1. Ragstone Andy

    Ragstone Andy Active Member

    As some of you may know, Ragstone Models have taken on the production of the 'Agenoria' range of loco kits, it will take a while for them all to available from stock, but any of the AM1-41 series can be produced to order.

    I am aware that the more recent kits have not bee received as well as the earlier ones, so in a cloud of optimism (it was a scrap etch) I started a 1366 pannier tank (about 00.30 today!) I've only spent a few hours on it (in tea breaks) and it seems OK, (photos attached) so I would like to know what issues there may be, I am aware Pencarrow had a bit of a fight with one, so if you have built one feedback would be appreciated (but not about the castings cos I've not looked at them yet) I'd like to know what lies ahead! We will be at Kettering on Saturday!
    20190226_222727.jpg 20190226_222829.jpg upload_2019-2-26_23-2-49.png

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: 26 February 2019
  2. simond

    simond Western Thunderer


    I suspect that Chris will be along soon, but you might want to have a look at his thread on RMWeb last year (or was it earlier?)

    I think it would be fair to say it was not a happy experience!

    BTW, my 1366 came from a CRT kit and that required “a considerable degree” of scratchbuilding too.

    Methinks there is a place for a decent kit of this loco, and her saddle-tank sisters. Good luck with the venture.

  3. adrian

    adrian Flying Squad

    Best of British as they say - as you say the later kits had a certain reputation, well deserved in my opinion. The dimensions and fit of the components were below par shall we say. If you have the original auto cad files then I'm sure a man of your calibre will be able to tweak the dimensions and fit quite nicely so it will be good to see if you can make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

    although I was tempted with my first analogy "you can't polish a turd" :shit: :)) :))

    However I would be interested in a couple of the earlier Pete Stamper models - unfortunately I have an unhealthy pathologic hatred for etched brass so would you be able to offer any of the kits in nickel-silver? I don't mind if there is a premium it's worth paying to avoid the brass.
  4. Ragstone Andy

    Ragstone Andy Active Member

    That's what see this thread off - I've got this far without major problems, must be doing something wrong!
    There's no physical problem in doing it, just adds to the cost (all chassis are N/S anyway) - but as they are all two bodies per sheet it ideally means two people want one in N/S
  5. Ragstone Andy

    Ragstone Andy Active Member

    Pencarrow likes this.
  6. Dog Star

    Dog Star Western Thunderer

    Andy, (@demu1037), I recollect that you have indicated to me that all of the display models for Ragstone are built and shown with S7 wheels... there is bound to be a S7 "test" track near to you ;) .
  7. demu1037

    demu1037 Western Thunderer

    Yes I did (oops senior moment), and that still applies (for Ragstone), however we are discussing Agenoria and I haven't built any display models yet (I have inherited some....), it will take a while for me to build them all, but at least I can be safe in the assumption that when I eventually do there will be S7 wheels available for them ;)
    Pencarrow likes this.
  8. Pencarrow

    Pencarrow Western Thunderer

    Hi Andy,

    You've reached the stage above where it appears there are no problems, they only really appear when you start to assemble all the sub components and also when you compare the kit to prototype photos.

    I think there's quite along list of things I've found on my RMweb thread but here's a few pointers for things you may want to check / amend in a future production.

