Marx Vs Walker-Fenn Speed Control

Thanks Bruce.  Those photos are probably from my web site, but not, sadly, of my locos.  I merely 'borrowed' the photos from eBay sales.

However, I think the video was made by a member of this forum who will doubtless tell us more about these fascinating locos.

Graeme

Interesting post, Bruce, as to both the pics and the video. I only have one clockwork loco, a late 1920's Hornby tank engine, and I'm not as familiar with the mechanisms as I should be. My clockwork is a great little runner, but it doesn't have variable speed control (as far as I know ).

I'd be interested in seeing more of that layout...looks cool!

I remember a vague reference in one article that mentioned this make of engine with a governor. I imagine they are are rare and I never equated clockworks with controlled speed. I would love to learn more about them. 

Bruce

Yes, the Walker Fenn in the video is mine.  I'm afraid it isn't the best running example; it has had heavy repairs and is in need of a complete rebuild of the motor.  The one shown in the "Spring Windup" video is a much better performer (I don't know who owns it).  I might tackle the rebuild next winter; we shall see!  Incidentally, there is an old thread on my W-F project HERE for your amusement.  My thanks to Graeme for sharing his saved pictures with me so I could get mine rebuilt to a somewhat original appearance.  There are more pictures of the rebuild at the bottom of this page of my website if any of you are interested.

The British term for an adjustable governor on a windup motor is a "Controlled Clockwork", a saying I had never heard of until I started messing with the W-F.  The Walker-Fenn was produced pre-WWII, probably starting around 1929 when the patent was issued (apparently a 1929 advertisement exists, although I haven't seen a scan of it yet).  I don't know when production ceased, but it was obviously over by the start of the war.  It is a Marklin motor that has had the governor added later... the casting that supports the governor has the WF patent number stamped in it.

After the war, a different controlled clockwork locomotive was offered - again, an 0-6-0, but with a different governor, this one called a Walker-Riemsdyk.  I don't know exactly when they were produced, although I have seen advertisements from 1952 and 1955.  I have bought a locomotive that is supposed to be a W-R; but it is still in shipment so I haven't got to see it in person yet.  I'm very anxious to see the differences between it and the Walker-Fenn.

I have seen reference to a rare Hornby that had an adjustable governor, but I will have to dig around to find the particulars.  I've never seen pictures of one - would love to see one in person.

Be careful looking at odd clockwork locomotives like this - they are addictive! 

Windup Guy,

It's a small clockwork world. Many thanks for all the information you provided. I have some reading to do and I appreciate your generosity..Your video and Graeme's photographs made me wonder about Hornby perhaps having this..I suppose the market fell out when they stopped making gramophones. I already have been infected with Hornby..I am more than likely doomed. That WF restoration is a sight to behold..beautiful work...without Bondo!

Bruce

Bruce, I was wrong about the Hornby controlled clockwork; it was Bassett-Lowke that I was thinking about.  That's why I have to refer back to my written information sometimes instead of relying on memory - sorry about that!    I don't know if Hornby did or didn't make a variable speed windup motor at some point in their history.

At any rate, I thought you might enjoy seeing this page I scanned out of a 1929 B-L catalog.  I split it up into two different images so it is readable, although the picture didn't turn out so good.

The interesting part is in the first paragraph:

"Among the most important improvements, is a feature whereby any speed within the limits for which the motor is designed can be obtained, without bringing various trains of gears into operation, simply by the movement of a lever, similar to a throttle lever."

I don't know how the variable speed was accomplished, but it must be enough different from the Walker-Fenn that it didn't encroach on their patent.  I would really like to see one in person sometime, or at least a closeup photo of the governor.

James,

Ever since I was a toddler I have been fascinated by all things mechanical and while I have repaired my own spring driven clocks, clockwork toy trains are a recent fascination, hence my questions and I appreciate your helping out.

