Slaters 16mm wheels on 45mm axles?

Paul M

Registered
25 Oct 2016
6,732
1,089
58
Royston
I go back to my scratchbuilt 2-6-2 (piccies are on my other computer I'm afraid) but it runs on Slater's 44m diameter drivers made for the 16mm : 1ft GRS kit of the Lynton & Barnstaple loco. I haven't measured the tread width, but I expect it to be about 4.5mm.

When I first built it, I had an LGB R3 turnout on the layout, an Aristo #6 and a USAT #6 and it ran through them all without difficulty.

I currently have Aristo 10 ft and #6 and a USAT #6 turnout plus an LGB diamond, and the loco runs fine.

I'll do a bit of measuring in the morning. The wheelbase is longish, so the middle drivers have had the flanges turned down in a lathe (someone did it for me) so they are blind.

There shouldn't be a problem - there are plenty of people in the UK running wheels to 16mm Association standards on LGB and similar trackwork.

As an aside, the back-to-back for 32 mm track is 28 mm - so add 2 x 4.50 mm = 37 mm - only 5 mm wider than the gauge, but for both 32mm and 45mm gauges, the Association standards are for 1.5 mm thick flanges
Very strange, as I've said earlier, a lot of 16mm scale locos are gauge adjustable for 32 and 45, usually by moving the wheels, so they must be compatible.
 

JimmyB

Semi-Retired; more time for trains.
Having watched this thread and read each of the points, I feel there is either something amiss here, or we are missing a piece of information, or there is a misunderstanding over gauge, scale etc, but something just does not add up.

As pointed out Slaters produce wheels for 16mm/1ft scale, and these wheels come in either 32mm or 45mm gauge, the same wheel in both cases, and the 45mm gauge does and has run on LGB track. I believe the 40mm B2B and 4mm wheel thickness are "red herrings" because that is close to LGB "standard" and works. So is this misinformation or misunderstanding.
 

PhilP

G Scale, 7/8th's, Electronics
5 Jun 2013
28,111
2,895
Tamworth, Staffs.
I wonder if the axles are home-made?

If someone has made 45mm (length) axles, as opposed to an axle for a 45mm (gauge) wheelset, would that give that sort of back to back measurement?

I set my back to back at 41mm and that is for 'g scale' profile wheels.
If the flange is finer, and the tyre thinner, then would not the back to back have to be greater?
 

Rhinochugger

Retired Oik
27 Oct 2009
30,262
3,632
North West Norfolk
I wonder if the axles are home-made?

If someone has made 45mm (length) axles, as opposed to an axle for a 45mm (gauge) wheelset, would that give that sort of back to back measurement?

I set my back to back at 41mm and that is for 'g scale' profile wheels.
If the flange is finer, and the tyre thinner, then would not the back to back have to be greater?
I think in reality, the B2B should be 40.5 mm.

You'd struggle to make your own axle to suit a Slaters' wheel because the axle reduces to a square shoulder (for quartering) and then reduces again for a thread. The wheel nuts are done up with, what in the UK, is a universal wheel nut screwdriver with two prongs. (In the smaller scales, Romford and Markits us the same principle).

But I agree with Jimmy, something doesn't add up because I've used these wheels and axles (albeit a different wheel style and diameter) without any problems.
 

PhilP

G Scale, 7/8th's, Electronics
5 Jun 2013
28,111
2,895
Tamworth, Staffs.
So three scenarios:
1. Not aSlaters axle.
2. Not 45mm track.
3. Defectively manufactured Slaters axle.
 

Rhinochugger

Retired Oik
27 Oct 2009
30,262
3,632
North West Norfolk
OK, earwiggo ..........

Slaters' wheels on Slaters' 45 mm axle (outside frame so not square shouldered ends) and with loco pushed hard against the 'other' unseen rail (Aristo track).

Interestingly, the tread on these wheels (measuring the turned down 'blind' driver) comes out at 5.5 mm - 6 mm

Also, for idle comparison, the pony truck wheel is LGB Feldbahn

I think I'd email Slaters about the problem.

