Got what seems like a simple one the my Forum friends this time. Has anybody run into a situation where the Kadee recommended coupler for a piece of rolling stock doesn't work even if it works with the height gauge? A few examples:
I am a bit stumped as to what the problem is. As I have engines from many different manufacturers, it's a bit annoying when I can't guarantee any car will mate with any engine. As usual, any suggestions ideas would be would welcomed.
Well FRRYKid, I've read your post a couple times and not entirely sure I follow you. Are you using the kadee height gauge like this one?
Assuming yes, all locomotive/rolling stock couplers shouldn't just mate up to it, but should line up almost exactly. Like this:
Otherwise, maybe picture or two would help us help you to troubleshoot.
Mike
FRRYKid Has anybody run into a situation where the Kadee recommended coupler for a piece of rolling stock doesn't work even if it works with the height gauge? A few examples:
I do not quite understand this.
Are you saying two pieces of equipment both line up with the Kadee height gauge, but when coupled together, the couplers are not vertically in alignment?
If this is the case, I have an idea that has worked for me. Please verify.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Wheels may be taller or shorter than the wheels on other cars.
There could be spacers...washers...installed where the trucks screw into the body, raising the overall height of a car.
Of course, the car heights could be manufacturered at different (broader) height tolerances.
Coupler box cover could be loose, causing the couplers to droop too low.
If differences are not repairable, Kadee makes overshank and undershank couplers to help keep the couplers of different cars aligned.
Edit: I see that LastSpikeMike said pretty much the same thing.
Also, if the couplers have the Kadee box spring, that shiny thing, try flipping from top to bottom or visa versa, to act as a shim or help stablize the coupler if its drooping.
I have seen all of these problems.
- Douglas
And we need people that have actually dealt with the problem to provide answers.
SeeYou190 FRRYKid Has anybody run into a situation where the Kadee recommended coupler for a piece of rolling stock doesn't work even if it works with the height gauge? A few examples: I do not quite understand this. Are you saying two pieces of equipment both line up with the Kadee height gauge, but when coupled together, the couplers are not vertically in alignment? If this is the case, I have an idea that has worked for me. Please verify. -Kevin
That's it exactly. They hit the height gauge exactly but aren't on the same level to each other especially with the GSC flats.
Hold on there.
You have a straight and level track, and position the height gauge 'correctly' on that track.
You place a car or engine on that track correctly railed, and observe its coupler aligns with the one on the gauge.
Just to be sure, you reverse the car or locomotive and check the other end.
Then you repeat this with the 'other' car or locomotive, on the same track without moving the gauge, and observe that it also aligns correctly at both ends.
I don't comprehend how two cars so checked would not couple at correct height.
It occurs to me (as someone who has not actually done this) that there is some awfully salty-sounding reference to different 'numbers' of Kadee products, shims, etc. being "recommended" for particular car types or situations. While these may be helpful, they will not be definitive correct solutions. Only actual testing on a known track with gauge in the same position, for each car tested, could do that.
The only real possibility I see is that, in following the 'recommendations', you tested them on different tracks, moving the Kadee gauge around, with the assumption that the recommendations were right. Is that an accurate supposition?
Something immediately clear from Kevin's picture is that a 'coupler height gauge' that does not measure or indicate coupler shank tilt is not a complete solution.
I can see a number of potential ways to look for or measure this; clearly using an oriented camera is one good one.
I had not thought about the advantages of making the gauge in a lighter or contrasting color to simplify observation, but it seems to me at least a reasonable option that we might discuss.
SeeYou190 FRRYKid That's it exactly. They hit the height gauge exactly but aren't on the same level to each other especially with the GSC flats. Perfect. I had a very similar problem that was driving me nuts. I had a few cars that matched the Kadee coupler height gauge, but when coupled together, they were off by about 0.040". What I found, through photography, was that they actually were off from the gauge, but I was being fooled. I don't know why it only seemed to be on some cars, but it was true. They looked good to my eye, but on camera you could see they were not correct. I think it is because the Kadee gauge and Kadee couplers are black, and this makes accurate visibilty somewhat off to the naked eye. My solution was to build my own couipler height gauge and not use the Kadee gauge. I used a Kadee PS1 boxcar as my standard when building my gauge. I figured I could trust the coupler height on their own car to be accurate. My gauge has a slot that the coupler must go into with no touching. The slot will clear the coupler by about 0.020", so that is my tolerance for adjusted coupler height. This picture shows it beginning construction. It also has a stepped pad for setting trip pin height. The base is 0.032" thick, and the step is 0.020", so I set all my pins between 0.032" and 0.052" above the rail. I will see if I can get a picture of the complete gauge. I do not seem to have one saved. Anyway, the gauge works for me a lot better than using my eye and the Kadee gauge. All my couplers line up perfectly now. EDIT: Well, I cannot put my hands on the one I made. MicroMark does have a similar tool in their catalogue that for $8.00 would be a lot easier than making one! ANOTHER EDIT: This is crazy. I just went though all my pictures of projects in progress, and the coupler height gauge is not in any of them. All those pictures of my cluttered workbench, and the custom coupler height gauge is nowhere to be spotted. -Kevin
FRRYKid That's it exactly. They hit the height gauge exactly but aren't on the same level to each other especially with the GSC flats.
