other model railway Manufacturers and Gauges
kcc
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:11 pm

1950's Triang

Postby kcc » Sun Jun 26, 2022 9:47 am

I have recently set up my 1958 Triang trains (locos, rolling stock and series 3 track). I have got this running well and added some "new" old items. I have been given a modern Hornby Hogwarts Castle 4 - 6 - 2 loco. It will run on my old track, but is quite prone to derailing. I guess because the finescale shallower flanges do not sit well. Would it be possible to replace the wheels with older deep flange wheels? I know the process seems to be common in reverse, i.e. putting new wheels on older locos!!

Thank you.

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 13619
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: 1950's Triang

Postby Bufferstop » Sun Jun 26, 2022 11:54 am

It may only need the wheels pushing in or out a little on the axles. It's a compromise between too close to keep the wheels on the rail whilst passing through pointwork, and too far apart to take the correct route when approaching the tip of the frog.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

Bigmet
Posts: 9266
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: 1950's Triang

Postby Bigmet » Sun Jun 26, 2022 2:56 pm

kcc wrote:...Would it be possible to replace the wheels with older deep flange wheels?...

Unless 'someone' is producing the wheels to this pattern - it's a wider tyre as well as a deeper flange that is required - then the most likely source of wheels is from existing old chassis. The simplest path may be to adapt the complete old chassis to the newer body, because the axle diameter was 9/64".
http://www.tri-angrailways.org.uk/indexlocoS.html

kcc
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:11 pm

Re: 1950's Triang

Postby kcc » Sun Jun 26, 2022 4:57 pm

Thank you both for your comments. I have ordered a back to back wheel gauge and hope this will improve the running. Maybe on the other rolling stock too.

Bigmet
Posts: 9266
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: 1950's Triang

Postby Bigmet » Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:43 pm

Caution regarding the 'back to back gauge'. For current OO wheels this will be 14.5mm. But the old Triang wheels were around 13.5mm b-t-b, because the flange is much thicker. 'Around', because the plastic wheels of wagons and coaches had one wheel free on the axle so it could move a little side to side, relative to the wheel fixed to the axle.

What the matching track provided in the way of the width of flangeways I have no idea, but what I distantly recall is that kit wheels such as 'Jacksons' approximating to current OO wheelsets with 14.5mm b-t-b and a much narrower tyre, literally 'fell into the hole' at the point crossing of the later Triang 'Type 4' track, and would randomly derail as a result. So my first attempts at kitbuilt wagons were not operable on a friend's 'Type 4' track layout, and had to be confined to the club OO layout that the junior section were permitted to use.

In short, the Triang product was a 'coarse' system, internally consistent but not corresponding with that of current product.

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 13619
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: 1950's Triang

Postby Bufferstop » Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:46 pm

At some point the situation must have arisen that the current production wheels would not run reliably on some existing track, or was the running reliability of Triang's wheels so bad that no one noticed. All I can remember from that time is that Peco produced their nylon wheelsets in Universal(Triang) and Scale/HD versions. Even the Universal type had a smaller flange than Triang's own wheels.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

User avatar
Mountain
Posts: 5517
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 3:43 pm
Location: Somewhere in Wales, UK.

Re: 1950's Triang

Postby Mountain » Tue Jun 28, 2022 11:35 pm

Mind you. Triang has proven the test of time and were actually pretty well made. It depends what one is looking to do with ones locos and stock. Keep them origional or update them? My aim is to adapt and update as I see them as a great source of well made reliable mechanisms with hardy bodies that I can convert to run in 7mm narrow gauge (0-16.5) as I realize that they are not the smoothest runners (Pretty crude compared to some modern designs) but they are reliable, work and are cheaply available. I do not go out to look for the best examples so it does not matter to me if they have missing steps or parts.
Some other modellers prefer them as origionals and still others like to improve them by changing wheels and adding detail etc, but keeping them in 4mm scale.
The only downside to adapting things is that there are less and less origionals, but one thing to consider is "Would the model be used and enjoyed if it just sat in a box in a cupboard?" Better to bring them out and enjoy the things as that is what Triang and others made them for!
So if one gets pleasure from a pristine example in a display case, or to the other extreme such as if one gets pleasure through adapring and making them into something else... Whatever we use them for lets enjoy them!

