Hi, my question is this: I have a variety of different traincars, I want to convert to a knuckle coupler. Is there a universal? which one should I consider? Any help will greatly be appreciated.
Gidday, [#welcome] to the forum.
Have a look here…
http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/coupler.htm
…while I also use Bachmann EZ mate MK II’s…
http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/products.php?act=viewCat&catId=87
…Kadee’s are now my standard replacement for all the other clones.
Hope this helps .
Cheers, the Bear.
I recommend changing to KaDees also.
Since you have a variety, Here is KaDee’s own conversion chart {simply find your maker, type of equipment and then the matching KaDee coupler # to it}:
http://www.kadee.com/conv/holist.pdf
[8-|]
Since having been in this hobby off and on since around 1960, the only coupler that I will use anymore, after having expermineted with most of them, are Kadees. I am firmly commited to Kadees as I feel they are the best there is. I buy the #5s in bulk packages of 20-25 pairs. I have also used others of Kadee’s numbered couplers, where they were the recommended type, for the application.
Not sure just what mix of cars you have. Some of the conversions may be “Talgo” style couplers (coupler truck mounted). You can use the Kadee in the “swing arm” or better yet convert to body mount. Simply cut off the coupler “arm/ extension” from the truck and mount the #5 kadee in it’s own box. Some minor cutting, filing or shimming w/ styrene is usually all that needed. Body mount is far superior in operation and coupler height. While at it, it is good idea to get the height gauge http://kadee.com/htmbord/page205.htm and the 2/56 tap and drill set http://kadee.com/htmbord/page246.htm.
The question is not “which coupler to use,” it’s “which Kadee coupler to use.” Though a few prefer the Sargent couplers, which are also a top-quality product, Kadee remains the standard.
I personally use the #58 coupler for most installations. These are drop-in compatable with most cars and engines produced today, and I use them even when upgrading rolling stock I bought back in the 1950s. The head on the #58 is closer to prototypical size than that of the venerable #5. Since the #58 was introduced after I’d started converting old horn-hooks to Kadee, I have a mixture of #5 and #58 on my layout. They play well together, with no issues.
For some installations, Kadee makes specialty couplers, like long-shank, short-shank, overset and underset. The links in earlier posts will help you find those when you need them.
Oh, one more thing. Get the Kadee coupler mounting gauge. This simple gadget will help you mount the couplers so they are correctly set up to interact with other cars and trackwork.
Which type(s) of couplers are on the cars now?
1 Like
Mr Besley, where do you get that the O.P. is stating that he is only asking about Kadee Couplers from the above post?
I don’t believe that I implied that at all. My point is that there are Kadees, and there are Kadee wannabees.
For HO, the quality brand is KaDee. They make couplers for just about any HO car/loco ever made.
Per se, there is no “universal” coupler. However, KD # 5s fit the vast majority of freight cars out there.
The KD website has conversion tables that will make your choice easier and quicker.
By the way, there are other knuckle coupler offerings out there, and some folks will be quite happy with them.
However, I have yet to hear of someone that regretted having KDs, and I’ve been playing with HO trains since 1960.
KaDees for sure. I’ve tried them all and came back to KaDee for lots of reasons. They stay connected better, have real coil springs for the knuckle, many different versions for installs, use mostly metal vs plastic, good tools to work with, etc.
I do not like putting any coupler in the truck even though they make a version that will fit into some. Building custom shims for a #5 coupler box is in the long run a much better way to go.
Richard
Until very recently, the last several years I have had minimal involvement with model railroading. I finished my layout and showed it once in awhile, but that was it, nothing new and I didn’t keep current at all. Back then, the Kadee #5 was the top standard for couplers and they had just come out with a close to “scale” coupler, the #58.
What surprises me, is that after all these years, the Kadee #5 is still the main coupler. I’ve even noticed that a lot of new releases now come with Kadee #5’s as standard equipment. What I wonder is why hasn’t there been a move to a more scale coupler like the #58?
Pirate,
There are some reasons why we have not seen the ‘masses’ move to a ‘scale’ coupler:
- The vertical tolerances are much tighter, and cars tend to become uncoupled due to coupler head height, and rough track.
- Appearance - the #58 looks bad with that ‘hole’ in the side.
- Lack of offset versions for special mounting applications. Sam from Kadee gave a clinic at the Naperville RPM last October. He stated that Kadee was not going to do offset shank variations as the scale coupler head was too small to allow for either an overset or underset shank without making the shank/coupler head interface look ‘clunky’(my term).
The last bullet sort of sums up my reasoning for my staying with the standard Kadee couplers. They operate fine, there are many mounting options, and while not perfect in the ‘looks’ department - They sure are better than the competition! My ‘standard’ now is the #148 ‘whisker’ coupler for most applications.
Jim
I use some. But the number 5 is popular more than for the head size, it’s also the box fit, spring and way it works to uncouple. Anyway, back to the head size, for long rolling stock and locomotives the effect of elevation changes(intended or unintended) normally has a negative effect on coupler height making them too high or too low. A scale sized head is smaller and so slips under or over the other coupler more easily, especially if it too is a small(scale size) coupler head. This effect is also more evident with longer trains where there is a lot of coupler pressure on the knuckles.
Since we run long cars and multiple long locomotives on long trains, operational reliability of a coupling is the first priority. If one of our 20 to 30’ trains uncouples on a grade then derails and other unpleasant things can happen.
All of our rolling stock is taken through an inspection procedure and recorded. You’d be surprised how many rtr cars have incorrect coupler height and/or bad wheelsets. We try to keep our coupler height to within .020"(+/-0.010") of the centerline gauge.
Here is where you can get some of the KaDee supplies:
The venerable #5:
http://www.wholesaletrains.com/Detail.asp?ID=4800
THe assembled #5:
http://www.wholesaletrains.com/Detail.asp?ID=4797
Couler height guage:
http://www.wholesaletrains.com/Detail.asp?ID=200456792
Insulated coupler height guage:
http://www.wholesaletrains.com/Detail.asp?ID=200456792
A whole passel of KaDee stuff {most of what they make} on theses pages:
http://www.wholesaletrains.com/Search2.asp?Search=KaDee&scale=HO&Submit2=++Search++&offset=0
OR
You can get them here:
http://www.modeltrainstuff.com/HO-Scale-Couplers-s/1467.htm
Just trying to be extra helpful! [;)]
[8-|]
DEPENDSON YOUR DESIRE FOR REALISM AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU HAVE .GO TO LOCAL HOBBY SHOP ANDSEE ALL THE VARIETIES. THE ONLY REALISTIC ONES ARE “SERGENT” COUPLERS- I HAND ASSEMBLE THEM BUT IT TAKES SOME PRACTICE -THEN THEY ARE GREAT- BUT MUST BE HAND COUPLED AND UNCOUPLED
MDF
Biggest problem with Sergents for me is that they’re not compatible with anything but Sergents.
Depends on your concept ofofelig I rebuild 40’s to 69’ s kits and use only Sergent couplers work well are exact scale but only for real thing modelers - take skill to assemble or u buy preassembled … Take a look … No funny parts hanging down- very cool. Love them but not for average plastic models… Waste of $.
What happened to the OP?
1 Like
Hi,
I suspect the OP got his answer (KDs being the way to go) and didn’t care to get enmeshed in conversations of exotic couplers or “more than I want to know” stuff.
Oftentimes we (including me) regulars give newbies with basic questions a whole lot more information than they need or want or even can understand.
When I jumped into DCC a few years ago, I was always grateful to the guys on the Forum that kept their answers to my elementary questions on my elementary level.
Of course that is often very hard to do…