EVERYBODY has a 'bottom line' - what they are willing to pay for any given item.
Kadee - for manufacturing.
Manufacturers - when using someone elses product.
You - when spending your money.
CHOICES, CHOICES!
You want Kadees? Buy em. ($.75ea - Cheep). Or, is it you just want them for FREE?
(They come on InterMountain cars, not Athearn).
Medina1128 wrote:To borrow a phrase from some younger modelers; KADEES ROCK!! I still have cars with the Kadees that I installed on them in 1982!! And they're still going strong. I've had to replace a couple of springs, that's it. I've NEVER had anything fail.
I have some pinless Kadee K couplers (salvaged, with permission, from another modeler's scrap box when he converted to MK's in the early '60's) that still perform as designed. I use them as 'inside' couplers on cuts that aren't intended to be broken up - they push-together couple just fine, and aren't affected by track magnets.
I have a few early MK-4 couplers, still in service on cars I built shortly after my choice of prototype became set in concrete. Except for a few knuckle spring losses, they have performed well for 40+ years of nearly continuous service.
I have MKD-5/10 couplers on kitbashes that started life as Athearn BB kits (and still have the Athearn frames at the ends) which have been in service since the early '80's. A couple of 'heritage' (club heralds) BB cars have had them even longer.
A high percentage of my freight cars have truck-mounted MKD-6 couplers which are actually body mounted! Four wheel cars, just like Thomas's, "Troublesome trucks."
If you get the impression that I insist on using Kadee couplers, you're right!
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
hdtvnut wrote: Simon, the couplers had coil springs. Aside from some being missing, this isn't my primary complaint. The centering springs are not accurate out of the box, and the cars mostly won't couple together on a straight without guidance from a tool. The springs can take an even worse set if the cars are left on a curve. These couplers also are not very sturdy and a minor impact can spring one, trashing it.Gandy Dancer, the car that is too high is the 9039 Vista Dome Coach. I had to use KD's with underset heads to make this car work, and the heads are still a little high.Manufacturers seem incompetent when it comes to passenger car couplers. Those on my Bachmann heavyweights (articulated with lever arms) had too much vertical play. I decided to replace them with body-mounted draft boxes since I had adequate track radii. The articulation scheme used by later Rivarossi and Walthers cars works better, but not with couplers having plastic centering springs.The 4 wheel trucks on these cars roll reasonably well. The 6 wheel trucks on some Walthers heavyweights I bought about a year ago have a lot of friction, and I tried lube and tuning without much luck. The Branchline heavyweights have the best trucks I've seen yet, as well as the best detail. Of course, the detail stuff is pretty delicate and I had to learn to handle them with care.Hal
Simon, the couplers had coil springs. Aside from some being missing, this isn't my primary complaint. The centering springs are not accurate out of the box, and the cars mostly won't couple together on a straight without guidance from a tool. The springs can take an even worse set if the cars are left on a curve.
These couplers also are not very sturdy and a minor impact can spring one, trashing it.
Gandy Dancer, the car that is too high is the 9039 Vista Dome Coach. I had to use KD's with underset heads to make this car work, and the heads are still a little high.
Manufacturers seem incompetent when it comes to passenger car couplers. Those on my Bachmann heavyweights (articulated with lever arms) had too much vertical play. I decided to replace them with body-mounted draft boxes since I had adequate track radii. The articulation scheme used by later Rivarossi and Walthers cars works better, but not with couplers having plastic centering springs.
The 4 wheel trucks on these cars roll reasonably well. The 6 wheel trucks on some Walthers heavyweights I bought about a year ago have a lot of friction, and I tried lube and tuning without much luck.
The Branchline heavyweights have the best trucks I've seen yet, as well as the best detail. Of course, the detail stuff is pretty delicate and I had to learn to handle them with care.
Hal
Marlon
See pictures of the Clinton-Golden Valley RR
hdtvnut wrote:Just got the HO Empire Builder passenger set. Most too low by a small amount. The dome car, too high...
Most too low by a small amount. The dome car, too high...
In HO,, when it comes to either a kit or ready to run,, I think of the purchase as merely "Parts" until it has gone through "My carshop"........period..........If you put those trucks on a small mirror and tilt the mirror back and forth,,and watch that junk hobble back and forth,,,you will quickly see the """qUalIty""" of the wheelsets.....At least those the wheelsets can be used in a scrapyard scene.....The couplers??? most are not even good for that.....I would rather see kits come without this junk at all..I would rather buy my own steel wheeled trucks and draft gear couplers..I want my HO equipment to look and run like a real car..
People have asked me on numerous occasions as what train to buy for their grandchildren...My reply is that a good quality starter set will give them everything to get started,, but allot of the cheap junk has to be rebuilt to operate properly.....and the track should be properly secured to a surface.....I have looked at numerous starter sets in the stores and have seen couplers and wheels that have fallen off the cars.....Maybe instead of starter sets, they should be called "beginners kits"
There is the old saying "ya get what ya pay for""" well,, when it comes to allot of train stuff, that is not the case....Some companies have better quality comtrol than others,,,,Kadee couplers mounted on draft gear are my choice.....and steel wheels.
The cars with the couplers mounted on the trucks --well-- they are Just like my other toy trains; my Lionel 027s,, Hardly what I would call a model..
BDT
JBB wrote: Master of Big Sky Blue wrote: Safety Valve wrote: Im beginning to discriminate in future rolling stock purchases based on what I call the "Hassle factor" the fixing of shoddy work. The less potential for it the more likely I will buy that boxcar.Thats why I only buy items in kit form. That way any shoddy work you have to fix is your own, and better yet, you don't have to pay for it.What gets me is I am told that model train cars are coming Ready to Run because they are just to hard. The thing that insults my intelegence is the cars that are being offered, blue box style kits. Now of these were cars that were offered in kit form in the old Ambroid style I would see a legitimate complaint. But for crying out loud. Shake the box and it comes out built almost. While I am personally seeking craftsman style kits because I enjoy the challenge. Making shake the box style kits ready to run only increases the costs of said car while creating the potential for lots of frustration on the part of the modeler. I also feel that ready to run also removes alot of the core values of what this hobby is about leading to the increasing presence of people who's layouts appear in magazines that basicly follow the priciple. "I have alot of money so I hired Joe' Amazing Custom Layouts for Every space to build my layout for me". I find such a thing insulting and it degrades the work of people who actually build their layouts.JamesJames ,I can only add right on! Your post and the one from Kadee are some of the best things I've read on this board. We've all got a right to do things the way we want, and if all you're inclined to do is run RTR equipment, fine, but your missing one of the most interesting and rewarding parts of the hobby if you don't build some of your own stuff.As far as quality goes, we model railroaders are saps. How long have we put up with poor quality items that have to be corrected after we buy them. How many of you have got scrap boxes full of rotten couplers that wouldn't have a prayer of working, and another set of boxes full of wheel sets that had to be replaced because they wouldn't make it around the layout once on a good day without derailing. How many beginners have been discouraged because they didn't understand or weren't told that that so called RTR item really needed some aftermarket addon items if it was to work properly. Why don't we have quality items like the extensive line of trucks that Central Valley offered? And don't tell me price. The prices people pay for those items on ebay or swap meets show that there is a market willing to pay big bucks for quailty. And it's not production costs either. Somehow Kadee has made quality trucks and wheel sets for close to half a century in the good old USAThis isn't a new trend. Every old timer can remember the heart break of those beautiful brass locomotives that looked great, but wouldn't run as good as the tyco train set items (And no NWSL to save us back then!)I want to add a big note of thanks to Kadee. I've been buying their products for over 40 years now. They've stood behind everything they've ever made. Stuff is properly engineered, fits, and most importantly works, not most of the time, but all of the time. Thanks Kadee for a great line of products which are still made in the USA by people who care about our hobby!JBB
