Re: Coupler thoughts



I rather agree with you about a drop-in shank; personally I'd like to see short, medium, and long standard shanks (or even just shorter and longer). 

In the meantime though, I'm not letting that hold me up from improving the look of my fleet. On a whole train, the overall look is worth the effort, to my eye.

-Drew McCann

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019, 7:19 PM Dusty <> wrote:
No on the 705 with the current shank. Give me a 705 coupler to effortlessly retro fit most existing equipment before making the 705 the defacto std. 714s and 705s aren't ALWAYS the best coupling and uncoupling mates. Two 705s can be pretty tight for 'picking'.

The first '705' could/should have been a drop in for 714 compatible boxes. I just assembled a 714 and melt welded the split knuckle parts together. Guess what? They still pivot and center (oops, and bounce). So anyone with a Blackstone piece of equipment, a screw driver, a knife, one right thumb and one left thumb could improve the appearance of that engine or car with a drop in. Let's see? If half of the existing Blackstone cars got drop in 705s at $2.75+- a car how much $ is that? Plus the lost spring replacement revenue! 

Look at the HO 'scale' coupler model. Narrow box for scratch builder and such. But a #5 box compatible choice for existing applications. Why not Hon3.

Dusty Burman 

Join to automatically receive all group messages.