I have accumulated six engines but the recent discovery and acquisition of a Hornby and it's long running capability sort of added fuel to the fire, about just what was possible in clockwork trains. That is a very interesting B-L hint at a mechanism that I think your right, (it seems like a mechanism unique to B-L) and I would love to see one. The take off to the W-F governor to position it laterally in the cab makes sense but if there was room for it in the cab I would think it would balance better ( maybe less drag)...mounted vertically. That got me thinking of Wilesco toy steam engines with the vertical ball governor, and I was just wondering if I could get my hands on one as a replacement part..but I would like to see that B-L governor..especially how the speed was adjusted. On another post here, theres a link to a Garden Railroad post and it was great to see all those homemade engines. I might try that next as a future project. Ever contemplate a scratch build? I bought a spare Hornby drive train..I'll have to think this over..fun to contemplate. 

Bruce

I recently picked up this book, vol 5, but for much less.

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/...51?ean=9781872727523

It is enough to inspire me to sell everything and build a totally Hornby layout...........Almost.

Colors are amazing.

Steve

"Ever contemplate a scratch build?"

That is the million dollar question!    Yes, in fact, I have made up some crude drawings for a new windup motor that could be retrofitted into a Marx CV body.  My friend Rick and I plan on building two of them - one for each of us.  The plan is to use commercially available gears and mainsprings, but build the rest.  No reverse, but a variable-speed governor is a possibility.  The goals are two-fold compared to a stock Marx motor; 1) Increased running distance and 2) Slow speed performance.  My idea is to use a bigger, heavier mainspring (compared to a regular Marx mainspring), but instead of using the increased torque for more pulling power, increase the gear ratio for a longer running distance without a loss of power compared to a stock CV.  Ball bearings are a possibility, although even bronze bushings would be an improvement over the typical steel shaft in a steel sideplate.  The increased level of stress in such a motor means pretty much everything needs to be stronger than in a Marx motor; thicker sideplates, larger diameter shafts, beefier gears, bigger ratchet & "key".  However, it is live steam season, so this will have to wait until next winter... same as the W-F rebuild.  Hopefully, I will get to see a lot of interesting clockworks and get some good ideas at the Spring Windup in June! 

In the UK, there was a development in the 1970s of emplloying the govenors from telephone dials to control clockwork with amazing accuracy.  Combining this with thin parallel-turned axles running in PTFE sleeves, allowed a 12 coach train to be pulled a long distance with a geared-up clockwork mechanism.   The trick was to know how many turns to wind the key so that the train stopped in the station.  If this was done correctly, the gradual gliding to a halt was so gentle and realistic.

But, clockwork layouts need to be flat! 

When I saw that first photo of the governor, my first thought was "gramophone". Now I just keep thinking about putting  a gramophone motor into an engine. Of course, it would probably have to be a larger gauge than O or Standard.

Thanks for sharing!

I concur; this is THE book if you're into Hornby. There is a soft-cover companion volume to it, also. The prices seem to have gone up considerably, similar to the Marx books.

The Graebe book covering Hornby trains is known here as "the bible" and, with its supplement, Vol 5a, tells the Hornby story with amazing fidelity.

I wonder if this is a personal thing, but once Vol 5 came out, I largely stopped collecting Hornby since it had become the same sort of activity as one imagines philaterly is - just trying to fill gaps in a well understood line.   The mystery had been removed, so that if one got home with a new Hornby piece, it was now the work of minutes to work out what it was and when it was made. 

So, publication of that book had the peverse effect of causing me to start chasing lesser understood brands - where it remained the work of days or perhaps a week to work out what one had just bought.   Much cheaper entertainment per minute, or per hour - and always exciting when the story was finally uncovered.

But, right to the end of steam in the 1960s, British railways  were still colourful - see for example www.elegantsteam.com.   I should explain that before 1923, there were 123 different lines, before 1948 four and then one nationalised railway here.   Before WW1, going by the old photos, the trains were kept immaculately clean too, so the amazing liveries were enjoyed by all.

But, the Walker- Fenn and Walker- Riemsdyk locos were marketed by Walker and Holtzaphal, later W&H, who were until about twenty years ago retailers and wholesales to the model trade.  They were based in New Cavendish Street, very near New Cavendish Books actually, publishers of so many tinplate histories including Graebe.

