As the subject line.

Toying with the idea of using a redundant Class 50 chassis underneath a Worsley Works D600 etched brass kit.

While the Poole-era 47 has been mentioned as viable, I'm wondering about the Class 50.

Cheers, NeMo

Wheelbase etc was different on the 47 to the 50 so I doubt it...............

No, they are different designs, the 50 chassis block is longer and more slender (slightly).

Cheers,
Alan

Quote from: koyli55002 on May 30, 2016, 12:30:43 PM
Wheelbase etc was different on the 47 to the 50 so I doubt it...............

Never stopped a manufacturer using the same chassis for totally different locos before!

Cheers, NeMo

Good point, sir, and well made !
But sadly, not in this case 

Quote from: NeMo on June 01, 2016, 12:22:57 PM

Quote from: koyli55002 on May 30, 2016, 12:30:43 PM
Wheelbase etc was different on the 47 to the 50 so I doubt it...............

Never stopped a manufacturer using the same chassis for totally different locos before!

Cheers, NeMo

Didn't the Poole built 37's and 47's share the same chassis block at one time?

John

They did indeed - which I think was probably the point NeMo was making in his latest post.
But I think even Lima may have balked at the idea of using a 47 chassis for a 50 or 55 !

Actually, if I remember rightly, the Poole built 56 also used a 47 chassis .............
What with that and a totally unconvincing cab roof, didn't have a lot going for it really !

Really, since neither is identical to the original D600 A1A-A1A, my question was more about whether people thought the Farish 50 would make a reasonable chassis for the Worsley kit.

But it doesn't sound like it from the feedback here.

Cheers, NeMo

Just had a glance at my "BR Main Line Diesels"
I see the wheelbase for the Class 41 is quoted as 50 feet.
Class 50 wheelbase is quoted as 56 ft 02 in so I reckon it would be about 12mm too long.
Class 47 wheelbase is quoted as 51 ft 06 in so still a tad long, but not as much.
Hope that helps
Good luck anyway !