    1. Overall I found the pannier tanks too narrow. I should have noticed as the half etch bend lines on the inside of the wrapper didn't align well with the corners. When you come to fit the curved boiler underside you may find you have to trim the pannier tank wrapper and relocate the balance pipe holes.
    2. Have a look at prototype photos of the pannier tanks, they are not riveted. The kit however includes half etch points for rivets and instructs you to punch them all.
    3. The cab width is also IMO too narrow in the front and rear cab sheets but the bunker rear is right and iirc I had to cut a strip out to suit the sheet width. Iirc the slots in the footplate didn't align with the tabs on the cab sides.
    4. If you look at photos the cab sides should be closer to the edge of the running plate than the kit. I realised too late what was wrong (my first kit) and should have added material or remade the pannier tank and cab spacers.
    5. The cab rear sheet does not include the curved build out for the hand brake.
    6. The raised areas of the cab floor don't match the prototype.
    7. I have some memory of remaking either the smokebox or firebox vertical sides for some reason.
    8. The etched holes for the cab hand rails needed relocating to match the prototype.
    9. I also had to relocate the handrail holes in the pannier tank as they were too low. I think they would be correct if the tank wrapper was curved around the correct width formers.
    10. The half etch slot for the running plate sides are to close to the edge IMO. This becomes apparent when you add the vac pipe as it sticks out from the running plate rather than tucking under.
    11. The castings generally were not worth including in the kit because in my kit they were either so badly cast or bore no resemblance to the item they were supposed to represent. A friend turned a chimney for me. The majority of the rest were replaced from other sources at some considerable cost. The cab blackhead castings seemed to be for a completely different loco.
    12. I remade the running plate mounted sand boxes from scratch and all the linkages and modified alternative axle spring castings to raise them to the right level.
    1. I would have a good look at the Premier milled frame sides and compare them with those in the kit. You'll note a difference in the profile. IMO the axle holes are also too high up the frame sides. I had to add a spacer above the frames to get the buffer height correct and then noticed there was too much frame dropping down towards the rail.
    2. Cylinders. They are loo long, far too small in diameter and give the kit a completely different appearance to the prototype.
    3. I seem to remember I also had to adjust the slide bar bracket to angle and position the slide bars correctly.
    4. The spacer at the front of the frames has what look like two extra cylinders etched into it. The 1366 were 2 cylinder locos. The prototype spacer has two large holes in it.
    5. Again I've sourced alternative castings got items such as the draincocks, sand boxes etc.
    6. I'm in the process of binning the kit chassis and starting from scratch using Premier side frames and making new cylinders. I'll be using Finney7 hornblocks this time.
    Being my first kit I started the build assuming that all the parts were correct but didn't start finding issues until it was too late. I thought it was down to my skills at first but then slowly realised that there were issues with the kit when I belatedly started looking at photos and taking measurements from drawings. A soul destroying experience which nearly put me off 7mm completely.

    Thankfully I had support in RMweb from many seasoned builders. Confidence was also restored by stopping the 1366 and building a Connoisseur LSWR O2. All the parts fitted, were the correct size and pooled like the prototype.

    Having built some skills I then restarted the 1366 and correcting some of the issues. Currently putting off putting together the frames and making some new cylinders but have loads of prototype photos if you need any.

    Hopefully you'll find the above useful. I will be interested to see if your build highlights the same issues. With a few corrections to the etches and a review of the castings this could be a superb kit.

    My build thread is here:

    Agenoria WR 1366 Pannier for Pencarrow Bridge

    With notes at the end of the first post.
    Last edited: 27 February 2019
    gwrrob likes this.
  9. Pencarrow

    Pencarrow Western Thunderer

    The 1366 kit I had was NS not brass.
  10. Pencarrow

    Pencarrow Western Thunderer

    From Mike "stationmaster" on RMweb:

    Cylinders duly measured in their current unclad state on 1363

    Overall length from the outer end of the nuts on the front (which will probably touch the inside of the false front cover) to the back end of the casting a ting bit over 30inches. Assuming the cover goes on flush against the nuts/studs I think the overall length will be as near to 31 inches as makes no difference.

    The maximum outer diameter of the unclad cylinder casting is 21 inches to which will be added some 1/8th inch plate and probably a bit of lagging but the latter should not push the plate out any further so 21 inches can be considered as the workable dimension.
  11. Ragstone Andy

    Ragstone Andy Active Member

    Hi Chris,

    Thanks for that - yes I can see how as the build progresses these things become apparent until its too late - as you say. Its a loco that's worth getting right, so will be investigating further. Come and introduce yourself on Saturday

  12. Ragstone Andy

    Ragstone Andy Active Member

    Hi Chris,

    The original Agenoria range (AM1-41) designed by Pete are brass bodies/NS chassis, the newer ones (AM42 on) are all NS

  13. Pencarrow

    Pencarrow Western Thunderer

    Certainly will Andy. More than happy to give any help or pointers on the 1366 revisions. Might even bring my 1366 along.
  14. Pencarrow

    Pencarrow Western Thunderer

    I've been through my 1366 thread and have extracted a few photos to illustrate some of the points above and to refresh my memory...