DSCF2066.JPG
 

Fred2179G

Registered
20 Apr 2017
601
133
USA
the Association standards are for 1.5 mm thick flanges

Those "small england" wheels in my first photo don't look as if they have 1.5mm flanges.
Another data point - G1MRA suggests 6mm wide at the treads.

 

Fred2179G

Registered
20 Apr 2017
601
133
USA
Perhaps you could glue washers (about 35mm od ?) to the backs of the wheels to build up the flange thickness to about 1.5 mm.
Now that's an interesting thought. Although I do worry about the amount of axle supporting the wheel after loading all the spacers!
 

Fred2179G

Registered
20 Apr 2017
601
133
USA
So three scenarios:
1. Not aSlaters axle.
2. Not 45mm track.
3. Defectively manufactured Slaters axle.
Phil,
I think if you read my analysis of the width issue, you can see why the Slaters 16mm fine scale wheel doesn't work on a 45mm gauge axle. So none of your scenarios are valid.
 

Fred2179G

Registered
20 Apr 2017
601
133
USA
the tread on these wheels (measuring the turned down 'blind' driver) comes out at 5.5 mm - 6 mm
And G1MRA says 6mm. Which suggests your wheels are 10mm or G-1 wheels, not 16mm scale. My G-3 wheels are 7mm wide.
 

Greg Elmassian

Registered
8 Mar 2014
5,058
708
San Diego
www.elmassian.com
Yes, tread width is width of tread, not wheel width with flange turned down.

So, Rhino: in post #26, you say those drivers are the same wheels (or so implied). You also say the loco pushed against far rail.

what is the back to back on that loco? surely not 40 mm if those wheels are indeed 4mm tread width...

Can you please confirm?

Greg
 

Paul M

Registered
25 Oct 2016
6,732
1,089
58
Royston
If the flange is finer, and the tyre thinner, then would not the back to back have to be greater?
Yes, surely the back to back measurement relies on the rest of the wheel to be to the relevant standard.
 

Greg Elmassian

Registered
8 Mar 2014
5,058
708
San Diego
www.elmassian.com
Depends on how you read that question...

If you gauged the wheels properly, and the tire thinner and the flange thinner (finer usually means flange depth), yes of course the back to back as measured would be greater.

But you CANNOT increase the back to back just "because"... you run into many other issues, as mentioned, you will have all kind of issues with the wing rails and flangeways at the frog.

So, if you ask if you change other things and keep gauge, yes the back to back measurement increases, way out of specification and ability to work.

Greg
 

Fred2179G

Registered
20 Apr 2017
601
133
USA
Yes, surely the back to back measurement relies on the rest of the wheel to be to the relevant standard.
The way that Slaters makes their wheels is to mold a tire/tyre on the outside of the nylon wheels with the brass boss. Everything at the back of the wheel is flat and in the same plane, as you can see on my photo of my large wheels. So the axle shoulder is also the back-to-back and that's where the square part of the axle starts. The width of the flange and tread are not relevant to the back-to-back.
It is a very neat and almost foolproof system.

wheels-20160308_162058-axles-inserts-sm.jpg
 

Greg Elmassian

Registered
8 Mar 2014
5,058
708
San Diego
www.elmassian.com
Rhino,: can you please respond to the question, on the loco pictured in your last post, what is the back to back measurement?

"Fred": yes, technically you can set the back to back to anything.... but it DOES INDEED CHANGE the gauge, and you CANNOT necessarily set the correct gauge if the tread width and flange width are way out of spec....

All of this works together, mess one measurement up, and the others will change, go way off spec on tread width, flange width, back to back and you will have issues.

Not really sure of what the point was other than the back to back is set by the axle shoulder.... then if their 45mm axle has shoulders of 40mm that part is right... if you have issues on 45mm track then either the flange width is out of spec, or the tread width is out of spec, or the track is out of spec, or a combination.

I keep asking questions to locate where the issue is, which will give the answer. So the OP says the back to back is 40mm...

So we need to check that track, but probably little can be done.

