Date   

Re: Couplers

lloyd lehrer
 

All I have ever used was picks with two exceptions one layout had sergents that needed magnets and one that had all perm mags under the tracks and electomags in some hard to see spots 

lloyd lehrer, (310)951-9097

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018, 5:43 PM LARRY KLOSE <lklose@...> wrote:
Re uncoupling, try those fuzzy toothpicks that now seem to be everywhere.
There was quite a discussion of this on the Sn3 list. I haven't tried them
on the Kadee 714's but they work great on the HO standard Kadees (which are
the universal standard in Sn3, also).  Push the little brush between the
knuckles twist a little and voila.  I'm cutting off all my uncoupling "glad
hands" in favor of this.  Some experimentation may be necessary--the brushes
come in several diameter and stiffness options.  I prefer the ones with a
little cover over the brush that comes off like a pen cap and can be put on
the other end to extend the handle.  These also have a wire core which seems
more durable than those with an integral plastic core.

I operate on a friend's HO layout frequently and I don't bother with his
Kadee magnet ramps any more.  I just bring my brushes.  They're good if you
get something between your teeth, too.  I keep a pack in my RR work apron
for when one wears out.

YMMV.

Larry





--
lloyd lehrer


Re: Couplers

LARRY KLOSE
 

Re uncoupling, try those fuzzy toothpicks that now seem to be everywhere.
There was quite a discussion of this on the Sn3 list. I haven't tried them
on the Kadee 714's but they work great on the HO standard Kadees (which are
the universal standard in Sn3, also). Push the little brush between the
knuckles twist a little and voila. I'm cutting off all my uncoupling "glad
hands" in favor of this. Some experimentation may be necessary--the brushes
come in several diameter and stiffness options. I prefer the ones with a
little cover over the brush that comes off like a pen cap and can be put on
the other end to extend the handle. These also have a wire core which seems
more durable than those with an integral plastic core.

I operate on a friend's HO layout frequently and I don't bother with his
Kadee magnet ramps any more. I just bring my brushes. They're good if you
get something between your teeth, too. I keep a pack in my RR work apron
for when one wears out.

YMMV.

Larry


Re: Couplers

John Stutz
 

Mark

As I tried to make clear: slinky action is intrinsic to the centering action of Kadee's and MicroTrains' designs of semi-scale split couplers. If you want to avoid it, you must prevent the coupler's longitudinal motion in the draft gear. This requires a solid pivot, or a dynamical equivalent.

I do not see how to achieve a solid pivot with these couplers, but I have not given it much thought. Jim Vail's heavier spring approach, which you brought up, should allow working of short light trains without much slinky action. However this approach puts more centering thrust on the couplers and makes it harder to open them when coupling.

Kadee's original centering design for their K and MK series couplers was dynamically similar to that in the 714. In the later production of these, they provided a short wire stub that fitted into the spring. This limited the amount of spring compression to the minimum needed for coupler swing, thus minimizing slinky action, without quite eliminating it. This might work for the 714s.

MicroTrains took up this matter as N-scalers moved toward prototype length trains. Their initial solution was a T-shank design with the spring inboard, followed by the reversed 714 style with the spring outboard. Both eliminate slinky action when pulling, by pulling the coupler against solid stops. But both are subject to slinky action when pushing. This is apparently the price of producing couplers that will couple reliably against the very light rolling resistance of N scale cars.

Total elimination of slinky action requires fixed coupler pivots. At this time we seem to be limited to the Kadee "scale" knuckle couplers, which are still oversize for circa 1900 designs, and Sargents' truly scale couplers.

Does anyone know of other alternatives?

On 10/12/2018 12:37 PM, Mark Kasprowicz wrote:
That makes sense. Is there a solution for it John?
Mark K


Re: Couplers

Climax@...
 