Perfect.
I had a very similar problem that was driving me nuts. I had a few cars that matched the Kadee coupler height gauge, but when coupled together, they were off by about 0.040".
What I found, through photography, was that they actually were off from the gauge, but I was being fooled.
I don't know why it only seemed to be on some cars, but it was true. They looked good to my eye, but on camera you could see they were not correct.
I think it is because the Kadee gauge and Kadee couplers are black, and this makes accurate visibilty somewhat off to the naked eye.
My solution was to build my own couipler height gauge and not use the Kadee gauge.
I used a Kadee PS1 boxcar as my standard when building my gauge. I figured I could trust the coupler height on their own car to be accurate.
My gauge has a slot that the coupler must go into with no touching. The slot will clear the coupler by about 0.020", so that is my tolerance for adjusted coupler height.
This picture shows it beginning construction. It also has a stepped pad for setting trip pin height. The base is 0.032" thick, and the step is 0.020", so I set all my pins between 0.032" and 0.052" above the rail.
I will see if I can get a picture of the complete gauge. I do not seem to have one saved.
Anyway, the gauge works for me a lot better than using my eye and the Kadee gauge. All my couplers line up perfectly now.
EDIT: Well, I cannot put my hands on the one I made.
MicroMark does have a similar tool in their catalogue that for $8.00 would be a lot easier than making one!
ANOTHER EDIT: This is crazy.
I just went though all my pictures of projects in progress, and the coupler height gauge is not in any of them.
All those pictures of my cluttered workbench, and the custom coupler height gauge is nowhere to be spotted.
So it would seem that the couplers were not actually lining up with the guage in the first place, so their heights vary.
And that's where the solutions come in to play. Drooping couplers are a common problem with BB kits since the entire underbody can be slightly curved (warped) in addition to the coupler box not being secured. Thinking of those old metal covers that can loosen up the first time you remove it to install different couplers.
Lastspikemike Doughless So it would seem that the couplers were not actually lining up with the guage in the first place, so their heights vary. And that's where the solutions come in to play. Drooping couplers are a common problem with BB kits since the entire underbody can be slightly curved (warped) in addition to the coupler box not being secured. Thinking of those old metal covers that can loosen up the first time you remove it to install different couplers. These are AHC and Walthers. Different problems.
Doughless So it would seem that the couplers were not actually lining up with the guage in the first place, so their heights vary. And that's where the solutions come in to play. Drooping couplers are a common problem with BB kits since the entire underbody can be slightly curved (warped) in addition to the coupler box not being secured. Thinking of those old metal covers that can loosen up the first time you remove it to install different couplers.
These are AHC and Walthers. Different problems.
Doh!. Got my threads mixed up.
OvermodSomething immediately clear from Kevin's picture is that a 'coupler height gauge' that does not measure or indicate coupler shank tilt is not a complete solution.
The picture was posted as an example of how a photograph of a problem can reveal something the naked eye cannot easily see.
I posted it as an attempt to help FRRY find the problem he is having.
I did not post it as an invitation for LSM to critricize my model building skills again.
Now we know why he never posts pictures of his own work.
I have taken down the post. Maybe RRBELL will remove it from his post also before my abilities to build a freight car come more under scrutiny.
Maybe someone a lot smarter than me can help FRRY find a solution.
I won't be wasting anyone's time anymore.
SeeYou190 Overmod Something immediately clear from Kevin's picture is that a 'coupler height gauge' that does not measure or indicate coupler shank tilt is not a complete solution. The picture was posted as an example of how a photograph of a problem can reveal something the naked eye cannot easily see. I posted it as an attempt to help FRRY find the problem he is having. I did not post it as an invitation for LSM to critricize my model building skills again. Now we know why he never posts pictures of his own work. I have taken down the post. Maybe RRBELL will remove it from his post also before my abilities to build a freight car come more under scrutiny. Maybe someone a lot smarter than me can help FRRY find a solution. I won't be wasting anyone's time anymore. -Kevin
Overmod Something immediately clear from Kevin's picture is that a 'coupler height gauge' that does not measure or indicate coupler shank tilt is not a complete solution.
