richhotrain riogrande5761 This topic seems like it was posted to throw a cat among the pigeons considering how universal is the preference of the KD standard. LOL An interesting observation, Jim. Rich
riogrande5761 This topic seems like it was posted to throw a cat among the pigeons considering how universal is the preference of the KD standard.
This topic seems like it was posted to throw a cat among the pigeons considering how universal is the preference of the KD standard.
LOL
An interesting observation, Jim.
Rich
There seems to be a pattern of those lately...
I disliked X2F couplers appearance, so I went with Kadee's. No operational issues, so not changing now. The cheap clones however.......
Ricky W.
HO scale Proto-freelancer.
My Railroad rules:
1: It's my railroad, my rules.
2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.
3: Any objections, consult above rules.
Software tools:
You are extremely dismissive, not to mention insulting, of the past experience of Brakie and others with much more experience than you seem to have. It would be very easy for us old timers to just ignore questions that are naive, or to which the answers seem obvious to us. Instead, we generally try to help with the best information we have, and the most relevant experience. Accept it or ignore it. That's your choice. But try not to be insulting as you go your merry, ignorant way.
Thank you.
Tom
Software ToolsYou certainly don't sound at all sorry and frankly no one now much cares about how tough it was then.
Ever think how much knowledge I gain from those experiences? Sure,the hobby change for the better from those growing experiences..Even the highly detailed P2K locomotives came from years of requesting better models.
Or do you think it was done by the manufacturers out of the goodness of their hearts?
We made the KD the de facto standard coupler because it gave hands free uncoupling and we no longer had to leave our stool at the control panel just to uncouple cars at a industry nor did we no longer need to stand while doing yard switching..You stood because you had to uncouple the cars. 48 years later and I still use magnets for hands free uncoupling.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Software Tools BRAKIE Sorry Jim,a lot of you young folks would have not made it in the 50/60 There is simply no merit in struggling with components that are not well suited for purpose, if there are better choices readily available.
BRAKIE Sorry Jim,a lot of you young folks would have not made it in the 50/60
There is simply no merit in struggling with components that are not well suited for purpose, if there are better choices readily available.
That is an interesting comment, but I don't believe I understand it clearly as it relates to couplers. Can you explain how you define better?
- Douglas
BRAKIESorry Jim,a lot of you young folks would have not made it in the 50/60
You certainly don't sound at all sorry and frankly no one now much cares about how tough it was then.The model railroad world is a very very different place today, but there are still plenty of things to tinker with for those that want to follow that particular aspect of the hobby.
rrebell Uh, since when is using a screw driver hands-off?
Hands off uncoupling with X2F is funny since the ramps was crappy at best. The screwdriver was the best method for uncoupling cars while switching industries and yards.
The only true hands off uncoupling was and still is using KD couplers with magnets but,using magnets seems to be frown on by the experts and their followers.
BRAKIE rrebell The real trouble with hornhooks is uncoupling and needing a ramp for hands off. LOL! Only newbies used those stupid ramps that didn't work half the time or broke anyway. Serious operators used small flat tip screwdrivers-these came with those el cheapo small screwdriver sets that was found in five and dime stores. Today you can find them at Family Dollar,Dollar General and other like stores for around $2.00-Dollar Tree has 'em for $1.00. If you wanted to get all uptown fancy then you bought a small flat screwdriver with a pocket clip. It's true a lot of us wore pocket protectors so we wouldn't put a hole in our shirt pocket or skin. These flat tip screwdrivers works equally well with KDs.
rrebell The real trouble with hornhooks is uncoupling and needing a ramp for hands off.
LOL! Only newbies used those stupid ramps that didn't work half the time or broke anyway.
Serious operators used small flat tip screwdrivers-these came with those el cheapo small screwdriver sets that was found in five and dime stores. Today you can find them at Family Dollar,Dollar General and other like stores for around $2.00-Dollar Tree has 'em for $1.00.
If you wanted to get all uptown fancy then you bought a small flat screwdriver with a pocket clip. It's true a lot of us wore pocket protectors so we wouldn't put a hole in our shirt pocket or skin.
