I am switching all my couplers to a more realistic type

[unionpacificchuck]

I am switching all my couplers toa kadee 3118 "SF" shelf coupler. that way all the couplers will have working shelves on them and coupling will be much more realistic and easy to do.

[NeO6874]

I was under the impression that the type F coupler was used mainly on tank cars (where the coupler slipping, and puncturing the tank is possible in a derailment) whereas most other freight cars have type E couplers (Kadee #5/#58 series, as well as the 2x,3x,4x series)...

[cacole]

They're your trains and you can do whatever you please, but shelf type couplers are not used on all rolling stock.  They are required to be on tank cars that carry flammable or hazardous cargo to prevent the couplers from coming apart and puncturing the tank, but every other type of car I have seen still uses the standard coupler.

[bogp40]

Besides all that has mentioned, it's not a good idea to use shelf couplers on any long equipment or cars that have extended coupler boxes. Unless you have perfect trackwork and very gentile upeaseings and overeasings for your grades, you risk derailments from the coupler of one car lifting the truck up off the rails. Watch your Kadees during normal running and you will notice the knuckles side up and down where coupled going up and down grades or over irregular trackwork.

[BRAKIE]

Actually ALL tank cars have shelf couplers including the clay slurry and the corn syrup cars.

[Curmudgeon]

and short of a hook-and-loop, Kadees have to be THE most unprotoypical coupler devised.

Show me a prototype in NA that has a gold-painted 1958 Cadillac front coil spring laid horizontally on the side, and a fixed metal "air hose" without gladhands that hangs UNDER the coupler and not to the side......

[BRAKIE]

Even the "air hose" is in the wrong location.

[BRAKIE]

Actually ALL tank cars have shelf couplers including the clay slurry and the corn syrup cars.

 

 

That tank car doesnt have type F couplers.........so your statement is a little too encompassing.

David

 

David,That tank car is not in revenue service its coupled to a wooden box car for pete's shake.

I will stand firm on my statement.

[msowsun]

I model the 1950's. When did "shelf" couplers first appear on tank cars?

[Paul3]

Curmudgeon,
Hey, at least Kadees are knuckle couplers.    I'd say that in HO scale, hook and loops were the least realistic, followed closely by the X2F horn-hook.  Also worse than the Kadee in the realism dept. are the Accumate couplers on all the Atlas equipment these days.  Those don't even have a swiveling knuckle, they split right down the middle.

If I were to rank operable couplers for realism, I'd list 'em like this:
1). Sargeant (or Lincoln Pin...depends on your era).
2). Kadee "scale" couplers.
3). The plastic "scale" couplers by various manufacturers.
4). Kadee #5-type.
5). The plastic #5-type couplers by various manufacturers.
6). Accumate.
7). X2F.
8). Hook & Loop.

Paul A. Cutler III
************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
************

[Curmudgeon]

Curmudgeon,
Hey, at least Kadees are knuckle couplers.    I'd say that in HO scale, hook and loops were the least realistic, followed closely by the X2F horn-hook.  Also worse than the Kadee in the realism dept. are the Accumate couplers on all the Atlas equipment these days.  Those don't even have a swiveling knuckle, they split right down the middle.

If I were to rank operable couplers for realism, I'd list 'em like this:
1). Sargeant (or Lincoln Pin...depends on your era).
2). Kadee "scale" couplers.
3). The plastic "scale" couplers by various manufacturers.
4). Kadee #5-type.
5). The plastic #5-type couplers by various manufacturers.
6). Accumate.
7). X2F.
8). Hook & Loop.

Paul A. Cutler III
************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
************

 

Lincoln Pin?

Hopefully you don't mean "link and pin"?

Good read here: http://www.geocities.com/budb3/arts/tech/cuphist.html

with a quote:" No magnetic, operating coupler in HO has earned the right to be called scale. "

Now, if you mean Sergent, yes:  http://www.sergentengineering.com/

Followed by MDC, DeVore, and X2F (they are all one color......and no coil spring on the side), then Mantua (my standard because the nmra hates them), with ANY Kadee at the bottom of the list.

I get stuff in the shop with Kadees on them, I rip them off.

 In "0", I use operating Scale Models, followed by Monarch.

 

[Texas Zepher]

I am switching all my couplers toa kadee 3118 "SF" shelf coupler. ... will be much more realistic.

In real life, passenger cars cannot be coupled to tankers.  The shelf of the tanker's coupler will damage the walkways used to pass between the cars. 

[loathar]

I see shelf couplers on plastic pellet covered hoppers near me all the time.

