I just completed installing "KADEE" couplers to older rolling stock. We some difficulty all are working. In the course of all of this I ran across some "E-Z" couplers on a box car (origin unknown). These appear to be easier to install given the proper gear box. I.E. the "E-Z moulded centering spring. I have several more conversions to make. I would appreciate any and all pros and cons as to the use of each of these products
I think they call them E-Z because they are designed for E-Z (as in gentle) service. They have a tendency to break under hard use. Of the many magnetic knuckle couplers available, only Kadees seem to have the durability needed for long term, long train service.
Kadee manufactures a wide variety of couplers, including some with centering 'whiskers.'
Due to the configuration of the mounting holes in my (ancient, Japanese prototype) rolling stock, my Kadee of choice is #6.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Pro: Kadee
Con: All the imitations.
Simply put, Kadee makes the best couplers. Yes, there are those who favor the closer-to-prototype Sargeant couplers, but Sargeants don't have magnetic uncoupling operation.
Kadee couplers are all-metal, and they just plain don't break or wear out like other brands. Once installed properly, they are very reliable and will give you many years of trouble-free operation. They come in a wide variety of inter-operable models, designed for odd installations where the pockets are high or low, shallow or deep.
I don't work for or own stock in Kadee. But, in an era of lowest-price, who-cares-about-quality products, Kadee reminds us that there are still companies out there with "the right stuff."
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Kadee now makes a "whisker" coupler that has a built in metal centering spring. These are just as easy to install as the plastic ones your talking about. I believe their #148 is the whisker version of their old #5. (check their web site)
The cheap plastic knock offs break too EZ.
I too have struggled with Kadee mounting and adjusting. When I found McHenrys I was instantly using them. But as you read here the Kadee imitaters don't perform as well.
I would like to know the proper alignment of the Kadee centering spring. I think it was notched for early boxes and I usually bend the spring to get as tight as action that can be achieved.
How do you adjust the centering spring?
Cliff
Port Doom RR
To be honest, I don't know.
I have been using the standard No.5 for a while now and haven't found an issue with their centering. I do take a small jewlers file and make sure the shank portion that goes in the pocket are free from burs and is nice and smooth, and I lube them with dry graphite. By going the extra mile, they don't stick for me.
Elmer.
The above is my opinion, from an active and experienced Model Railroader in N scale and HO since 1961.
(Modeling Freelance, Eastern US, HO scale, in 1962, with NCE DCC for locomotive control and a stand alone LocoNet for block detection and signals.) http://waynes-trains.com/ at home, and N scale at the Club.
woodview3 wrote: I just completed installing "KADEE" couplers to older rolling stock. We some difficulty all are working. In the course of all of this I ran across some "E-Z" couplers on a box car (origin unknown). These appear to be easier to install given the proper gear box. I.E. the "E-Z moulded centering spring. I have several more conversions to make. I would appreciate any and all pros and cons as to the use of each of these products
Kadee couplers have been the standard in HO for decades. After their patent ran out, other manufacturers stepped in, Accurail, Bachmann and McHenry to name a few.
In my own experience, except for the early McHenry's without the metal spring, I have not had great difficulties with any of them, either in operation or installation. All three of these so-called "Kadee clones" come with different makes of ready-to-run rolling stock and locomotives. Except on tank cars where I want shelf couplers, I don't bother to replace them with Kadee's, saving my time and $ for other things.
On the other hand, I limit my trains to 18-20 cars. Someone running 100+ car unit trains may have encountered problems with pull-aparts but that hasn't been my situation.
John Timm
I use what I have on hand.
Some are Kadee, others are McHenry or Accumates.
Unlike some of my fellow modelers, I won't pull a perfectly good model apart just to replace a knuckle coupler that hasn't given me any trouble yet.
In 30 years I've seen Kadees break, from serious abuse - not by me, and I have no doubt that I will see others break as well.
Such is life.
Mark Gosdin
Kadee invented the magnetic knuckle coupler about fifty years ago. They were and are the choice of all model railroaders, except for price. In fact, until Kadee's patents expired in the '90's, rolling stock makers supplied the dirt cheap one piece no moving parts NMRA coupler to save a buck a car.
The clones came out in the '90's. The weak spot on clones in the knuckle spring. Many used a plastic finger spring to close the knuckle and the fingers are prone to breakage or taking a set. The clones with a metal coil knuckle spring are better. Most new rolling stock today comes with clone knuckle couplers. I usually leave the clone couplers in place until they break.
For replacements I buy Kadee only. The Kadee's are unquesionable more reliable and so far, Kadee's cost the same as clones. If you can get the best for the same money, why not buy the best? If the clones ever drop down to one half the price of a Kadee I might buy clones. But so far that hasn't happened.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com