So you are down to measuring the gauge, that should be simple... that will tell us the thickness of the flange... which I suspect is very narrow, combined with a tread width of 4mm is not going to work...

Can anyone measure these wheels for these dimensions?

Greg
 

Rhinochugger

Retired Oik
27 Oct 2009
30,262
3,632
North West Norfolk
Yes, tread width is width of tread, not wheel width with flange turned down.

So, Rhino: in post #26, you say those drivers are the same wheels (or so implied). You also say the loco pushed against far rail.

what is the back to back on that loco? surely not 40 mm if those wheels are indeed 4mm tread width...

Can you please confirm?

Greg
No, they measure overall including the flange at 5.5mm - 6 mm - back-to-back is 40mm. I measured the width of the blind driver as it's not easy to measure from the root where the flange meets the tread with just a basic tape measure.

Also, I've been quoting 'tread width' incorrectly as tread and flange, mainly because that's the dimension that I pulled out of the 16mm Association info.
 
Last edited:

Rhinochugger

Retired Oik
27 Oct 2009
30,262
3,632
North West Norfolk
And G1MRA says 6mm. Which suggests your wheels are 10mm or G-1 wheels, not 16mm scale. My G-3 wheels are 7mm wide.
Well, they were bought from GRS (as I said somewhere in my ramblings) and they were intended for their 16mm :1ft kit of an L&B Manning Wardle.

I think it would be worth talking to Slaters - there's a contact form on their home page which you'll find if you Google 'Slater's Plastikard'.
 

Greg Elmassian

Registered
8 Mar 2014
5,058
708
San Diego
www.elmassian.com
So these wheels seem to be right on the edge of minimum width for G1MRA standard, and part way to the "fine scale" specs.

The minimum wheel width is 6mm, and 5.5 is under, and if the flange meets spec, it is 1.5 mm thus giving a tread width of 4-4.5 mm...

For off the shelf track, you can easily find over gauge (as well as under gauge)...

I went to the shop and measured an LGB tank car, back to back was 40mm (39.997) and flange thickness was 1.76mm and wheel width a bit over 6mm...

The first picture really cannot have these dimensions and the wheels are falling inside the rail unless the track gauge is off... the numbers just do not add up.

Greg
 

Rhinochugger

Retired Oik
27 Oct 2009
30,262
3,632
North West Norfolk
The first picture really cannot have these dimensions and the wheels are falling inside the rail unless the track gauge is off... the numbers just do not add up.

Greg
Yep, it does not look at all right - which was why, at point, I queried whether the other wheels were actually on the track :think:
 

Fred2179G

Registered
20 Apr 2017
601
133
USA
I've been quoting 'tread width' incorrectly as tread and flange, mainly because that's the dimension that I pulled out of the 16mm Association info.
Semantics, gentlemen. I too have been quoting wheel width at the tread - the combined width of flange and the tread that rests on the rail.
If you go back to my post calculating why they don't fit the rails, I said 1mm flange and 3mm tread. My pal wrote "My wheels have 8 spokes and are 4 mm wide."

In fact, having now looked at the 16mm association standard, it says the same as Rhinochugger:

Untitled-1.jpg
these wheels seem to be right on the edge of minimum width for G1MRA standard, and part way to the "fine scale" specs.
Perhaps. They are 16mm scale wheels, not G1MRA, that are narrower than the 16mm Assoc std shown above. My pal confirms his are 4 to 4.5mm across the wheel (flange + tread.)

And finally, here's a comparison of the Slaters against some LGB wheels which are 7mm wide (flange + tread.).

y4milxfPjnvNxub0l-16icbHKHq5ORH0zt1_b6x4QKEx-q92IG-LsGpAq-9HCFOMU6nJeG_FtNACQUb3CAAYClvL8oDngQDYh56KlUxFBivtE_q4aX919-_X0oDsWgBJkIXESCx-w_A12vvmLuFw2jhi4yosEdPtr84abfWZvAo8fwziFQZmv6dqS1X-TqxJ7Q-


Same back-to-back, but not nearly enough tread!
 
Last edited: