Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

what happened to the kadee #1, #2, #3 and #4 couplers?

5840 views
30 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: lavale, md
  • 4,642 posts
what happened to the kadee #1, #2, #3 and #4 couplers?
Posted by gregc on Friday, August 17, 2018 1:20 PM

why did kadee stop making the earlier couplers?

i have a set of #4 couplers from when I was in high school.   why did kadee stop making them?

and what were the first three Kadee couplers like?

greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Friday, August 17, 2018 1:35 PM

(To the younger crowd:  Kadee used to make couplers that were mechanically actuated--trip pins, and all that.  The #4 was one of those.  Then they introduced magnetic actuation--MK-4, etc.)

 

Either because "everyone" abandoned using them.  Or Kadee wanted "everyone" to go over to the magnetics.

It does seem odd that they did that, though.  Sales is sales, it seems to me.

 

As far as the #1, etc.:  A good question.  Perhaps 1 through 3 were never released to the public.  Or perhaps 4 superseded them.

 

Old magazines would probably answer some of the last question.  To sell couplers, you had to advertise.  In Model Railroader, in particular.  And you had to "display your wares".  So a tip-toe through old mags will reveal if #1-3 was ever released.

 

Ed

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,864 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Friday, August 17, 2018 1:54 PM

Next question, what happened to WD 1-39?

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: lavale, md
  • 4,642 posts
Posted by gregc on Friday, August 17, 2018 1:56 PM

i found a patent granted in 1969 (?)

greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • From: Potomac Yard
  • 2,761 posts
Posted by NittanyLion on Friday, August 17, 2018 2:26 PM

riogrande5761

Next question, what happened to WD 1-39?

 

All the failed water displacement formulas before the 40th one worked  

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,859 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Friday, August 17, 2018 2:40 PM

gregc

i found a patent granted in 1969 (?)

 

The 1969 patent is for the N scale/old timer coupler.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    January 2017
  • From: Southern Florida Gulf Coast
  • 18,255 posts
Posted by SeeYou190 on Friday, August 17, 2018 5:09 PM

riogrande5761
Next question, what happened to WD 1-39?

.

Better question: What happened with Preparations A though G?

.

-Kevin

.

Living the dream.

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: lavale, md
  • 4,642 posts
Posted by gregc on Friday, August 17, 2018 5:16 PM

SeeYou190
Better question: What happened with Preparations A though G?

do you know what Preparation H is for?

greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading

  • Member since
    December 2015
  • From: Shenandoah Valley
  • 9,094 posts
Posted by BigDaddy on Friday, August 17, 2018 5:29 PM

Kadee used to sell a single "test coupler"  I thought I had a #2, but I could only find a 6,7, and 8.  Since I bought them, they must have been inexpensive.  Not sure I ever found that I needed them.

Henry

COB Potomac & Northern

Shenandoah Valley

  • Member since
    January 2017
  • From: Southern Florida Gulf Coast
  • 18,255 posts
Posted by SeeYou190 on Friday, August 17, 2018 5:30 PM

gregc
do you know what Preparation H is for?

.

Of coarse I do. I just hope whatever was wrong with Preparations A through G was discovered before they reached the human trial phase of product testing.

.

Back to Kadee...

.

I still have a stock of #4 couplers. These are all metal, including the draft gear box, so they are unsuitable for brass models or models with metal underframes.

.

I have had these for 20+ years. I am pretty sure they are not made any longer.

.

The head size is identical to the #5. The slack in the centering spring in the draft gear is a nice feature. The centering spring does not work very well. Everything must be burnished and cleaned of burrs before any assembly. Installing the slack bushing in the centering spring will drive you crazy. Peening the rivet is no fun at all.

.

Boy do I love those #148 whisker couplers. 

.

.

-Kevin

.

Living the dream.

  • Member since
    January 2004
  • From: Canada, eh?
  • 13,375 posts
Posted by doctorwayne on Friday, August 17, 2018 11:34 PM

I don't recall any #1, 2, or 3 Kadee couplers, but my first HO trains, 1956, I think, came with #4s...

I wasn't too pleased when they went to the Magne-matics, with that ugly, fat trip pin, as they wouldn't work with the uncoupling ramp for the #4s, and I cut quite a few of them off. 
A lot of those later ended-up on MoW equipment, and are still in service, although this one is on a friend's layout...



I seem to recall that the original Kadees were the K-Type, as I've read references to the same.

Wayne

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: lavale, md
  • 4,642 posts
Posted by gregc on Monday, August 20, 2018 10:06 AM

i asked Kadee and got the following response:

The #4 coupler was discontinued for a number of reasons, the mold was wearing out, the coupler just isn't used as much as it once was, it was difficult to assembly for many modelers, and we have newer coupler designs that work better in many places the #4 was used.

We do still have a limited supply of the #4 coupler only (no boxes) we sell directly upon request.

The #3 coupler was a fully assembled #5 coupler but now it's an assembled #148 whisker coupler.

All other coupler numbers not currently produced have been discontinued for any number of reasons but mostly because we've develped newer better couplers to take their place.

Sam Clarke
R&D / Tech Advisor / Artist

based on the patent and the #4, it looks like earlier couplers relied on a spring that pulls the coupler into the pocket to center it, while the #5 and #148 types use a fixed pivot and lateral spring force to center the coupler.

greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Monday, August 20, 2018 12:15 PM

I've got an MK-8 on a little steamer.  I think the 6, 7, and 8 were variations on the length and/or the offset of the shank.  I'm pretty sure the 8 was a long shank, and the 6 the short shank.  The 7?.....

The MK-8 (I THINK there was a K-8--not sure) is kind of hard to describe.  There were (are) two roundish plastic thingys that went above and below the coupler.  There was a hole through the middle for a 2-56.  The interesting thing was the centering spring, which wrapped around one of the thingys.  The ends sorta stuck out and were bent up--on either side of the coupler.  So, when the coupler was shoved sideways, the prong on the spring shoved it back to center.

I believe I needed to use the MK-8 instead of the MK-5 because the assembly was narrower, and would fit in the confined space.

When Kadee came out with the MKD (magnetic delayed) series, they had to redesign the 6,7,8 mount, because that one used asymmetrical spring pressure--something the old MK spring couldn't do.

Incidentally, I used an MK-4 on the front.  There was a VERY TEENY coupler pocket (due to my, uh, detailing).  I just cut the back half of the coupler shank off and epoxied what remained into the hole.

 

Thanks to Wayne for showing a photo of a K-4.  They were the only drop-fit coupler for the all-metal cars that Ulrich made.  Those had the coupler box cast into the car.  And you DIDN'T want to try removing it.  On the plus side, I think maybe a Sergent "non-compatible" coupler would be a drop-fit, also.  Talk about ahead of yer time.  By about 60 years.

 

 

Ed

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 30,002 posts
Posted by rrinker on Monday, August 20, 2018 3:13 PM

 In the early Magna-matic days, the #5 was often referred to as the MKD5&10 as in "five and dime" store.

 In fact that was what as on the old packages:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/LOT-3-Kadee-HO-Magne-Matic-Couplers-w-draft-gear-MKD-5-10-6-Pair/263129239867?hash=item3d43b9913b:g:NqsAAOSwhSVZh4Wd

Somewhere along the line, they dropped the "&10" from the name.

Also don't forget the FIRST magnetic ones didn't have the delay feature, they just used a magnet instead of the diamond shaped ramp of the #4. It wasnt too much longer that they figured outhow to get the delayed action, thus the MKD numbers - Magnetic, Kadee, Delayed

                             --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Monday, August 20, 2018 4:17 PM

Pretty sure the 5's originally came without coupler boxes, the 10's with.

Then they probably figured it would be, overall, more cost effective to sell only 10's. And then got worried about losing sales when people kept looking for 5's.  And thus did the combination of 5&10.

Or so it seems to me.

 

Ed

  • Member since
    February 2022
  • From: New Jersey
  • 7 posts
Posted by Barry547 on Wednesday, April 3, 2024 4:55 PM

That is the interesting part of trying to find a MK or MKD 4.  I am working on an old Mantua flatcat from the 1950's and the coupler box accepts a #4.  I only had one in my KaDee box, I must have used the other one for some project years ago.  Trying to find some is quite interesting.  I contactd KaDee with the hope they might have a package or 2 in the 'lost' area.

 

The original Manuta can came with a coupler that had a 'push' pin for uncoupling and the #4 would fit perfectly!

 

Maybe y'all might have one in a stash box, or maybe Cody Grivno might have one???

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,038 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Wednesday, April 3, 2024 6:01 PM

What was Kadee's answer?

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • 2,318 posts
Posted by kasskaboose on Wednesday, April 3, 2024 6:10 PM

I join others in being curious why #5 is suggested and not #1-4?

  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 1,137 posts
Posted by PC101 on Wednesday, April 3, 2024 8:03 PM

gregc

i found a patent granted in 1969 (?)