In regards to track. I used to adapt my Peco code 100 track to run Triang along with modern stock which did work ok. Was not perfect but a nice compromise. I gently eased out the check rails (Or replaced) and eased out the flangeways in the frogs with part of a broken hacksaw blade. It worked ok for me until the bendy overly flexible horrible NEM pocket couplings came along where not a lot ran well through pointwork after that! But soon after I ended up abandoning 00 altogether.

Bigmet
Posts: 9266
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: 1950's Triang

Postby Bigmet » Wed Jun 29, 2022 11:28 am

Bufferstop wrote:At some point the situation must have arisen that the current production wheels would not run reliably on some existing track, or was the running reliability of Triang's wheels so bad that no one noticed...

It was poor, and the same applied to the major competitor, H-D, in my experience. Steam loco bogies were typically removed where possible, and the high drag, small radius curves, poor coupler systems (the H-D's Peco coupler was particularly dire in the hands of children) and unsophisticated control made for plentiful derailments. I had the direct comparison with European HO available, thanks to family on the near continent, and it shone a very harsh light on RTR OO.

But that old RTR OO was a strange mixture. By the late sixties all my remaining Triang/Triang-Hornby/H-D mechanisms were rewheeled and usually remotored with a higher reduction ratio gearset, and most running under whitemetal bodies or heavily 'carved' plastic bodies. So upgraded, these were my best mechanisms at the time thanks to the stable chassis blocks. And the best of the Triang wagons, all bogie vehicles which looked well, had been detailed, rewheeled, fitted with replacement couplers and ran properly: all else now long gone, but the Triang LNER Brick and Trestrol wagons still run today, evidence that Triang could have done so much better. Likewise the H-D origin 'Blue Spot' and 'Grano' bodies which brush up well, the latter easily carved into representations of LMS and GW types.

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 13619
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: 1950's Triang

Postby Bufferstop » Wed Jun 29, 2022 4:06 pm

The H-D super detail bodies were a leap ahead when compared to the early Rovex mouldings. After the Lines Bros buyout of H-D and a few items being absorbed into the Triang range the rest was handed over to G&R Wren. Eventually the SD wagons were bought up by Dapol, or reading between the lines the stock of parts to assemble them remained with Wren for a while and Dapol produced bodies from the tools but produced their own chassis for them, which in turn may have been supplied back to Wren to use up the last remaining bodies. The situation was so confusing that Dapol issued a statement explaining which combinations of body and chassis came from where along with details of which box they would come in. It was published in the Railway Modeller and other magazines and ran to the best part of a page. From time to time Models "still in their original boxes" have turned up which don't accord to the Dapol statement. My guess is that at some point, probably in a model shop someone compared the two models, (The differences were minor) and put them back in the wrong boxes.
Subsequently "Hornby Railways" bought the tools to all of Dapols 4mm range, presumable including those the some years before "Triang Hornby" had given away to Wren
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

kcc
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:11 pm

Re: 1950's Triang

Postby kcc » Sat Jul 02, 2022 11:05 am

Well the back to back gauge has made a massive difference to the new Hogwarts Castle. Thanks again for the advice. I decided to check all my rolling stock, although with a few exceptions they were running well. Your caution (Bigmet) about some of the older Triang wheels being 13.5mm back to back proved to be correct. That had me puzzled but luckily I left well alone and did no harm.

Interesting comments too about modifying locos. At first the Hogwarts Castle would not run on my series 3 track because of detailing that was quite low and fouled against the high activating "rails" on TPO sections. I was reluctant to remove these parts but wanted a working model rather than a display item. Each to their own.

Anyway many thanks and a fascinating insight to the variety and complexity of wheels.

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 13619
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: 1950's Triang

Postby Bufferstop » Thu Jul 07, 2022 12:22 pm

The back to back with old Triang split axle plastic wheels was pretty meaningless, The axle could float sideways, with one wheel attached whilst the other wheel was free to move along the axle. It was designed to work with the original points which didn't have a frog, the switch rails moved far enough to line up with the wing rails and provide a continuous path.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions


Return to “Other Model Railway Manufacturers and Gauges”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest