yes it was the last one for my wifes thomas g1 collection, he fixed her gordon just 2 weeks ago as well, as well as my late fathers virgin hst over a year ago, hes a legend

The two spacers are very thin and are the same as ones used on some other models so it was correct. Whether it was like that originally I don't know but I suspect it was. But yes the Black 5 doesn't have them as per the service sheet. Bit weird.

@@oobill yes the spacers are the correct ones, but what u meant was they had both been put on one side by someone before you had it in for repair. I have repaired several black 5’s and a couple of henrys and the spacers are thin. I think this is to allow more side play from the centre axel for 1st radius curves. As The motion sits on the small rectangular ‘cut out’ this isn’t effected.

Another repair for the same person, makes you wonder?? I personally detest the Thomas range and always have done from a very young age. Anyhow another superb repair.

@dansmodelrailways7886 There was actually another thin spacer in the box the model came in so it looks as though both sides had double spacers. I agree the 5MTs don't have them. Also the fact this had chewed crank pin heads makes me suspect jiggery faffery by someone at some point.

A number of reasons but mainly because gently pushing along a bit of track allows you to feel any points of resistance or if the wheels aren't as free moving as they should be. It's crucial for diagnosing issues to be able to feel the movement. Also it's very important to test the movement with the motor disengaged as well as engaged.

All good points, in the context of this repair, Bill….indeed essential. But my point was a more general one. I’m interested to know why you chose not to use a rolling road when testing the loco, particularly at the end of a repair job. Keep up that fantastic work. Yours is my No.1 ‘go to’ channel when I have a repair or service to undertake. many thanks for all you do for the hobby ! 🙏👏👏

Because it doesn't really assist much with a test or a repair other than to observe the motion in either direction under power. Which can be useful. I'm currently doing a repair where it would actually have been good to have a RR to demonstrate a problem. But as they are quite expensive things and I'd rarely ever use one I just don't see much point. The only way to truly test a loco is on a layout where it is subject to curves and points etc. Also I know people use RRs for running in but I think it's way better to do that on a layout where everything is subject to all normal affects of running on a track. All the moving parts will behave differently on a layout than on a rolling road because of lateral movement going round curves etc. I'm not suggesting they are useless or not worth having and I may pick one up at some point but the vast majority of repairs I do wouldn't really benefit from using one in my opinion. It's just quicker, easier and often simply more beneficial to use a bit of track. Which I'd still need to use even if I had a RR.