I think that photo shows an acceptable level of precision.
If it did not droop slightly, you might have had to rework a bunch of stuff for no operational or visible benefit.
Getting stuff to look and function right takes enough time as it is. No need to take more time to do somehting that doesn't matter.
SeeYou190I have taken down the post. Maybe RRBELL will remove it from his post also before my abilities to build a freight car come more under scrutiny.
If LSM took the picture as an opportunity to 'criticize skill', that's his problem. It shouldn't dissuade you from showing FRRYkid how he might be using his information and gauge 'correctly' according to wisdom and advice, but still wind up with cars or engines that visibly won't mate with each other, as he said.
Likewise, it was interesting to read that there are situations in which intentional coupler-shank tilt or sag are necessary to compensate for other car characteristics. That in itself shouldn't be a call that 'the faults in the model should have been corrected first' -- let alone that shank tilt is some kind of prima facie evidence of incompetent detail craftsmanship.
Doughless SeeYou190 Overmod Something immediately clear from Kevin's picture is that a 'coupler height gauge' that does not measure or indicate coupler shank tilt is not a complete solution. The picture was posted as an example of how a photograph of a problem can reveal something the naked eye cannot easily see. I posted it as an attempt to help FRRY find the problem he is having. I did not post it as an invitation for LSM to critricize my model building skills again. Now we know why he never posts pictures of his own work. I have taken down the post. Maybe RRBELL will remove it from his post also before my abilities to build a freight car come more under scrutiny. Maybe someone a lot smarter than me can help FRRY find a solution. I won't be wasting anyone's time anymore. -Kevin I think that photo shows an acceptable level of precision. If it did not droop slightly, you might have had to rework a bunch of stuff for no operational or visible benefit. Getting stuff to look and function right takes enough time as it is. No need to take more time to do somehting that doesn't matter.
Kevin, I would venture a guess that your work is perfectly acceptable to all but one forum member. Don't let one bad egg deprive the forum of your participation.
So I'll ask. What is the issue with the coupler height on Kevin's boxcar? If you look closely, the spot at which it touches the gauged coupler, its actually a bit lower. Then near the spring area, it might be slightly higher.
It should operate fine, and be unnoticeable when actually coupled. (Wasn't the point of the pic to show something that we wouldn't have seen with the eye?)
OP is describing situations that seem way more severe than what Kevin has shown, IMO. For which I remain stumped.
DoughlessOP is describing situations that seem way more severe than what Kevin has shown, IMO. For which I remain stumped.
I am extremely reluctant to call FRRYkid some flavor of liar, so I'm presuming there are cases in which using the gauge does not assure correct alignment in subsequent operation. That one likely cause of this could be shank tilt, including the workarounds mentioned, has the value of explaining one way the situation the OP reported might have come about. Something in fact that I hope FRRYkid will post is a set of side-on pictures showing each of the 'suspect' cars aligned to his gauge on a common track, ideally for each of the 'recommended' coupler and box types he was told to use.
Any time a new engine or car goes on my layout, either new out of the box or returning from the RIP Track, it must pass the coupler gauge test. This happens if I change a coupler or a truck or wheelset, or do anything that might affect the coupler height. I have two coupler gauges, so even "I can't find the gauge" is no excuse.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
FRRYKid,
There are a number of things perhaps that need to be cleared up or realigned to point the right direction.
Our coupler conversion recommendations are based on the particular model we have in our hands at the time. It certainly does not guarantee that all of the same model will be the same in every respect especially with the couplers and their heights, especially with older models that were designed for the X2F "Horn Hook" couplers where the manufacturers made little effort to achieve consistent coupler heights. The Horn Hooks simply didn't require it as knuckle couplers do. So our recommendations might be simply a starting point for some models.
Now some Kadee pointers for the use of a coupler height gauge. As has been mentioned, use a consistent spot on your track to check all your models coupler heights. Do not actually couple the two couplers together as the height gauge will simply lift or lower the opposing coupler into position which might give you a false reading. Push the two couplers together face to face just enough to compare their heights, to compare the level of the opposing coupler, and the trip pin height. Drooping and slanting couplers should be leveled up as best as possible as the tip of the trip pins will be too low and catch in the track. "Do not" adjust the trip pins until the coupler is mounted correctly and is as level as possible. Note, the parting line of the mold leaves a line right at the center of the coupler face which gives you a measuring point to look at. Coupler heights are measured from the top of the rail to the "center" of the coupler head, not the top or bottom of the coupler.
Tha's all I'm going to say at the moment and I'll see where this takes the thread.
Sam Clarke R&D Kadee Quality Products
A couple of observations:
Kadee makes a couple of different coupler gauges, one of them in some sort of plastic that won't short out the rails.