[jeffrey-wimberly]

Most of the hoppers I've seen use a lower-shelf coupler whereas the tank cars use couplers that have both upper AND lower shelfs.

[Midnight Railroader]

 

Lincoln Pin?

Hopefully you don't mean "link and pin"?

No, no--the "Lincoln Pin" was introduced in 1809, but was discontinued in 1865.

[Paul3]

Curmudgeon,
Even tho' I can't find it now, I recall seeing someone selling so-called "Lincoln Pin" (brand name) couplers for 1800-era HO equipment.  And yes, they really worked.  A fellow member of my club (who models the 1800's) knew all about them when I asked him about it.  They were a cast white metal pocket with brass wire links and pins.  They may have even been compatible with a Kadee #5 box (but obviously didn't rotate).

Edit: Ok, I looked around the web a little more, and found that Tomar makes an HO "Link & Pin" coupler (but they aren't the "Lincoln Pin" brand): http://www.tomarindustries.com/A-6002.jpg

As for the rest of your post...  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!  Stop it, you're killing me!  An X2F and the hook and loop are more realistic than any Kadee???  (giggle)  Oh, man, that's some funny stuff.  I didn't know you were such a comedian. 

Let me put it this way: I agree that Kadee's are not true "scale" couplers, and knuckle springs are not realistic.  However, from 3 feet away, you probably can't see the spring (especially if it's blackened).  At the same time, there's no mistaking the X2F or the hook and loop coupler for even being close to realistic.

For operating couplers, the Sergent are the most realistic.  But Kadee's #58's are in second place.

Paul A. Cutler III
************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
************

[Curmudgeon]

Curmudgeon,
Even tho' I can't find it now, I recall seeing someone selling so-called "Lincoln Pin" (brand name) couplers for 1800-era HO equipment.  And yes, they really worked.  A fellow member of my club (who models the 1800's) knew all about them when I asked him about it.  They were a cast white metal pocket with brass wire links and pins.  They may have even been compatible with a Kadee #5 box (but obviously didn't rotate).

Edit: Ok, I looked around the web a little more, and found that Tomar makes an HO "Link & Pin" coupler (but they aren't the "Lincoln Pin" brand): http://www.tomarindustries.com/A-6002.jpg

As for the rest of your post...  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!  Stop it, you're killing me!  An X2F and the hook and loop are more realistic than any Kadee???  (giggle)  Oh, man, that's some funny stuff.  I didn't know you were such a comedian. 

Let me put it this way: I agree that Kadee's are not true "scale" couplers, and knuckle springs are not realistic.  However, from 3 feet away, you probably can't see the spring (especially if it's blackened).  At the same time, there's no mistaking the X2F or the hook and loop coupler for even being close to realistic.

For operating couplers, the Sergent are the most realistic.  But Kadee's #58's are in second place.

Paul A. Cutler III
************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
************

 

ANYTHING is more realistic than a Kadee.

Unless you can find me a NA Prototype with a gold-painted 1958 Cadillac front suspension coil spring tied to the side.

Only someone who has never seen a prototype coupler would think a Kadee was prototypical.

Even one of the folks who writes for Mentally Ret....ooops, I mean "MR" made the statement a while back that they were going to change out the factory operating drop-pin knuckle couplers (not H0) for the more prototypical-appearing Kadees.

I was ALMOST convinced in the early days that I could not be considered a serious model railroader unless I had expensive imported brass locomotives and Kadee couplers.

I found out winter of 75-76 first hand about those imported brass locomotives, and then took a hrad look at what else the magazine was trying to convince me to do.

 

NEVER shall I own a brass locomotive, or Kadee couplers.

Or, dcc.

As far as "Lincoln Pin", I've been around the hobby a couple of weeks now, and the only time I've seen that spelling is folks who haven't got any idea what the actual spelling is.

That doesn't mean someone, someplace, didn't make a model product and call it that for grins, but Sergent doesn't list anything close.

Pockets with chain links and pins are, in fact, "link and pin" couplings: "They were a cast white metal pocket with brass wire links and pins."

 

Those are link-and-pin couplings.

[Midnight Railroader]

And you guys think I'm harsh!

[cjcrescent]

ANYTHING is more realistic than a Kadee.

Unless you can find me a NA Prototype with a gold-painted 1958 Cadillac front suspension coil spring tied to the side.

Only someone who has never seen a prototype coupler would think a Kadee was prototypical.