These flat tip screwdrivers works equally well with KDs.
BRAKIE IRONROOSTER If you didn't like them you could replace with KD's. But if you couldn't afford KD's (and metal wheels) you could still build and run cars. Paul,IIRC it wasn't the cost because my first KDs cost around 95 cents a pack and since the X2F worked we spent money on Central Valley trucks so our cars could roll smoother. Then smooth running Athearn BB trucks began to edge out CVs as replacements and in the late 60s there was another change of direction-KD couplers was fast becoming the defacto standard coupler by choice. Metal wheels wasn't all that important since there was more important changes such as moving from brass to nickel silver track. The 60s seen a lot of changes in the hobby and overall it was a exciting time due to the amount of better running models especially the brass steam engines since steam still ruled the modeler's roost in the 60s.
IRONROOSTER If you didn't like them you could replace with KD's. But if you couldn't afford KD's (and metal wheels) you could still build and run cars.
Paul,IIRC it wasn't the cost because my first KDs cost around 95 cents a pack and since the X2F worked we spent money on Central Valley trucks so our cars could roll smoother. Then smooth running Athearn BB trucks began to edge out CVs as replacements and in the late 60s there was another change of direction-KD couplers was fast becoming the defacto standard coupler by choice. Metal wheels wasn't all that important since there was more important changes such as moving from brass to nickel silver track.
The 60s seen a lot of changes in the hobby and overall it was a exciting time due to the amount of better running models especially the brass steam engines since steam still ruled the modeler's roost in the 60s.
Larry,
For me starting in the early 70's, just buying a couple of locomotives, some cars and Atlas buildings was all I could afford to start. Once I had a 4x8 layout built with brass track and wired for 2 train operation, then I could start upgrading.
Paul
IRONROOSTERIf you didn't like them you could replace with KD's. But if you couldn't afford KD's (and metal wheels) you could still build and run cars.
And remembering my days as a kid when I used them, it was differing coupler height that presented most of the problems, not the horn hook couplers themselves. In addition to being mostly truck mounted (and too light), all of those manufacturers seemed to make cars that had slightly different height's so cars might not couple or uncouple properly, or came uncoupled over track undulations. For me, they always worked just fine in MDC and Athearn BB cars where the coupler boxes were at a consistent height, so I can certainly see how somebody might not care to swap them out even today.
IRONROOSTEROne of the advantages of the horn hook coupler was that it gave manufacturers a standard low cost coupler to include with low cost kits.
From what I remember reading in the past, even though the horn hooks were supposed to be "standard", each manufacturer used their own opinions as to what the tolerences should be. Therefore the "standard" couplers did not necessarily work well with each other.
One of the advantages of the horn hook coupler was that it gave manufacturers a standard low cost coupler to include with low cost kits. If you didn't like them you could replace with KD's. But if you couldn't afford KD's (and metal wheels) you could still build and run cars.
CAZEPHYRTo each his own. Square wheels are good too. RR
Yes,they work but,the cars bounce going down the track.
DAVID FORTNEY I was visiting a freinds HO layout that is really large and very well detailed. After spending about 2 hours watching him and a few others operating his layout I was amazed to see that he uses nothing but horn hook couplers. He refuses to use KD's or something similar. He just don't like them. His layout runs smooth, looks great and you don't even notice the horn hooks until they pointed them out. What are your thoughts.
I was visiting a freinds HO layout that is really large and very well detailed. After spending about 2 hours watching him and a few others operating his layout I was amazed to see that he uses nothing but horn hook couplers.
He refuses to use KD's or something similar. He just don't like them.
His layout runs smooth, looks great and you don't even notice the horn hooks until they pointed them out.
What are your thoughts.
To each his own. Square wheels are good too.
RR
riogrande5761 Doughless Example: I bought one of those highly detailed RTR Exactrail boxcars and noticed that the underbody was so over populated with details that it kept the truck from turning sharp enough to negotiate even a 30 inch radius curve. I had to remove the underbody detail just to get the thing to run. I don't see a defense for paying upwards of $30 for a model that was designed with a flaw that Tyco solved decades ago. But I'm sure it photographed well as it sat on display. Nice try, but this topic is about horn hook couplers. The gripe above is something else which I don't really care about. What's my point? Even couplers are getting so protoypically sized that they don't operate very well. If the guy likes his horn hooks, that's enough defense for me. And my lesson learned: Prototypical accuracy can really ruin a good model railroad. The way it looks is you are making a "straw man" to knock down and the argument has little credibility. Modelers who use Kadee's know from years experience that they are the best thing on the market for many years for HO couplers. Give it up man! There is no contest. Of course if someone wants to use horn hooks, thats their choice. But the topic title was "are horn hook couplers that bad" so I gave my opinion. I can't really add anymore so cheers /nuff said.
Doughless Example: I bought one of those highly detailed RTR Exactrail boxcars and noticed that the underbody was so over populated with details that it kept the truck from turning sharp enough to negotiate even a 30 inch radius curve. I had to remove the underbody detail just to get the thing to run. I don't see a defense for paying upwards of $30 for a model that was designed with a flaw that Tyco solved decades ago. But I'm sure it photographed well as it sat on display.
Example: I bought one of those highly detailed RTR Exactrail boxcars and noticed that the underbody was so over populated with details that it kept the truck from turning sharp enough to negotiate even a 30 inch radius curve. I had to remove the underbody detail just to get the thing to run. I don't see a defense for paying upwards of $30 for a model that was designed with a flaw that Tyco solved decades ago. But I'm sure it photographed well as it sat on display.
Nice try, but this topic is about horn hook couplers. The gripe above is something else which I don't really care about.
What's my point? Even couplers are getting so protoypically sized that they don't operate very well. If the guy likes his horn hooks, that's enough defense for me. And my lesson learned: Prototypical accuracy can really ruin a good model railroad.
If the guy likes his horn hooks, that's enough defense for me.
And my lesson learned: Prototypical accuracy can really ruin a good model railroad.
The way it looks is you are making a "straw man" to knock down and the argument has little credibility. Modelers who use Kadee's know from years experience that they are the best thing on the market for many years for HO couplers. Give it up man! There is no contest. Of course if someone wants to use horn hooks, thats their choice. But the topic title was "are horn hook couplers that bad" so I gave my opinion. I can't really add anymore so cheers /nuff said.
I guess my annoyance at people passing judgment on the producers (and indirectly those hobbysist who don't share their tastes) is rather fresh. I just spent a Saturday night lurking on another forum reading about everything that's wrong with every new model that's introduced...literally, that's what the threads were about....but if the company would've just made that paint a little darker on that one road name of that loco, they would order 15 of them...at $150 to $250 a piece, because they needed 15 for their roster. Yeah, sure.
But that's okay. Its a broad hobby.
I agree, its about realism. As another mentioned, back in the day, they put dummy couplers on the front of steam engines strictly for apprearance sake. When I was a kid, the first thing I would do is rip out that dummy coupler and put in a horn hook so I could switch cars with my steam loco, or run tender first like was the case on branch lines.
Realism can have a broad definition.
I find that most people gravitiate to buying what is right for them and align those purchases with their needs, because they don't like to waste money. So, if you have a layout where you have to back a 40-car, 15 pound train up a 2% grade, couplers matter more. Not sure if the OP's friend places those kind of demands on his couplers, or how many people in the hobby do either. Afterall, its a broad hobby.
Doughless What's my point? Even couplers are getting so protoypically sized that they don't operate very well. If the guy likes his horn hooks, that's enough defense for me. And my lesson learned: Prototypical accuracy can really ruin a good model railroad.
What's my point? Even couplers are getting so protoypically sized that they don't operate very well.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Ah, yes, the great HO coupler discussion.
When I started in HO there were a dozen different scale-size dummy couplers, all of which required filing beyond flash removal just to get them to couple - and even more if using several different brands. Of course, back then a set of needle files was considered a basic tool.
There were also Mantua's basketball hoops, the Ulrich proto-action knuckle coupler, and the Baker cross between a tin box and a logger's Peavy. (All further comment deleted.)