Now wooooogh there big fella. Ya all know that a martini is better shaken (bounced) than stirred. :)

-----Original Message-----
From: rick@urbaneagle.com
Sent: Oct 12, 2018 6:51 PM
To: HOn3@groups.io
Subject: Re: [HOn3] Couplers

I skippe much of this thread, but to curtail bounce, use Kadee retainer
springs in the caboose trucks or on whatever end car you are using.

Rick
> For me the bounce occurs when going down grade. Even with easy
rolling Blackstone trucks, the train bounces like a slinky going down
the 4%.




Re: Couplers

rick@...
 

I skippe much of this thread, but to curtail bounce, use Kadee retainer springs in the caboose trucks or on whatever end car you are using.

Rick

For me the bounce occurs when going down grade. Even with easy rolling Blackstone trucks, the train bounces like a slinky going down the 4%.


Re: Couplers

Jim Marlett
 

For me the bounce occurs when going down grade. Even with easy rolling Blackstone trucks, the train bounces like a slinky going down the 4%.

Jim Marlett
http://flatheaddrag.com/
http://jimmarlett.zenfolio.com/

On Oct 12, 2018, at 1:06 PM, John Stutz via Groups.Io <john.c.stutz=nasa.gov@groups.io> wrote:

Mark

This would work for short trains, but merely moves the bouncing section forward on long trains. The problem occurs where the drag of the trailing load overcomes the preload on the coupler springs, causing them to compress and allow the coupler to pull slightly out of the box. Thus the part of the train where drag slightly exceeds preload will expand and contract under varying drag. Aft of this section the coupler springs are fully extended. Ahead of it the coupler springs are fully compressed. The problem area moves up and down the train as the trailing load varies with grade and curve resistance.

This behavior is intrinsic to any coupler arrangement that allows the coupler to move in and out of its draft gear. Kadee's original couplers, still used in their logging cars, suffered from similar problems. MicroTrains' re-engineered "N-scale" split couplers shift the behavior, so it occurs while pushing rather than pulling. NMRA experiments conducted circa 1960 demonstrated that reliable operation of long model trains required that couplers be pivoted on fixed centers, that prevent longitudinal motion.

John Stutz

On 10/12/2018 06:55 AM, Mark Kasprowicz wrote:
Do I recall Jim Vail once submitting a solution to Kadee bounce by fitting two springs instead of one? Not sure how he did it but perhaps it was one spring inside the other, as they tend to do when in the packaging>
Mark K


Re: Couplers

Dale Buxton
 

Well John,

I avoided using the "Sergent" name to avoid any inkling of a chance of any copyright infringement. The word "Sharon" has been considered to be in the public domain since the Sharon patents have long ago expired. So I used Sharon in my coupler box description. That said, the name of Frank's coupler company is spelled "Sergent" not Sargent. The correct spelling of the name will enhance peoples web searches exponentially. Don't we all just love the foibles of the internet. LOL


Re: K-36 #487 in HOn3 - Headlight?

Russ Norris
 

I bought two of the 4 oz. bottles -- one clear and one red.  I couldn't figure out the difference from what was posted, so I decided to try them both.  Thanks for the tip.

Russ Norris

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 12:01 PM Bill Lugg <luggw1@...> wrote:
I found the liquid at http://www.skygeek.com/70104-l.html for about $3
less than MSC Direct and their shipping is about $2 less than MSCDirect.

It looks like this stuff is great for machining too.  I'm getting a
couple of bottles of the liquid, one for the modeling table downstairs
and one for the shop.  At $7.75 a bottle, you can't beat it.

Bill Lugg

On 10/11/2018 12:37 AM, Dale Buxton wrote:
> Larry,
>
> Several years ago I needed some more Boelube and could not find it on
> the PBL web site then either. I found it at a small aircraft
> construction suppler that specializes in Spruce Wood. (
> https://www.aircraftspruce.com ) I thought the connection was strange
> but they stocked both liquid and and stick form.  A 4 oz. bottle was
> reasonable in price (about $12 and the stick was about $4). I think I
> like the liquid better than the stick. Which reminds me, I need to
> order some more.
>
>
> I just did a quick search for the stuff and found it at  MSC Direct.
> They have a better price point and always have really fast delivery times!
>
> Dale Buxton
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 9:10 PM LARRY KLOSE <lklose@...
> <mailto:lklose@...>> wrote:
>
>     Re drilling and hazards to the model from parts falling off, PBL (Sn3
>     Specialist) sells or sold a product called Boelube for lubricating
>     drills.
>     Developed by Boeing, it helps by enhancing cutting speed and
>     keeping the
>     work piece cooler.  I don't see it on the web site but maybe that's an
>     oversight.  Try calling to see if it's still available.  PBL part
>     no. 800.
>     This is an industrial product so it may no longer be available in
>     small
>     quantities.
>
>     P-B-L.com;707-462-7680.
>
>     Ask Joe Melhorn who recently posted about drill speed.  In the
>     course of an
>     LED and decoder install for me he recently drilled some very
>     delicate light
>     castings soldered to one of my models and as I recall, he used a
>     pretty high
>     speed.  Nothing fell off.
>
>     Can't comment on the best route for the wiring.
>
>     Larry
>
>
>
>
>





Re: Couplers

Mark Kasprowicz
 

That makes sense. Is there a solution for it John?

Mark K


Re: Couplers

John Stutz
 

Mark

This would work for short trains, but merely moves the bouncing section forward on long trains. The problem occurs where the drag of the trailing load overcomes the preload on the coupler springs, causing them to compress and allow the coupler to pull slightly out of the box. Thus the part of the train where drag slightly exceeds preload will expand and contract under varying drag. Aft of this section the coupler springs are fully extended. Ahead of it the coupler springs are fully compressed. The problem area moves up and down the train as the trailing load varies with grade and curve resistance.

This behavior is intrinsic to any coupler arrangement that allows the coupler to move in and out of its draft gear. Kadee's original couplers, still used in their logging cars, suffered from similar problems. MicroTrains' re-engineered "N-scale" split couplers shift the behavior, so it occurs while pushing rather than pulling. NMRA experiments conducted circa 1960 demonstrated that reliable operation of long model trains required that couplers be pivoted on fixed centers, that prevent longitudinal motion.

John Stutz

On 10/12/2018 06:55 AM, Mark Kasprowicz wrote:
Do I recall Jim Vail once submitting a solution to Kadee bounce by fitting two springs instead of one? Not sure how he did it but perhaps it was one spring inside the other, as they tend to do when in the packaging>
Mark K


Re: Couplers

claneon30
 

Yup, that was the solution. The O scale guys do it too, but they also have the San Juan Evolution coupler, which is a rigid mount on the box.

Chris Lane - Editor HOn3 Annual




Re: Couplers

Mark Kasprowicz
 

Do I recall Jim Vail once submitting a solution to Kadee bounce by fitting two springs instead of one? Not sure how he did it but perhaps it was one spring inside the other, as they tend to do when in the packaging>

Mark K


Re: Couplers

Jim Marlett
 

Although I originally built my layout, or at least portions thereof, to use retractable under-track magnets for uncoupling Kadees, since trying the bamboo skewer technique I have abandoned magnets altogether. I may be blessed with steady hands or something, but it is really easy for me and nothing on my model railroad is a far reach. I’ve tried to keep my trackage within a foot of the front and no trackage is over 16 inches away.

Unfortunately, I am experiencing “Kadee bounce” and am considering switching to either Sergent Sharons or Kadee “scale head” couplers. It seems like Sergents would be the easier conversion, but I would like to hear from anyone who is actually using Kadee scale heads for HOn3. What I really wish is that Kadee would make a drop-in HOn3 coupler that worked like 150 series, but fit the existing HOn3 coupler box without modification.

On Oct 11, 2018, at 4:41 PM, Climax@... wrote:





>Although I have not tried it, I have seen and heard of people that use a long pointed stick that they put down into the coupler and and twist is to pop the couplers open when not over a magnet.


Re: Couplers

Mike Conder
 

Stupid autocorrect.  Why did it change words when you got "Send?"