 

In knowing this is an old Post. Just to follow up, This coupler looks like a few I have and came in brown or black plastic/Delrin.

  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 1,137 posts
Posted by PC101 on Wednesday, April 3, 2024 8:27 PM

Barry547

That is the interesting part of trying to find a MK or MKD 4.  I am working on an old Mantua flatcat from the 1950's and the coupler box accepts a #4.  I only had one in my KaDee box, I must have used the other one for some project years ago.  Trying to find some is quite interesting.  I contactd KaDee with the hope they might have a package or 2 in the 'lost' area.

 

The original Manuta can came with a coupler that had a 'push' pin for uncoupling and the #4 would fit perfectly!

 

Maybe y'all might have one in a stash box, or maybe Cody Grivno might have one???

 

I have 9 MKD #4 with the curved trip pin, metal draft gear box and cover and centering spring #S-23. Barry547, are you coming to the Train Collectors Association, TCA, york shown April?

  • Member since
    January 2018
  • From: Douglas AZ.
  • 634 posts
Posted by Little Timmy on Wednesday, April 3, 2024 8:57 PM

What about 7-UP ?

What happened  to 1 - thru- 6 up ?

 

Rust...... It's a good thing !

  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 1,137 posts
Posted by PC101 on Wednesday, April 3, 2024 9:51 PM

Can anybody here tell me what brand of coupler this is? HO scale and it is on a Ulrich metal 2 bay open hopper with really cool discharge hatches. Push up on the ''trip pin" and the knuckle opens, close the knuckle and the pin drops and the knuckle is locked closed. I can not remember to save my life.Thanks.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: west coast
  • 7,586 posts
Posted by rrebell on Wednesday, April 3, 2024 10:22 PM

PC101

Can anybody here tell me what brand of coupler this is? HO scale and it is on a Ulrich metal 2 bay open hopper with really cool discharge hatches. Push up on the ''trip pin" and the knuckle opens, close the knuckle and the pin drops and the knuckle is locked closed. I can not remember to save my life.Thanks.

 

Devore

  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 1,137 posts
Posted by PC101 on Wednesday, April 3, 2024 10:56 PM

Thanks.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 1,177 posts
Posted by mvlandsw on Thursday, April 4, 2024 12:37 AM

I modify the MKD #4's and their boxes to allow scale coupling distance between F units.

Mark

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,859 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Thursday, April 4, 2024 5:28 AM

PC101

Thanks.

 

Yes Devore developed that coupler in the late 40's or early 50's and sold it for a number of years. Eventually they sold the design and tooling to Model Die Casting/Roundhouse who continued its production into the 60's if not longer.

Note the package of couplers included in this Roundhouse metal freight car kit.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: west coast
  • 7,586 posts
Posted by rrebell on Thursday, April 4, 2024 7:53 AM

Did not relise MDC took them over. Once had the thought that this coupler could be modified for a real uncoupling lever as it had that conected protiusion on top for uncoupling that was proubly thought of but never done.

  • Member since
    February 2007
  • 472 posts
Posted by Graham Line on Friday, April 5, 2024 5:40 PM

The Kadee K-5 (no M, D, or &10) was a non-magnetic straight-pin coupler that had no lip on the inside of the knuckle. Just overlapping angles.

 NOTE:  The angle on the inside of the K-5 knuckle was steeper than on the later couplers that had the internal lip.  That's why filing off the internal lip doesn't allow reliable coupling.

Here's a picture of the K-5 packaging: https://www.flickr.com/photos/74312783@N00/25337778517/in/album-72157623115283234/

It was a breeze to uncouple from the side with a skewer and worked with a permanent wire ramp installed between the rails. We operated with them on a friend's layout for years and the couplers and the friend are very much missed. 

Ideal if there was a lot of switching and I don't recall any accidental uncouplings.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 1,177 posts
Posted by mvlandsw on Friday, April 5, 2024 7:31 PM

I tried eliminating the lip from #5 couplers to make manual uncoupling easier but got too many unwanted uncouplings. Maybe something else in the design was changed.

Mark

  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 1,137 posts
Posted by PC101 on Monday, April 8, 2024 12:40 AM

mvlandsw

I tried eliminating the lip from #5 couplers to make manual uncoupling easier but got too many unwanted uncouplings. Maybe something else in the design was changed.

Mark

 

The kuckle is the difference.

The first picture is a K coupler with the straight uncoupling pin.

Second picture is a MKD coupler with the curved uncoupling pin (removed).

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!