Then the Edwards brothers presented us with the Kadee K coupler - the one with the vertical trip pin sticking down from the corner of the knuckle.
In a valiant attempt to create order amidst the chaos, the NMRA set up a coupler design team, which eventually gave birth to the X2F, the much-maligned horn hook. When compared to Mantua and Baker, it didn't look TOO horrible, and, when properly made and finished smooth it operated about as well as the Kadee K.
So the toy train makers adopted it, as did most of the kit purveyors. Unfortunately, each installed them (or provided them) rough - to people who didn't all have needle files. And people discovered that getting them uncoupled by lifting them wasn't as easy as lifting scale dummies. The NMRA decided to distance themselves from the 'NMRA coupler,' with good reason.
In the meantime, those devious Edwards brothers brought out the magnetic, and then magnetic-delay Kadee couplers - and then set out to customize them for every HO locomotive and car in the known universe. The result is history.
As for how well properly adjusted X2Fs could operate, Ed Ravenscroft used them until his death - on a layout that included an automated hump yard. (He also told me that not one manufacturer had ever hit the NMRA dimensions spot-on.)
So, how about me? Kadees (including some really ancient Ks) all the way on the JNR and TTT, which run on 16.5mm gauge. The prototypes for my HOn762 feeders don't have a standard coupler yet - so I'm still in the market for a link-and-pin that will couple automatically.
And now a note on that 'thing' on the sharknoses. The last time I saw anything similar was on my very first Lionel train, new in 1937.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with appropriate couplers)
rrebellThe real trouble with hornhooks is uncoupling and needing a ramp for hands off.
riogrande5761 Thats one way of putting it. But when you look at the totality our own experience plus the universality of the opinions posted, it's hard to wrap my head around there being a defense for horn hook couplers. It's kind of mind boggling, but as the old saying goes, it taks all kinds. I guess "underdogs" have their fans, but the first thing I noticed about HO trains when I began looking at them around the age of 10 or so was that the couplers looked totally unrealistic. Later, when I saw Kadee couplers, I thought, now that looks tons better! I don't know, it's kind of a "no brainer" to me, you know, realism being kind of the goal of model railroading etc. Anyway, thats my 2 cents worth. To each his own.
Thats one way of putting it. But when you look at the totality our own experience plus the universality of the opinions posted, it's hard to wrap my head around there being a defense for horn hook couplers. It's kind of mind boggling, but as the old saying goes, it taks all kinds. I guess "underdogs" have their fans, but the first thing I noticed about HO trains when I began looking at them around the age of 10 or so was that the couplers looked totally unrealistic. Later, when I saw Kadee couplers, I thought, now that looks tons better! I don't know, it's kind of a "no brainer" to me, you know, realism being kind of the goal of model railroading etc. Anyway, thats my 2 cents worth. To each his own.
Its fun to read other forums too. There is a small but vocal crowd that constantly points out flaws with the accuracy of a manufacturers models. Its a hoot to read, because they seem to take the position of expert judge on the competency of a manufacturer but ignore some basic goals most modelers care about. Does it run.
Ed and Dr. Wayne:
Prototype Sharks couldn't normally be run elephant style because they didn't have nose MU capability. (I don't know whether any prototype owner retrofitted them after purchase). I do recall seeing four PRR Shark A units pulling a train through Akron, Ohio in the 1960's. They were configured as two A-A sets, and required two engine crews! A diesel double-header!
In this day and age, I cannot imagine any justification for producing models with direction-specific couplers. If the manufacturer doesn't want to provide operating knuckle couplers, then they ought to provide non-operating knuckle couplers that will mate equally well with Kadees (or equivalent) or each other. The seemingly bogus solution on those Sharks required two separate, different pieces. The dummy coupler solution would be simpler because it would require two identical ones. What am I missing here?
There were alot of couplers before Kadee #5 including Kadee ramp couplers. The real trouble with hornhooks is uncoupling and needing a ramp for hands off.
He has perfected his x2f's to work for him. Number one they are all body mounted.