 

KD's are more realistic than some others. But be that as it may, I use couplers on the basis of reliablity, NOT appearence. Most reliable has been the old mantua hook and loops. Realistic they ain't, but they are super reliable. If I could still get them I would. If you want the best realistic coupler, use dummys. They're truely scale and will not uncouple when joined. Trouble with them is, all uncoupling, and coupling has to involve picking the car up. This can lead to damage. KD's have been the next most reliable coupler around since the fifties. Why do you think its the de-facto standard? Why has every other manufacturer, except Sergeant, has copied the design? I don't believe its because of their appearence.

Even one of the folks who writes for Mentally Ret....ooops, I mean "MR" made the statement a while back that they were going to change out the factory operating drop-pin knuckle couplers (not H0) for the more prototypical-appearing Kadees.

Just because someone made a statement like that doesn't mean its technically true or even correct. He could well have been reffering to how a KD is a better coupler than the one he was replacing. Just because its in print, or on the internet doesn't mean its correct. It also could be a case of bad editing. Ever read National Enquirer, ?

I was ALMOST convinced in the early days that I could not be considered a serious model railroader unless I had expensive imported brass locomotives and Kadee couplers.

I found out winter of 75-76 first hand about those imported brass locomotives, and then took a hrad look at what else the magazine was trying to convince me to do.

NEVER shall I own a brass locomotive, or Kadee couplers.

Bad experience, I take it. Must have been a diesel. Until Overland/Samhongsa started importing diesels with good mechanisms, a brass diesel was a crap shoot. The gears and motors ALL needed replacing. Steamers were a different story. 99% of the time all they needed was a little lubing, and adjustment and as the advertisement for well known Taco Stand says, they were, "good to go". I have brass that dates back to the early 1960's and they are just as detailed, run as well, if not better than, and can outpull all of todays "plastic wonders" . They will definitely outlast them, and probably even me.

 

Or, dcc.

No one has brought this subject up. Its your choice to use or not use DCC. No one is questioning, or commenting on this. Whatever system you want to use is fine.

 

As far as "Lincoln Pin", I've been around the hobby a couple of weeks now, and the only time I've seen that spelling is folks who haven't got any idea what the actual spelling is.

That doesn't mean someone, someplace, didn't make a model product and call it that for grins, but Sergent doesn't list anything close.

Pockets with chain links and pins are, in fact, "link and pin" couplings: "They were a cast white metal pocket with brass wire links and pins."

Those are link-and-pin couplings.

I've been around a few weeks as well, (over 2300) and in the early days of modeling logging, pre 1900, etc. there was a coupler on the market called Lincoln's Pin Couplers. They were made of white metal, and were offered in both O and HO scales. Russ Simpson's link and pin couplers seem to me to be the best I ever used on my On3, (even though I no longer fool around in it).  

Just mine.

[BRAKIE]

Whoa! Talk about a uncalled for comment.Geesh!

 

davidmbedard,The tank car bottom shelf coupler  was mandated in 1970 for tank cars..

[jeffrey-wimberly]

ANYTHING is more realistic than a Kadee.

Unless you can find me a NA Prototype with a gold-painted 1958 Cadillac front suspension coil spring tied to the side.

Only someone who has never seen a prototype coupler would think a Kadee was prototypical.

Kadee's were not designed to be prototypical. They are semi-prototypical, in that they have an operation knuckle. As for the spring, if it's paintd black nobody's going to notice it unless they're looking for it. To say that a hook and loop coupler is more prototypical and looks better than a Kadee is pure hogwash! I've had trains with hook and loop couplers and they looked like s***! The Kadee number 5 is all I use and they work very well.

[BRAKIE]

Jeefery,Remember the great looking MDC coupler? No knuckle springs there!

[Hudson]

Does anyone here have experience with the "Sergent" products?

They look very nice, how about operation?

[jasperofzeal]

ANYTHING is more realistic than a Kadee.

Unless you can find me a NA Prototype with a gold-painted 1958 Cadillac front suspension coil spring tied to the side.

Only someone who has never seen a prototype coupler would think a Kadee was prototypical.

Even one of the folks who writes for Mentally Ret....ooops, I mean "MR" made the statement a while back that they were going to change out the factory operating drop-pin knuckle couplers (not H0) for the more prototypical-appearing Kadees.

I was ALMOST convinced in the early days that I could not be considered a serious model railroader unless I had expensive imported brass locomotives and Kadee couplers.

I found out winter of 75-76 first hand about those imported brass locomotives, and then took a hrad look at what else the magazine was trying to convince me to do.

 

NEVER shall I own a brass locomotive, or Kadee couplers.

Or, dcc.

