Can 3 rail couplers be made more realistic? A smaller operating knuckle coupler perhaps that is still compatible with the huge claws we have now. Has this ever been attempted?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Originally Posted by PAUL ROMANO:
Can 3 rail couplers be made more realistic? A smaller operating knuckle coupler perhaps that is still compatible with the huge claws we have now. Has this ever been attempted?
Yes, by MTH. However, the design issue was the output current capability of the main board to properly and consistently operate the O Scale size operating coupler. MTH has successfully brought the operating "scale size" coupler to the HO market, quite some years ago.
At least one forum member has used the coil from a lionel coupler to open a Kadee coupler remotely. I know of another person who has wound his own coils to open On3 Kadees using DCC.
It can be done but I am not sure any of the 3 rail manufacturers would be motivated to offer them. Something better suited to a niche outfit.
Pete
This subject has been discussed many, many times - all over the O-gauge hobby, not just on various forums.
They can't be both smaller and still large at the same time. They have to fit. Each other.
Any size modification that would still allow interaction between the "old" and the "new" would have to be marginal, and therefore not worth the effort.
I made peace with this years ago, and I never have understood how the middle rail and the big flanges - and those swinging pilots! - are accepted, but the larger couplers are not.
Of course, these may be a problem for you too.
Functionally - and visually, except for their size - the standard 3RO coupler is more prototypical than are Kadees.
Hey, they are better than Marx and Std. Gauge Flyer "one-way" couplers, Flyer link
couplers, or Marx tilt (and all the brands of tab and slot...or worse, like Unique)
couplers......At least most of the stuff you buy in three rail today, from whomever,
will couple with each other. Now if they would just standardize the bleeping track and
several other things....
Originally Posted by D500:
This subject has been discussed many, many times - all over the O-gauge hobby, not just on various forums.
They can't be both smaller and still large at the same time. They have to fit. Each other.
Funny how Kadee #805 couplers seem to couple just fine with most manufacturer's big "claw" couplers.
Any size modification that would still allow interaction between the "old" and the "new" would have to be marginal, and therefore not worth the effort.
Did I mention that the Kadee #805 couplers seem to work just fine with most manufacturer's "claw" couplers?
I made peace with this years ago, and I never have understood how the middle rail and the big flanges - and those swinging pilots! - are accepted, but the larger couplers are not.
Of course, these may be a problem for you too.
Functionally - and visually, except for their size - the standard 3RO coupler is more prototypical than are Kadees.
Well, prototypical in mechanical function but, certainly not size. Also, the big "claw" couplers generally must be bashed together in order to get them to stay closed/latched. With Kadee couplers that isn't necessary, and I've never had a Kadee coupler "come open", even on very long/heavy trains.
I wish MTH or Lionel would deliver a scale electro coupler. I have converted everything to kadees and I think it is one of the best ways to improve the appearance of any car or engine. Completely worth the time invested IMO. I have installed many Atlas 2 Rail electro couplers on Lionel tenders. They work but they need fine tuning. I hope that MTH or Lionel get it right, if they ever do release such a product. I installed two of the Atlas scale electro couplers on my TMCC crane and it looks great!
I had hoped the Lionel Vision Line would have scale electro couplers, but they went with the lobster claws.
BTW, I could not agree more with HW, that Kadee couplers are simply marvelous!
Andy Edelman talked about that at York back in April. He asked for a show of hands on how many were really gung-ho on an electronic Kadee-style coupler. No one raised a hand. There were only a few of us in the audience who were even using Kadees. I think it's a matter of market demand. If "electronic Kadees" came with the engines I doubt I'd even use them as I didn't use the electronic couplers much when I was running hi-rail couplers.
Originally Posted by AGHRMatt:
Andy Edelman talked about that at York back in April. He asked for a show of hands on how many were really gung-ho on an electronic Kadee-style coupler. No one raised a hand. There were only a few of us in the audience who were even using Kadees. I think it's a matter of market demand. If "electronic Kadees" came with the engines I doubt I'd even use them as I didn't use the electronic couplers much when I was running hi-rail couplers.
An excellent point Matt!
I remember when Atlas can out with their "scale size" Electro-Coupler, many, many years ago. It was designed to with with Lionel TMCC equipped models, but was a complete failure mechanically, since it took EXTREME pressure to close & lock the knuckle, which then later sometimes broke anyway.
The MTH "scale size" electro-coupler looked and worked great on test, but I'm obviously not sure the market is really there. I prefer the Kadee couplers anyway, especially the newer 700 series.
Originally Posted by Hot Water:
The MTH "scale size" electro-coupler looked and worked great on test, but I'm obviously not sure the market is really there. I prefer the Kadee couplers anyway, especially the newer 700 series.
At least to my old tired eyes, the MTH HO electro-coupler looks larger and bulkier than the good ol' warhorse Kadee No. 5 anyway.
Rusty