Claughton,

I noticed the same behavior in myself, which, I think is a healthy thing especially since retirement, always looking forward to something new to uncover and experience, and I think this was a chief feature of my venture into tinplate, so much of which, was an unknown country to me, whereas contemporary toy trains ( to me personally) became boringly predictable. Consequently, the Hornby book sounds great following in your footsteps, so to speak. I pretty much have the six inch Marx tin covered, so the Hornby's similarity and additional variety appealed to me and that, in of itself, opened the door to a much bigger universe, such as the Walker Fenn, Bing etc. I personally enjoy all the contributions here and look forward to them. I am off to follow your link, which, before I do, another fascinating story is Paya, which was covered over at Tinplate Times...One aspect that I will share that pulls my interest is the intersection of colorful UK liveries and then the melding of this with lithography is simply fascinating..

Bruce

Electroliner

It seems as if I am going through the same process learning about US streamliners in particular, and American model railroading in 0 Gauge, as you are doing for European stuff.   The great thing is to lay in some books.

The principle work is Century of Model Trains by Allen Levy (now running ACE Trains of London) which, since there were 60,000 printed ought to be plentiful secondhand.   As a schoolboy, it broke the bank when I bought that book back in 1975 (£16!) but the book opened up an entire world.  Covering such a diverse field, it  cannot deal with anything in great detail, but it makes you hungry for more.  Now, the marque histories have been written covering just about everything, so any further desires can be fulfilled.  But, CoMT has still, I think, the best photography of any book covering model trains and the text has stood the test of time too.   Do not hesitate if you have not got one!

Books are a confirmed weakness of mine; so I always appreciate suggestions for more!  I haven't sprung for the Hornby book (yet), but the Century of Model Trains was available for a small amount; and it should be arriving in a few days.  I also found a 1953 W&H catalog for a reasonable price, which should have the Walker-Riemsdyk loco listed in it.  When it arrives (all the way from the UK, so it may be a while) I'll scan any interesting clockwork pages and get them posted.

The Walker-Fenn seems to me to have been converted from a Marklin freelance British-outline clockwork tank engine.  The couplings and connecting rod are both Marklin, and the rest of the loco is not familar to me so it is probably Marklin, which I have never really followed.

The 1953 Walkers & Holtzapffel catalog arrived yesterday!  I scanned in page 28, and split it into two pictures so it is readable:

The price list has the locomotives priced at 100/- plus 22/3 Tax... being an ignorant American, I had to look up an explanation of pre-decimal UK money; you can find one at this page.  The motor alone is priced at 78/- plus 17/4 Tax.

Hopefully, the actual locomotive will show up soon... 

James

No doubt about it..I want one. Thanks for this great insight via a vintage ad.

Bruce

Yes, thank you.

Our pre-decimal money was particularly good at confusing the few German spies and getting them caught quickly after they arrived.

!00/- = 100 shillings = £5

22/3 = 22 shillings and three pence (then prounounced thrupence); this was formally £1/2/3 which would now be £1.12.

So the total price was £6.12 - and there were then four US Dollers to the pound, making it about $24.50 including sales tax.

But, people born after about 1965 (we went decimal in 1971) have no more understanding of real momney than anyone else, so no reason to feel down about it.  As a schoolboy in the 1960s, coins with Victoria's head on them were common, if not exactly plentiful.

The claim was that decimilasation was necessary to allow machines to calculate easily - no one then imagined how computers would develop.   The US seems to have no difficulty using inches, feet, yard, and miles, or ounces, pounds, quaters Etc, showing decimilasation was completely unnecessary.

But, I would like to see steam at work again too!

Reimsdyk was a director of the Science Museum in London,, in charge of the land transport gallery, and retired to the south of France.   His last work of note was "Compound Locomotives" published by Pendragon; I have it and it is a facinating read, covering all varieties of these engines all over the world - including your giant Mallets.

Claughton, thanks for the further clarification of the pre-decimal UK money.  That really does make it easier to understand.  Also enjoyed the note about Riemsdyk - looks like I need to do some research on him!

I'll post pictures when (if?) the W-R shows up...

Windupguy

I forgot, but the other retirement project Reimsdyk was involved with was the Gauge 1 locomotives produced by Aster in Japan from the 1970s.   These have proved an enduring range all over the civilised world.   They have been responsible for many latter day garden railroads, the production of Peco gauge 1 track and the modest revival that size has enjoyed over the last two decades.

Reimsdyk is an example of how influential the pen can be. 

Claughton, thank you again for the additional information about Riemsdyk.  Also, my copy of "A Century of Model Trains" arrived today - what a fantastic book!  There is such a varied and interesting variety of old trains out there; always new things to discover and learn!

The Walker Riemsdyk came today.  It needed a bit of work, but it is now puttering around the layout.  Here is the repaired locomotive:

This is the left side of the motor:

The spring is at the front of the locomotive, the governor adjustment is at the back.  The thumbwheel moves a lever back and forth that is attached to a wire rod that rotates a circular ramp to adjust the governor.

Speaking of governors:

I don't know if I can do justice to the operation of the governor, but I will do my best.  As you can see in the picture, there are two cylindrical weights attached to a flat spring to the long governor gear.  When the gov is up to speed, the weights try to fly out, and in the process the flat spring arches toward the right of the picture.  The spring contacts the motor sideplate to limit the speed of the motor.  The governor is adjusted by sliding the entire assembly side to side via the circular adjustment ramp on the outside of the motor.  If the ramp is adjusted so it pushes the flat spring of the gov further away from the sideplate, the motor will run faster.  Another flat spring on the opposite sideplate pushes the governor assembly toward the right sideplate as the ramp is adjusted to a slower speed.  It makes sense when you see it in operation; I realize my short description is lacking!

Here is a comparison between the Walker Fenn and the Walker Riemsdyk:

The Walker Fenn is larger than the WR.  Also, the WR has blind center drivers, so it negotiates the curves around my layout better.

The Walker Riemsdyk runs nice and slow, but only runs about 60' on a single winding.  It is a neat locomotive, I'm glad to have it on the layout.

James

I soaked up your great post and it really provides a great insight, and the mechanism is ingenious as a take off of the steam prototype as below..

The earlier reference by Claughton to telephone mechanisms being modified for the same purpose lead me on a search to find how this was done but so far I have come up empty handed, the insertion of bushings was interesting as well. If I could figure this out, I would attempt to retrofit something similar as I have a Hornby frame \motor with no shell that I tinker with. Thanks for the great information and taking the time to attach photos. A really interesting history lesson is to be had here.

bruce

Two things

The Walker Reimsdyck ought to run more than 60ft, surely?   Maybe the spring has been repaired and is now considerably shorter?   A batch of repair springs were made in the UK about twenty years ago, and unused ones turn up from time to time, so advertising in the GOG might produce something.   But, as I rmemeber, the springs were standardised Hornby No2/ Bassett-Lowke so parhaps not suitable - I'm no expert.

The chap who employed telephone dial govenors is Bob Lovell, still active in GB.   He collaborated with the late Derek Lucas, who inserted PTFE bushes in the axle-boxes of his carriages, turning the axle ends down to about 1mm - making them roll as if they had ball bearings.   The geared up and controllable  clockwork locos could pull a full length consist, 12 vehicles,  of these cars a long way.  The phrase they employed covering therir modifications to the mechanisms was "teleguv".  Can you do anything searching for Bob Lovell and Teleguv?

Claughton

Thanks for the tip and leads for the search Heres a discussion of methods tried out..some interesting ideas. 

http://brassgoggles.co.uk/foru...ex.php?topic=36738.0

bruce

Let me see if I can get you contact details for Bob Lovell.

I have had some more thoughts about clockwork mechanisms.

In the UK, the approach has been to modify commercial model train mechanisms; before and after the War this was done commercially and later the work was continued by amateurs, fascinated in that modeller's way as to why the telephone dial always returned in such a nicely regulated way.   It is an attitude of mind that all modellers have - gosh - that's interesting - what could one use it for?

But, hardly anybody has actually made a new clockwork mechanism from scratch - they are still plentiful secondhand here since so many engines have been converted to electric propulsion.

I realise that serious clockwork never really developed in the US (what did those out in the sticks use?) but it was only immediately before WW2 that signs appeared that clockwork was fading - for example Hornby's 4-6-2 Princess Elizabeth was never offered in clockwork, though the Bassett-Lowke range was right up to the mid 1950s, from memory.

So, there is a reasonable supply of powerful mechanisms here which can be altered to incorporate more sophisticated govenors.

And, by the way, trying to regulate a model train by using a clock escapement will make a frightful racket, even if it can be made to work durably.   Do you remember cheap alarm clocks?  Just imagine that made heavier and then variably speeded up! 

I agree, the W-R ought to run further than 60'... even the "Gradient Type" was rated to run 80-90 feet.  It is very possible that mine is the lower geared Gradient Type, and equally likely that the mainspring has been broken and shortened.  I'll have to measure the particulars of the spring and see if my favorite source has a good replacement.

I have a Flyer windup that uses an escapement - and I can confirm that it is noisy and only marginally effective!  A centrifugal governor is a lot better at regulating speed for clockwork trains, IMHO.  You can see pictures of a Flyer escapement that I rebuilt for a friend's locomotive HERE - it is the third project down the page.  I have also machined new weights for the Marx governors with some success in slowing them down, as well as trimming the governor spring on another project with good results, too.  But, spring trimming needs to be done very carefully - it is easy to go to far.  I'll have to try my hand at an adjustable governor one of these days...

It's a long time ago, but I got a notion that our domestic telephone dial was too slow when returning (I must have seen a quicker one in an office or, more likely on TV so as not to hold up the story - like they never dial the full complement of numbers - boring) so I altered the govenor by tweaking the govenor spring.   This was excellent!  So I did it some more - with the result that nobody could dial out since the Strowger switches in the exchange could not keep up.  I had to re=tweak backwards to slow it down somewhat to get it back in tolerance again.   I an certain I did not alter the weight, only bent the spring a bit to alter the result of centrifugal force.

You would not have wanted me as your child!

But, the thing is a govenor only limits speed, not hauling power which is a product of spring strength and gearing.  {pressumably the gradient-type you speak of was lower geared, so increasing wheel torque but reducing length of run.

I am pleased you have a source of springs.  Since you know the perported length of run, and can work out the gear ratio, this will give the number of turns of the key to wind-up the engine from nil.   I suppose there is some relationship between this number and the number of turns you need in a spring, which might be determined from examination of a similar power or size mechanism known to be in original order?

Claughton, I really enjoyed your telephone story!  I was much the same as a child, and haven't gotten any better with age... although I can only imagine the consequences if my Dad had came home back then and discovered me adjusting the telephone's governor! 

I have searched a lot of horology sites, but still haven't found a formula for the relationship between the spring and number of turns it will wind/unwind.  Presumably it will depend on all the usual factors; spring length, spring thickness, basket size and hub size.  I need to do some more research and see what I can find.  As it is, the W-R has a 5/8" wide spring, although I have yet to measure the thickness.  I get my mainsprings at Clockworks... and all they have listed in 5/8" springs are a 0.013" thickness that is 69" long, and a 0.018" thickness that is 96" long.  I will default to the thicker, longer spring - the thicker spring will supply more torque, and the longer length can be trimmed to fit if it is too long.  It will be interesting to measure the present spring's thickness and length, and see how it compares to those numbers.  Needless to say, it would be nice to know the length and thickness of the original mainspring!  But, I'm not afraid to do some experimenting.

Actually, the shorter length of run isn't a problem on my small layout - other than having to wind a bit more often - since the slow speed of the loco results in some amazingly long run times, at least as compared to a typical Marx loco.  But, it is always fun to see if something good can be a bit better!

I am pleased you liked the telephone govenor story; I don't think I have ever had occasion to tell it before.

But, the view of the spring in your picture seems to show much too much air and not enough spring coils, though it has perhaps been able to expand more than normally without the restraint of the boiler on top?

Quite right, width and thickness and length are the measurements - I don't think the material has changed much.   I had our landing (English 8-day bracket twin-fusee) clock repaired perhaps twenty years ago and when it returned it was perhaps twice as hard to wind up.   I thought the stronger spring would wear the pivots unnececarilly - and the tick was more of a thud now, so I got them to replace the new spring with a lighter version.   It still runs for the whole week and ticks like it always used to.  In fact, since banning oil from my clocks in the 1980s, overhauls have ceased.  They used to be done every three years, but now perhaps something breaks on one of them every ten years, a great improvement.  Not good for clockmakers, though...

Trying not to have one's clockmaker apply oil to the mechanism is so difficult, but so beneficial:  No oil = no sticky gum = no grinding paste = indefinite life.   The parts move too slowly in a clock to allow a hydrodynamic wedge to seperate the surface of the pivots, so the oil does nothing.   I think that as model trains, particularly cheeky little critters, go rather faster so  synthetic oil is useful there and certainly synthetic grease on the main spring will ensure a prolongued unwinding, free from stuttering.

Strythetics do not dry out, and are therefore truly beneficial.   Mobil 1 is spoken of very well, as has been synthetic ATF.

Trying to really get to the bottom of childhood mysteries is what keeps life interesting - and there is always another question, like there is always another different train.

But restoring these things and learning in the process how the manufacturers ingenously overcame cost pressures yet made durable toys is fascinating in itself.

In Century of Model trains you will see a picture of W E Finlason, our greatest collector, who lived near here.   He was an electrical engineer at the General Post Office Reasearch Establishment at Dollis Hill.   You will have heard of this outfit - they were the people who developed the code-breaking machines for Bletchley Park.

But, "Fin", as we called him, would "improve" his early electric locomotives by inserting bridge rectifiers across the field windings, instead of getting the reversor up and running properly again.   It's much moore satisfying, I think, to get an old thing running well the way it was supposed to.   In this way, one learns why the technology developed over time.

If you want a modern train, build one.

Electroliner

Sir, I have Bob Lovell's postal address now, so if you would contact me at pwjbishopATgmailDOTcom I will be pleased to place you in touch.   Bob Lovell is in his 80s now, but I am sure can directly answer anything you need to know about British clockwork, including the Walker-xxxxxx locomotives.   I don't know if he has email, so a letter first, mentioning my name, will doubtless get you going properly.

Claughton

I will contact you this afternoon and thank you.

I have been really enjoying this dialog between two experts in clockworks and I appreciate the opinion on ratcheting speed governors that came from a ling to another forum's discussion of the same topic. Another suggestion "over there" was the use of a fan to dissipate the velocity of the unwinding of the spring...Any thoughts on this? My gut reaction to this is that the effect would be marginal unless their was some additional resistance involved to the output of the fan...(?) I would think the weight of the fan would act more like a fixed governor than the output of the blades. 

Another perhaps silly thought was to bypass the internal workings of the clockwork altogether, and perhaps add resistance to the drivers, perhaps a piece of spring steel set against it that could be adjusted. Any thoughts on this brainstorm? It would seem to retard the unwinding of the spring with affecting it's energy potential. 

bruce 

This business of the fan, as you put it, is used in the striking mechanism of clocks, either weight driven or spring drive with a fusee - ie those powered by constant torque.  Otherwise, the speed of the fan, and thus the loco, will vary according to how much power is left in the spring.

If you were to build a clockwork loco with a fusee, you could raise the length of run considerably, taking advantage of the great torque at the beginning to pull round the small end of the fusee, so the govenor would not have to apply itself so hard at the beginning.  In that sense, govenors applied in model trains do limit output, deliberately creating friction when the train has not got enough.  A fusee would avoid this to a large degree.

But, both the fan and the wheel brake, though they will cause more retardation as speed increases,  will not do so to a sufficient extent and in the proportion necessary to control the varying power.   One might as well just hang a long train on the back for the result would be the same, but the run would be very short.

The beauty of a govenor is that it can to be set to apply no friction until a set speed and then quite suddenly quite a lot of friction when speed rises, say when a coupling detaches or you go downhill.

I hope that makes sense.

I know that Bob Lovell and you will have a fantastic correspondence - in itself now virtually one of the delights of the past - waiting for the postman!

It occurs to me suddenly that there is not enough room in an 0 Gauge loco to allow a fan to work properly, even if you could get one in that was large enough and geared up enouigh to go really fast.   The noise and blast of ballast dust as the thing went past would doubtless stop all conversation in the room!

Claughton, your guess about the expanded spring in the W-R motor is exactly right; I had been running the motor out of the shell so I could get it sorted out and the spring was expanded far above it's normal position within the boiler.  It is still possible that it has been shortened, but it probably isn't as short as the motor picture would lead you to believe.

