It seems a bit quiet, so now I have figured out how to get pictures on here, it gives a chance to ask about a steam-boat engine I bought - and this is the only engine I have bought that is not a rescue case - it was just SO good and needed a home.
It is a single cylinder, and the dimensions are about the same as a No 1 ST engine (a fraction over at best). It has three bearings all Ali-Bronze with each one having a wick oiler. Single cylinder with reversing. I have not tried to run it yet, but it is immaculately made. You just have to turn it or adjust the reversing gear to know it is made by a master.
It strikes me as a very well made combinations of ST bits, though all I know is that it was bespoke made for steamboat use, and never used.
If anyone knows it, or thinks they know who made it, that would be of interest. At the moment it is there to inspire me to greater efforts in my own engines. I don't have a steam boat - not yet, anyway.
Hi Its almost certainly made using ST No.1 cylinder, covers (Except valve chest cover) and standard, with a purpose made bedplate and valvegear, with the valve gear closely following ST practice. It might utilise an ST No.3 bedplate, but probably not, as these were last made in the 1920s. Whatever, its NICE, and I'm green with envy!
Very nice engine. Can't really add anything further to other post. But just wondered if one & half No1 soleplates have been used and joined up and held on the base plate? Either way a very nice engine.
The cast uprights do look a little different from Stuart ones, and the base is definitely one casting - if you look at the central web of the base casting from underneath it is unmachined cast finish right across.
I like the half nuts to lock the full nuts - that makes me wonder if it is quite old. Maybe it was built for a project that was shelved, and has been kept as a display items since. There is no doubt in my mind that this was built to do a job of work, and no sign that it has done one!
Looks like the base was intended for a twin cylinder engine as there are two similar extensions where the upright bolts on, have to have a look through the twin cyl designs to see if anything is like it.
Now you mention it, the fact that both sides of the base casting are identical does suggest it was designed for a twin cylinder. On the plus side there is more chance of identifying it, on the down-side I can only imagine how much nicer it would be as a twin (though it would need a stonking boiler). I can't find the sellers info (eBay throws things away and I forgot to save it), but I recall it was a slightly larger bore than the ST No1 engine, and about the same stroke.
I have checked for a manufacturer name and not found one, though some parts are numbered so that, if you strip it, they go back together correctly.
I should do a full strip and rebuild I suppose, but I have a lot of projects on the go. Maybe I'll find a name inscribed inside somewhere.
Looks to me like stock codes 1479 & 2577, and Steves engine are the very same engine. Cant imagine the 'restorer' making much on it after buying from SRS, everything seems optimistic to me. The two stock code engines are the same as there are identical marks & scuffs, also there are tell tale items which also identify it as Steves engine (the cap head bolt for the lubricator, screwdriver slots on the studs, pipe fittings, etc). If those horrible gas pipe valves were changed for decent drain taps then it is a very nice looking machine. With suitable thrust bearing and prop it would drive a 12 - 14ft boat.
Simon. Tich, Invicta, Clayton lorry, 0.3cc Diesel, FD3/64 gas turbine. Weise Flying Scotsman part built, Seal 15cc part built. Currently researching 8th scale 14xx 0-4-2t and a 7.793 scale 2-6-2..... Now got a 3/4 acre garden to put a track round :-)
So it was sold in 2003 and sold again by them in 2006 - the guy I bought it from in 2008 was selling up his collection to help fund a house move. By the looks of it he bulled it up a little, but it is identical even down to the 'gas tap' valves - which I also think are stupid and will be replaced in due course.
I wonder if they keep records of where they got it from originally.