Master of Big Sky Blue wrote: Safety Valve wrote: Im beginning to discriminate in future rolling stock purchases based on what I call the "Hassle factor" the fixing of shoddy work. The less potential for it the more likely I will buy that boxcar.Thats why I only buy items in kit form. That way any shoddy work you have to fix is your own, and better yet, you don't have to pay for it.What gets me is I am told that model train cars are coming Ready to Run because they are just to hard. The thing that insults my intelegence is the cars that are being offered, blue box style kits. Now of these were cars that were offered in kit form in the old Ambroid style I would see a legitimate complaint. But for crying out loud. Shake the box and it comes out built almost. While I am personally seeking craftsman style kits because I enjoy the challenge. Making shake the box style kits ready to run only increases the costs of said car while creating the potential for lots of frustration on the part of the modeler. I also feel that ready to run also removes alot of the core values of what this hobby is about leading to the increasing presence of people who's layouts appear in magazines that basicly follow the priciple. "I have alot of money so I hired Joe' Amazing Custom Layouts for Every space to build my layout for me". I find such a thing insulting and it degrades the work of people who actually build their layouts.James
Safety Valve wrote: Im beginning to discriminate in future rolling stock purchases based on what I call the "Hassle factor" the fixing of shoddy work. The less potential for it the more likely I will buy that boxcar.
Im beginning to discriminate in future rolling stock purchases based on what I call the "Hassle factor" the fixing of shoddy work. The less potential for it the more likely I will buy that boxcar.
Thats why I only buy items in kit form. That way any shoddy work you have to fix is your own, and better yet, you don't have to pay for it.
What gets me is I am told that model train cars are coming Ready to Run because they are just to hard. The thing that insults my intelegence is the cars that are being offered, blue box style kits. Now of these were cars that were offered in kit form in the old Ambroid style I would see a legitimate complaint. But for crying out loud. Shake the box and it comes out built almost. While I am personally seeking craftsman style kits because I enjoy the challenge. Making shake the box style kits ready to run only increases the costs of said car while creating the potential for lots of frustration on the part of the modeler. I also feel that ready to run also removes alot of the core values of what this hobby is about leading to the increasing presence of people who's layouts appear in magazines that basicly follow the priciple. "I have alot of money so I hired Joe' Amazing Custom Layouts for Every space to build my layout for me". I find such a thing insulting and it degrades the work of people who actually build their layouts.
James
As far as quality goes, we model railroaders are saps. How long have we put up with poor quality items that have to be corrected after we buy them. How many of you have got scrap boxes full of rotten couplers that wouldn't have a prayer of working, and another set of boxes full of wheel sets that had to be replaced because they wouldn't make it around the layout once on a good day without derailing. How many beginners have been discouraged because they didn't understand or weren't told that that so called RTR item really needed some aftermarket addon items if it was to work properly. Why don't we have quality items like the extensive line of trucks that Central Valley offered? And don't tell me price. The prices people pay for those items on ebay or swap meets show that there is a market willing to pay big bucks for quailty. And it's not production costs either. Somehow Kadee has made quality trucks and wheel sets for close to half a century in the good old USA
This isn't a new trend. Every old timer can remember the heart break of those beautiful brass locomotives that looked great, but wouldn't run as good as the tyco train set items (And no NWSL to save us back then!)
I want to add a big note of thanks to Kadee. I've been buying their products for over 40 years now. They've stood behind everything they've ever made. Stuff is properly engineered, fits, and most importantly works, not most of the time, but all of the time. Thanks Kadee for a great line of products which are still made in the USA by people who care about our hobby!
JBB
Sky Blue, I just finished a set of 40' reefers from Branchline, it took me some time and they were the first to recieve the Kaydee Whisker 148's they are a set of 4 that I purchased last year. In no way did I intend to give you or anyone the idea that merely buying RTR or Blue Box that I am avoiding the problems related to coupler testing against the gauge.
I do the kits that I can in the time that I need to do them. The RTR's I buy because they are well done, the Proto 8,000 gal tank cars for example.
It is my challenge physically to do some of the kits and am careful with my budget to pick just the rolling stock that I will enjoy and not waste money on. Then they get Metal wheels and Kaydees. Always have been, always will be an extra expense which I dont mind these last 10 years.
The piles of thrown away horn-hooks and failed kaydee look-alikes is mute testamony to some manufactors un-willingness to cough that extra dollar or two in cost to make the rolling stock. I see that some manufactors install kaydees at the factory and those are the ones that earn my loyalty.
Thank you Kaydee for posting here, it is much appreciated. I would like to see your company prosper and make the couplers long after I pass on because it is truly a great thing to have in this hobby. Ive managed to put a pound of TE on the couplers and they have withstood it. I dont know how much more they can take without failing. But certainly MUCH more than the crappy plastic wanna-be's.
I think it is a sad thing to continually crank out a plastic POS that will fail instead of spec'ing a Kaydee from the start.
spikejones52002 wrote: You think you have problem in "HO".Try "G".Every manufacture includes a very stupid Hook & Loop coupler that matches everyone else.They can not get together and supply a knuckle coupler that works with anyone else. Most of the time they do not work with different manufacture date of there own.The biggest U.S. supplier of "G" gauge RR equiptment can not pull a couple of cars up a slight grade without parting and quickly the pin fails altogether.The biggest supplier of replacement knuckles looks like two snakes fighting.Another complaint of mine is why do ALL model RR equiptment put the coupler on the trucks? NO railroad ever put the coupler on its truck.
You think you have problem in "HO".
Try "G".
Every manufacture includes a very stupid Hook & Loop coupler that matches everyone else.
They can not get together and supply a knuckle coupler that works with anyone else. Most of the time they do not work with different manufacture date of there own.
The biggest U.S. supplier of "G" gauge RR equiptment can not pull a couple of cars up a slight grade without parting and quickly the pin fails altogether.
The biggest supplier of replacement knuckles looks like two snakes fighting.
Another complaint of mine is why do ALL model RR equiptment put the coupler on the trucks? NO railroad ever put the coupler on its truck.
Well, I have been doing G gauge out back since 1989,(and HO in the basement) and I use Kadees out tack also. And I body mount them. Takes a little more effort but it is worth it.
I do have large radius track and switches out back thanks to Llagas Creek. Also IM has been installing Kadee couplers on their HO cars for a couple of years now.
Bob
Are the Walthers' passenger cars really fitted with McHenry's? Reason I ask, is that though I've had to replace all of my Walthers' cars with Kadees as a matter of course, I've got another passenger train from another mfgr that I've outfitted with McHenry's, simply because they fit the particular trucks, and I've had absolutely no problem with them.
Frankly, I really WONDER where Walthers is picking up their couplers--maybe at a Garage Sale, LOL?
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
Simple equation
Walthers RTR + 1 pack Kadee #5 = lot less $$$ than Kadee-fitted Walthers RTR.
I hope they don't start fitting them as standard.
Jon
Sweethome Chicago is now on Facebook
Sweethome Alabama is now on Facebook
Hudson Road is now on Facebook
my videos
my Railimages
Hello Group,
More than likely, the reason Walthers still uses McHeny couplers is that they still have a large supply left over that was purchased prior to McHenry selling out to Horizon.
To: jsoderq, the reason Kadee does not sell to more manufacturers is not a supply issue. We can, and do, supply tremendous amounts of couplers to several manufacturers. Our production rates for certain couplers can meet any makers requirements. (I dare not tell you how many #5 couplers we've produced over the years.) The biggest isssues are costs and their bottom lines. A number of manufacturers buy our couplers because they know the "majority" of modelers want to have Kadee couplers on their models. However, a number of manufacturers care only about their bottom line and not the desires of most modelers. We do, however, understand because we have to deal with our own bottom lines and that's why we can not offer our couplers for less than it costs to make them. Also note that 100% of the products we make are made right here in our own shop in White City, Oregon, USA and we pay a decent living wage to our employees. However, we do not, and I'd guess most people don't, know the the actual economic comparison of Pacific Rim (China) cost of living to ours.