I know oils are a personal issue - and I understand your point about oiling not being as critical for slow moving clockworks.  I would agree with the need to use some sort of light, non-gumming oil on clockwork motors, due to the higher speeds involved.  I've experienced dry bearings on fast moving shafts in clockwork motors (primarily sparking wheel shafts on Marx motors and governors on various makes) howling, squealing or rapidly oscillating, all of which was resolved with a drop of oil.  I have used Castrol Syntech in the past - a full synthetic motor oil that has a reputation approaching that of Mobil 1.  Nowdays, I prefer Norvey Turbine oil, which is a light, non-gumming oil designed to be used on electric fan motor bearings and bushings - an application that demands a quality oil that will lubricate for long periods of time between applications, often without cleaning and in a hot, somewhat dusty environment.  The relative sheltered life of my windup motors should be a walk in the park by comparison.  As a side note about oils gumming up, I just got through repairing a Marx whistling windup motor for one of my Marx friends... it was completely locked up, and we feared it had major damage inside.  Once it arrived, it was apparent that someone had lovingly oiled it years ago; in the meantime, the oil had converted into a wonderful shellac that effectively glued the whistle's fan solid!  After a thorough cleaning & lube, it runs fine.

Which brings us to the subject of fans as governors - the Marx fan is approximately 1-1/4" diameter by 1/2" wide, and it is driven at a considerable overdrive.  It is much larger than the small centrifugal governor located underneath it, but yet a whistler motor runs with nearly the same gusto as a common, non-whistling Marx ratchet motor.  I think we can take it as evidence of the fact it would take a fair size fan to restrain the power of a typical windup motor.  Add to that the reduced responsiveness of a fan compared to a centrifugal type governor, and I can understand why the majority of manufacturers chose to use a mechanical governor instead of a fan.

Here are a couple of views of a Marx whistler motor - the large, die-cast blob is the fan enclosure / whistle chamber, of which the fan takes up about 2/3rds of the space:

Great discussion, everyone; I am enjoying it!

Did you know the origin of the name Castrol is an abbreviation of Caster Oil?

This stuff is still available as Castrol R, since it is thought to be the thing for early racing cars.   But, it deterioates very quickly, in fact it cooks, to a stick gum, and stains everything in varnish.   The 20th century was spent trying to remove those problems from oil and synthetics are the result.

Without dismantalling everything, what solvent do you find effective to dissolve congealed lubricant, such as that you found in the Marx fan?

I am intrigued that they managed to turn clockwork into sparks (something seen on modern toys occasionally) and more so that they were able to get enough air moving to work a real whistle.   This was the days when toys really demonstrated how things worked in the real world to children - synthethesised reality will have a lot to answer for in due course.

The Marx whistler locomotive is a stroke of mechanical genius!  Not only does it whistle, but it blows the grade crossing warning - two longs, a short and a long - then a pause before repeating.  The big gear you see on the right of the engine is the "cam"; it raises and lowers the large metal flap that modulates the whistle opening.  Very neat mechanism.

I did have to take the fan assembly apart to clean everything effectively.  I find that gasoline is an effective solvent for oil gum, then I clean everything as normal using WD-40 (useful for hosing out oil & grit), alcohol, and compressed air.  Assemble, lube and run!

It is interesting seeing the different mechanisms that were designed for the clockwork trains - I'm still curious about the Bassett-Lowke motor in the catalog scan I posted before... one of those will have to be the next item to find for the collection.

It is quite possible the B-L mechanism was made at the same time as they were making the Walker-Fenn for Walker & Holtzaphel - after all someone had to make it and it would not have been W&H, I feel sure.  The proximity of the dates these things were placed on the market seems too close to be coincidental, so I wonder what the connection actually was.

Bassett-Lowke offered a control rail and some of their locos have three trips hanging down.   Hornby had an elaborate mechanical control system too, all run from the signal cabin (control tower) but Hornby were too downmarket to ever make a variable speed mechanism themselves.

The point seems to have been you could run your railway from the point of view of the signal man.   Just like in real life, the engines would do what they were told by the signals sent by the signalman.   Looked at from this point of view, even a 60ft duration winding would require quite an extensive layout!