Uncoupling: Which is the lesser of two weevils?

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
1

A) Those unsightly coupler “hoses” that make hands-free magnetic uncoupling possible?

or

B) Clipping said unsightly hoses off and thus having to stick your big fat hand into the middle of the layout every thirty seconds to uncouple cars?

Me, I’m a pro-unsightly hose guy.

Opinions?

2

I vote for the hoses. [tup] Knuckles without are nice for photographs, but not practical for operations.

My two weevils.

3

You could use the big guy and the five finger crane it’s your railroad after all.

4

Leave the hoses on -

Keep your (as you say) big fat hand away from the cars - use a wooden skewer to uncouple the cars - ( shish ka bab skewers work great. ) Place the pointed end between the couplers, press gently and…voila !

5

I agree, I leave the hoses on and then manually uncouple with a skewer or uncoupling tool.

6

I am by no means a coupler guru as it sounds of the members here are. So, I have some slightly sloppy mounts such that the odd “hose” ocasionally jams in the guard rail of a turnout on a curve,so I bend and trim them to suit. However, I absolutely do cut the “hoses” off entirely from the pilot couplers of my steamers. Otherwise, I think it looks goofy, and as a neophyte in photographing my layout and models, I need every advantage I can think of. [:I]

7

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve walked over to my fleet with a pair wire cutters in hand saying “I’M GONNA DO IT! I SWEAR I’M GONNA DO IT!” (still haven’t done it…[:(])
I got a pack of those KD air hoses to try and really like the way they look, but they look stupid with the trip pins hanging down.
I’m playing around with some neodyne magnets that are working pretty good and don’t break the bank, but I’m still on the fence about the whole thing.[%-)]

8

This concept gets the job done without using the “hoses” or track magnets.

http://dccuncoupling.com/

9

Leave the “hoses” on. Like you said they are hoses. Look at the couplers on a train as it goes by and the brake hoses look like the ones on your models. I use ONLY Kadee brand couplers with the “hoses” intact and magnets for uncoupling. Rix makes a hand held magnet tool for uncoupling in other places.

10

I think I’ll stick with the KD’s as I’m just a poor man. Besides skewer are just extra-long tooth picks and they work great.

11

My choice? Depends on the application:

  • Ordinary freight cars in loose-car service - Kadee couplers, hoses intact as designed.
  • Interior couplers between unit train cars - Kadee ‘K’ couplers without trip pins. (For younger modelers, ‘K’ couplers were meant to be uncoupled mechanically. They were superceded by the ‘MK’ and MKD’ magnetic couplers.)
  • Passenger cars in fixed-consist service - detachable drawbars (similar to loco-tender connections.)
  • Passenger cars which need to be uncoupled, and locomotives - Kadee couplers with the trip pins reversed. (My locomotives don’t have ‘cowcatcher’ pilots, so there’s plenty of clearance under the pilot beam.)

Since some uncoupling has to take place where hands or skewers would be awkward or impossible to use, I prefer to keep the magnetic uncoupling feature intact.

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

12

On my railway, I still consider using skewers or Rix Uncouplers as falling under the Big-Fat-Hand-Into-The-Layout category (even though I have both).

But then, I also send the Big Hook out everytime there is a derailment – an annoying discipline to be sure, but it encourages me to build better track!

13

Frankly, I dislike both solutions. But the obviously fake hoses are the lesser weevil. I don’t want to worry about adding scenery, detail, and structures that might cause unpleasant consequences when my 0-5-0 is not quite as accurate as I would like. And because the 0-5-0 and the accompanying shirt sleeves don’t deal with high altitudes (60" or so high layout) nearly as well as magnets. The “high line” location is driven by surveys showing that optimum track routing would result in passing over top the model workbench.

my thoughts

Fred W

14

think i`m in the minority here but have removed all the “hoses” and use skewers to uncouple.

can still use “delayed uncoupling” for industries that are a bit hard to reach although with a maximum bench width of 15 inches this does not happen very often.

15

Minority or not, I couldn’t give a toss. I’ve removed the trip pins from all my Kadees. To my mind, they look nothing like brakepipe hoses, and the magnetic uncoupling feature is over-rated. So off they go.

Mark.

16

I’ve cut all the trip pins off my fleet of 350+ cars and 40 locomotives. It started when I discovered cars could not couple to the front of my locos because of their snow plows. Having decided that the pins didn’t really look much like hoses anyway, the pins were removed. I have absolutely no regrets for this decision.

So it’s up to you. Lots say “don’t take them off” while others say “remove 'em”. Ultimately, the choice is yours. I say “go for it.” [:)]

17

If I was to start over again I would use the seargent engineering couplers. They look and operate way better than the KDs. Coupling on curved track and oncoupling with a little magnet on a stick from overhead. They dont self center and look like a real coupler. I supose if you had a deep layout thats hard to reach it would be hard to uncouple. Plus haveing 200+ cars and 50+ locos it would get expensive changing now.

www.sergentengireering.com

Check them out. You will be impressed.

18

Small typo in URL. It is:

http://www.sergentengineering.com/

Cool stuff!

19

I removed all of the trip pins from my equipment. I just cannot ignore have fake they look andhow many problems the pin causes.

20

Normally, I just keep the trip hoses. But my Circus train project involves Accurail flats, and I’ve found it easier to asembnle the couplers and leave the pins off. I like the skewer ideas, but someone at the club pointed out that BEACUSE they’re really big toothpicks, and HAVE been used as such by certain members of said club, and didn’t trust them.