Sam Clarke
Kadee Quality Products
I recall buying kits in blue box for 2.00, some for 1.50 retail. Now they are about 10.00 for the exact SAME kits.
Come back and ask me about rising prices one more time. In the mean time I spend more on the couplers from Kaydee than ever before. I dont mind; I never had a kaydee fail... yet.
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
jsoderq wrote:For the record the reason manufacturers do not use Kadees is Kadee cannot supply a large enough quantity. The are made by a rather involved process. It is not just a matter of turning up the machine faster.
I'm sure there's truth in what you say, but if Walthers, or Stewart, or Athearn, etc.... would make a call, don't you think they could eventually "crank it up" to produce the quantity needed?
Jim
spikejones52002 wrote:Another complaint of mine is why do ALL model RR equiptment put the coupler on the trucks? NO railroad ever put the coupler on its truck.
I think it has to do with tight trainset radii, particularly in G scale. If the couplers were body mounted, cars would yank each other over due to all of the overhang on sharp curves without some kind of swing arm arrangement. It's probably just cheaper and simpler to mount them on the trucks.
Nelson
Ex-Southern 385 Being Hoisted
Well, Ive a stack of Kaydee 148 whiskers waiting for the crappy ones to fail. (And they will) It's too bad the manufactors refuse to invest a few dollars and install Kaydees right from the factory.
I did notice a few RTR cars coming out of the factory that required some further adjustment to pass the coupler gauge. I dont know if we are suffering from the China Factory worker getting tired at the toys and just jamming them into the shipping containers or what.. but the quality control just does not seem to be present. I have to pass or fail a car at home on the workbench.
hdtvnut wrote: Just got the HO Empire Builder passenger set from my LHS. The cars are nice; however: Walthers CONTINUES to put lousy McHenry couplers on their premium cars. In about half the cases, these would not couple together because of being off center. The heights were off, too. Most too low by a small amount. The dome car, too high and wouldn't work with the others. Baggage car front, too low for an engine correctly adjusted to hold onto it.Thrown away and replaced with KD's. On the dome car, had to use undersets, since there is no way to adjust these trucks.I've heard reasons why car makers don't buy KD's, but I just don't buy it; give us a break. And institute some actual product inspection.Hal
Just got the HO Empire Builder passenger set from my LHS. The cars are nice; however:
Walthers CONTINUES to put lousy McHenry couplers on their premium cars. In about half the cases, these would not couple together because of being off center. The heights were off, too. Most too low by a small amount. The dome car, too high and wouldn't work with the others. Baggage car front, too low for an engine correctly adjusted to hold onto it.
Thrown away and replaced with KD's. On the dome car, had to use undersets, since there is no way to adjust these trucks.
I've heard reasons why car makers don't buy KD's, but I just don't buy it; give us a break. And institute some actual product inspection.
I wish the manufacturers would use KD couplers but,I don't see that happening because the KD coupler is a AFTER MARKET coupler..I think there is 1 or 2 manufacturers that uses KDs though.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Hal, I agree that Kadees are the best way to go. However the height issue is surely just bad design of the coupler box location rather than the fault of the coupler, you said yourself that you had to put under-set Kadees as you could not adjust the truck.
Just out of curiosity were these McHenry couplers with the metal coil knuckle spring? I have used these as a drop in replacement for some IHC horn-hooks on a cheap passenger consist I put together and these work very well. The ones with the plastic filament return spring are dreadful.
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
hdtvnut wrote: Thrown away and replaced with KD's. Hal
The right choice. Were they really McHenry's, or were they Accumates? Not that it matters, really. Even Red Sox and Yankees fans can agree on Kaydees.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.