As far as "Lincoln Pin", I've been around the hobby a couple of weeks now, and the only time I've seen that spelling is folks who haven't got any idea what the actual spelling is.

That doesn't mean someone, someplace, didn't make a model product and call it that for grins, but Sergent doesn't list anything close.

Pockets with chain links and pins are, in fact, "link and pin" couplings: "They were a cast white metal pocket with brass wire links and pins."

 

Those are link-and-pin couplings.

If you say anything is more realistic than a Kadee, then use a piece of gum to hold your train together.  If you don't like Kadee or any other knuckle-type coupler, then I suggest you spend some time designing a better coupler than what is currently offered in the market.  Who cares if a coupler is not realistic or has a spring on the side, FYI, this whole hobby can be unrealistic even if we try as we might to make it real.  Unless you have REAL tiny internal cumbustion engines in your locomotives, freight cars that earn REAL revenue, and REAL life on your layout (which is the most unreal aspect of the hobby), then I suggest you keep your holier than thou attitute in check and just do as the rest of us and enjoy the hobby for what it offers us.

[Curmudgeon]

If you say anything is more realistic than a Kadee, then use a piece of gum to hold your train together.  If you don't like Kadee or any other knuckle-type coupler, then I suggest you spend some time designing a better coupler than what is currently offered in the market.  Who cares if a coupler is not realistic or has a spring on the side, FYI, this whole hobby can be unrealistic even if we try as we might to make it real.  Unless you have REAL tiny internal cumbustion engines in your locomotives, freight cars that earn REAL revenue, and REAL life on your layout (which is the most unreal aspect of the hobby), then I suggest you keep your holier than thou attitute in check and just do as the rest of us and enjoy the hobby for what it offers us.

 

Or, paper clips.

Mantuas are not that hard to find (I find them, and install them), and they are dead reliable.

The "bad experience" was a Gem 0-4-0.

Brass PAINT on tin or whatever, held together with green industrial epoxy.

Front geared driver, frame was slotted, run it upside-down to run it in, gears come unmeshed as there was no loco weight to keep them meshed.

Not a good idea for longevity.

Wescott's era, wrote a page and a half commentary and sent it in.

Ignored.

Not purchased an MR since.

MDC couplers I mentioned, and are FAR more realistic than Kadees.

I can walk into a room with a layout and immediately spot Kadee or Kadee clones in use.

Belly-button couplers.

Like going to a car show and seeing a 32 roadster with a V-8 and the distributor in the back of the engine.

Don't need to look anymore.

Just walk on by.

On my current railroad, every coupler on over 130 pieces of rolling stock and 15 locomotives is a functional knuckle with a drop pin.

Bags of Kadee take-offs.

The reason for the dcc comment is the same....."belly-button".

Everybody has one.

I won't just "go along" with what someone preaches until I have checked it out, and I won't use it.

Hate to say "never", but you get the idea.

Either straight DC (first pack, if you will, was built with WWII surplus stuff...HUGE transformer, 5" plate Selenium Rectumfrier, 4" Ohmmite rheostat, B-29 toggle switches with the phoshor dots in the end, and it worked forover 30 years) or an alternative control.

With that alternative control, I can run on DC layouts, dcc layouts, wooden track, kitchen floor, and during power outtages.

And, haven't cleaned my track in over 15 years.

[SOU Fan]

Does anyone here have experience with the "Sergent" products?

They look very nice, how about operation?

I have heard that they work very nice.  The only thing that I have heard that people don't like is that you have to manually "line up" the couplers.  I will probably have these onmy layout when I get it built.

-Smoke

[Midnight Railroader]

The "bad experience" was a Gem 0-4-0.

And after that one experience, you never will buy another brass loco?

Man, you'd better hope you never get a lemon for a car, or you'll have to forego all cars, forever, and walk everywhere.

[on30francisco]

I use link and pin couplers by Hartford Products on my Large Scale logging line. Although they require the old 0-5-0 to operate, they are extremely reliable, true to scale, and very tolerant of sharp curves and variations in mounting heights and centering.

[jeffrey-wimberly]

The "bad experience" was a Gem 0-4-0.

And after that one experience, you never will buy another brass loco?

Man, you'd better hope you never get a lemon for a car, or you'll have to forego all cars, forever, and walk everywhere.

Sounds like he doesn't want to have a "bad experience" with what many others have had very few problems with. I've been using Kadee's for over 20 years without a problem, other than those of my own making.

[loathar]

Curmudgeon-I'll take those bags of old KD's off your hands if you don't want them. Beggers can't be prototype choosers.