Couplers that are too low relative to the gauge are often in a coupler box with too much vertical space. Often a thin styrene or paper shim can be inserted under the couple so it sits flat and doesn't wiggle up and down. Some couplers that appear to be flat can deflect when they are pushed or pulled, and then uncouple.
We built a testing fixture about 40" long that has a coupler gauge at either end, an uncoupling magnet in the center and a rerailer on either side of that. It's mounted above the workbench at eye level for a person seated at the bench. Takes only a minute or two the position a car on the rig, check height at ech end, and observe that the couplers swing freely.
SROC99 FRRYKid, There are a number of things perhaps that need to be cleared up or realigned to point the right direction. Our coupler conversion recommendations are based on the particular model we have in our hands at the time. It certainly does not guarantee that all of the same model will be the same in every respect especially with the couplers and their heights, especially with older models that were designed for the X2F "Horn Hook" couplers where the manufacturers made little effort to achieve consistent coupler heights. The Horn Hooks simply didn't require it as knuckle couplers do. So our recommendations might be simply a starting point for some models.
Considering that the engines used with the coal cars are old (older than me anyway) AHM U25Cs and the conversion of those engines is a rather complcated process, it is entirely possible that not enough plastic was removed. Hence the need for the underset coupler.
SROC99 Now some Kadee pointers for the use of a coupler height gauge. As has been mentioned, use a consistent spot on your track to check all your models coupler heights. Do not actually couple the two couplers together as the height gauge will simply lift or lower the opposing coupler into position which might give you a false reading. Push the two couplers together face to face just enough to compare their heights, to compare the level of the opposing coupler, and the trip pin height. Drooping and slanting couplers should be leveled up as best as possible as the tip of the trip pins will be too low and catch in the track. "Do not" adjust the trip pins until the coupler is mounted correctly and is as level as possible. Note, the parting line of the mold leaves a line right at the center of the coupler face which gives you a measuring point to look at. Coupler heights are measured from the top of the rail to the "center" of the coupler head, not the top or bottom of the coupler.
The coupler gauge is on one end of my powered test track. (I use the test track for both cars and engines.) It is one of the metal ones that was super glued to the track to insulate it. I will have to use the idea of not coupling them together on the gauge. I had never read or seen that before. All the pictures I had ever seen show the couplers connected to check for height.
I definitely straighten and level couplers. (I had that problem frequently when I was converting my four U25Cs.) I don't need certain white classic cartoon dogs on the layout. (Sorry, bad pun.) At least on the Roundhouse coal cars, I have the droops when the screws won't hold the covers on. I also watch the trip pins even without the gauge as I have scratchbuilt car crossings I have to have the equipment go over. Even from stock, I've had to adjust a lot of them as they hit if I'm not careful.
FRRYKidI don't need certain white classic cartoon dogs on the layout.
Sam, would he benefit from a 'height gauge' that instead of a coupler had a longer rigid tang corresponding to where the shank would be in a properly-coupled pair? That would give him direct observation of the existing coupler box, pick the right 'accommodation' product or shim, and serve as a jig for gluing or aligning new parts so they dry or set up properly leveled and squared...
OvermodSam, would he benefit from a 'height gauge' that instead of a coupler had a longer rigid tang corresponding to where the shank would be in a properly-coupled pair?
Doesn't the traditional Kadee gauge have a "shelf" at the opposite end of the coupler for locating the proper "floor" height for mounting the draft gear?
Once this is located everything else should fall into spec.
https://www.kadee.com/documents/205_206ins.pdf
Regards, Ed
Overmod FRRYKid I don't need certain white classic cartoon dogs on the layout. I take it you don't have any Peabody coal cars, then?
FRRYKid I don't need certain white classic cartoon dogs on the layout.
I take it you don't have any Peabody coal cars, then?
No. And that wasn't the cartoon I was thinking of anyway.
FRRYKidNo. And that wasn't the cartoon I was thinking of anyway.
gmpullmanDoesn't the traditional Kadee gauge have a "shelf" at the opposite end of the coupler for locating the proper "floor" height for mounting the draft gear?
If I were doing it, either there would be separate 'tangs' or some kind of vernier raise/drop calibrated to different combinations of shank offset or shim, so you could get the right data for different products directly by using the gauge.
Overmod, thanks for your idea but it might not be applicable and too complicated to add the instructions to an already simple tool that's been on the market for a very long time.
We made the newer HO #206 height gauge in plastic for insulation and we put a platform on the end for body mounting coupler box height as on our other scale size gauges.
FRRYKid, I still don't know what your original problem was as your explination was a bit vague and confusing. We all hope that this thread has helpped you somewhat.
Sam Clarke R&R Kadee Quality Products