    In comparison to drawings and photos the tank was pitched too highly the smokebox front spacer and there was a gap on the firebox. I trimmed that slightly. The etched tank outline on the cab front was also too high.

    The blue pen lines on the tank underside show how much I ended up trimming from the tank wrapper to get the boiler to fit.

    This shows how much overlap there was in the bunker rear. I trimmed the excess but should instead have widened the cab and tank by around 2mm.

    This shows that the etched slots in the footplate are outside the cab. Again it wouldn't have been a problem if the cab was the right width.

    This shows the additional handbrake cutout I made in the rear sheet.

    This shows how the brake castings don't align with the wheels.

    This shows a comparison between the misshapen kit chimney (left), a CRT version and one I bought which was later reprofiled in a lathe by a friend.

    Prototype photo of the rear sandboxes - compare to the kit casting...

    Comparison between the correct tank filler (left) and the kit casting. I think also I shortened the front tank stay which iirc the kit had as the same width as the rear one.

    Comparison between the kit cylinder and prototype. Also note different shape of the cylinder mounting block and the offset of the valence to the running plate.

    To be continued...
    Last edited: 27 February 2019
    chrisb, gwrrob, Len Cattley and 3 others like this.
  15. Pencarrow

    Pencarrow Western Thunderer

    And the rest...

    Front handrail as etched position and correct marked in pen.

    Comparison between the shape of the running plate valance. The front curve needed taking forward.

    The chimney turned for me by Rob.


    The best side on comparison I was able to get (prototype photo from LaScala on RMweb). Note particularly the depth of the frames, running plate height, shape of the slide bars and cylinder shape. I adjusted the handrail holes after this.

    Cab roof which I remade to have the opening in the correct location.

    Comparison between the tank support casting in the kit (right) which was too short and narrow and which I originally packed up and one I bodged together.

    post-6675-0-23305900-1474752788 (1).jpg
    Comparison between the kit running plate top sandbox (rear) and ones I made up.

    post-6675-0-52396600-1473407762_thumb (1).jpg
    Comparison between typical kit castings (top) and replacements.

    post-6675-0-83915400-1473015311 (1).jpg
    A selection of some of the additional parts bought to replace bits of the kit. Very, very few of the original kit castings were used in the end.

    The motion brackets as etched are too wide and push out the slide bars.

    Left as supplied and right as thinned down.

    Alignment corrected.

    I should stress in fairness that this was my first ever 7mm loco build and therefore I made newbie errors that a seasoned builder would not have been caught out by. I'm also slightly horrified at the state of some of my early soldering. Some errors may be mine but certainly the kit has room for improvement for an easier build and a result with greater fidelity to the prototype.

    Hope this is useful.
    Last edited: 27 February 2019
    eastsidepilot, chrisb, gwrrob and 3 others like this.
  16. Ragstone Andy

    Ragstone Andy Active Member

    Hi Chris
    Thanks for all the info and pictures, That's a very creditable build from your first attempt a building a loco kit, shame it wasn't the pleasure it should have been

  17. Pencarrow

    Pencarrow Western Thunderer

    Must admit there are areas if the build that I'm now embarrassed by, particularly forming the tank and the early soldering. It did clean up OK (but now has years of grime on it) but the body still isn't finished as I opted to make further adjustments and to restart the chassis.

    If you do adjust the cylinders in the kit I would welcome the chance to obtain a fret. It's building new cylinders from scratch that's putting me off completing it.

    The O2 build went much better and was much neater.
  18. simond

    simond Western Thunderer

    Pencarrow likes this.
  19. MarkNJ

    MarkNJ Member

    Hi Andy,

    Very glad to hear that the Agenoria range will be reborn. I have built 2 Jinties and a Markham 0-4-0. The Markham is a very pleasant build, the Jinties not so much.

    I built one as supplied (My first ever O scale loco.) and one corrected. There are a lot of issues with the Jinty kit. The best part was the fact it is all nickel silver etches.

    If the Jinty is on your list of releases I would be more than happy to let you have my AutoCAD files of the corrected parts.

    All the best
  20. Pencarrow

    Pencarrow Western Thunderer

    Good to meet you today Andy and discuss the 1366. Shout if you need any further info.