I saw on his layout making reverse moves and dropping off cars at industries around his layout without one derailment.
Although I used x2f's back in the 60's and 70's, when KD's came out I changed and never looked back.
One last word on this gentleman's layout, it is truly a scale layout with great scenery, detailed structures, hand laid track and switches and an operation scheme that keeps 3 guys busy. All I can say is that he must really like X2f's!
I'm glad I got the chance to see this wonderful layout and watch it perform flawlessly.
Horn hooks are fine, as are plastic wheels, btw. They both work just fine for many realistically operating layouts.
Realism? Anything sharper than a 60 inch radius curve in HO scale looks unrealistic to me anyway, so everybody has their tolerance for compromise. I don't look at couplers when running trains either, even when switching.
But I think the key for smooth operations for normal-length cars is to have body mounted couplers.
BRAKIE David,Horn Hooks (X2F) coupler works quite well when properly mounted.They was needed far more then the majority realizes simply because every manufacturer had their line of couplers that was completely incompatible with other couplers..While it is true KD was around very few modelers would buy them-why buy KD when the X2F works perfectly well was the question of the time. Best to buy Central Valley trucks so,your freight cars can roll more freely.. A lot of modelers judges the X2F but,those nasty truck mounted X2Fs.
David,Horn Hooks (X2F) coupler works quite well when properly mounted.They was needed far more then the majority realizes simply because every manufacturer had their line of couplers that was completely incompatible with other couplers..While it is true KD was around very few modelers would buy them-why buy KD when the X2F works perfectly well was the question of the time. Best to buy Central Valley trucks so,your freight cars can roll more freely..
A lot of modelers judges the X2F but,those nasty truck mounted X2Fs.
A long, long time ago in MR, a letter to the editor said something like this too. His point was that a lot of the X2F couplers in train sets were poorly cast, which caused a lot of problems. The best examples of the horn hook from higher quality equipment were unceremoniously tossed in the trash in favor of Kadees. While I'm sure this and your point about proper mounting are true, the X2F is still best suited for continuous running, and not "real" operation.
riogrande5761During my four long summers in Germany in the 1990s I watched and examined trains at every oportunity. From what I recall they all used a hook and eye coupler system which makes it difficult to model with an automatic coupler. It dosnt seem possibe to make an HO version of that so unless Europe adopts a US knuckle coupler system, I dont see how things will ever change or ever catch up.
It´s really hard to believe that with all those really advanced rail technology available in Europe, the railroads could not agree upon a common automatic coupling system in over 150 years! We are still on the same old screw/link coupling established in the 1850´s!
It's Kadee for me .
Russell
riogrande5761 Larry. This is a topic you and I, and probably quite a few a others, will have to agree to disgree on. Regarding horn hooks, you are among a small number of voices crying in the wilderness. Yes horn hooks are really that bad. The industry appears to verify since they dropped them like a hot potato as soon as the KD patent expired. That speaks volumes.
Larry. This is a topic you and I, and probably quite a few a others, will have to agree to disgree on. Regarding horn hooks, you are among a small number of voices crying in the wilderness. Yes horn hooks are really that bad. The industry appears to verify since they dropped them like a hot potato as soon as the KD patent expired. That speaks volumes.
Jim,Old heads like me knows and understands how well they worked and how bad they worked will depend on one's lack of knowledge on how to make those couplers work.
Sorry Jim,a lot of you young folks would have not made it in the 50/60s since one had to have a degree in tinkering just to get the best out of what we had. Even a Athearn car kit took more TLC to build then a Roundhouse car kit and there laid one of the traps for the X2F or KD coupler.
And by the way,Walthers still sells the X2F.
https://www.walthers.com/horn-hook-couplers-x-2f-pkg-12
With all this talk of couplers, I'm really surprised..no one mentioned the Mantua couplers.....rather unsightly looking, but they actually worked fairly well. Had a lot of those, before I even had horn-hook.....Must be an age thing Huh! They even have some for sale on e-bay...LOL.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/302046682918?lpid=82&chn=ps&ul_noapp=true
Take Care!
Frank