Anyway, the link is obviously to Dale's COUPLER boxes ...

Mike Conder

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 11:17 PM Mike Conder <vulturenest1@...> wrote:
Here is a link to Dale's Corey boxes:


Mike Conder

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 7:45 PM John Stutz via Groups.Io <john.c.stutz=nasa.gov@groups.io> wrote:
I have previously advocated using the so called "N-scale" couplers made by
MicroTrains(MT) for HOn3.  When compared to a Sargent "Sharon" they are vary
near the right size for a circa 1900 full size MCB coupler, as used by the
Colorado NG roads.  They are still oversize for the 3/4 size MCBs that were
mostly used on the 3' gauge elsewhere.

You are correct that MT couplers "... still are a split coupler.", but there are
two distinct types of MT split couplers.  The MT 1024 & 1025 are downsized
versions of the Kadee 714, and suffer the same problems.  I have scrapped all
that I once had.

The MT 1015, 1016, & 1019 reverse the 714's spring arrangement, placing the
spring outboard of the pivot instead of inboard of it.  This eliminates the
objectionable spring action that occurs while pulling cars equipped with 714s,
although you then get spring action while pushing cars.  The big advantage of
the MT 1015 & etc. is how the spring placement affects coupling to a car.  With
the original style split couplers, the moment that two couplers touch the
coupling force is applied to the standing car.  If the couplers do not
immediately open, you are pushing the car down the siding.  With the revised
style split couplers, the centering springs must close before significant force
is applied to the standing car. This gives you almost 1/16"(1.6mm) of free play,
where the couplers are prying each other open under mere spring pressure, before
you actually start pushing the standing car.  This makes a big difference when
coupling to light cars, and still helps with heavier ones.

That said, I am quite attracted to Sargent's Sharon couplers.

Note: I had never run across Dale Buxton's HOn3 coupler boxes for Sargent
couplers.  Even had a hard time finding them today.  Finally found them by using
Shapeway's search with "Hon3 coupler boxes".   Actually got 21 pages worth of
references, but Dale's were the second item listed.

John Stutz


On 10/11/2018 06:46 AM, Dusty wrote:
> Some people use the N scale couplers. They are smaller but close up they still
> are a split coupler.
>
> Dusty Burman




Re: Couplers

Mike Conder
 

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 7:45 PM John Stutz via Groups.Io <john.c.stutz=nasa.gov@groups.io> wrote:
I have previously advocated using the so called "N-scale" couplers made by
MicroTrains(MT) for HOn3.  When compared to a Sargent "Sharon" they are vary
near the right size for a circa 1900 full size MCB coupler, as used by the
Colorado NG roads.  They are still oversize for the 3/4 size MCBs that were
mostly used on the 3' gauge elsewhere.

You are correct that MT couplers "... still are a split coupler.", but there are
two distinct types of MT split couplers.  The MT 1024 & 1025 are downsized
versions of the Kadee 714, and suffer the same problems.  I have scrapped all
that I once had.

The MT 1015, 1016, & 1019 reverse the 714's spring arrangement, placing the
spring outboard of the pivot instead of inboard of it.  This eliminates the
objectionable spring action that occurs while pulling cars equipped with 714s,
although you then get spring action while pushing cars.  The big advantage of
the MT 1015 & etc. is how the spring placement affects coupling to a car.  With
the original style split couplers, the moment that two couplers touch the
coupling force is applied to the standing car.  If the couplers do not
immediately open, you are pushing the car down the siding.  With the revised
style split couplers, the centering springs must close before significant force
is applied to the standing car. This gives you almost 1/16"(1.6mm) of free play,
where the couplers are prying each other open under mere spring pressure, before
you actually start pushing the standing car.  This makes a big difference when
coupling to light cars, and still helps with heavier ones.

That said, I am quite attracted to Sargent's Sharon couplers.

Note: I had never run across Dale Buxton's HOn3 coupler boxes for Sargent
couplers.  Even had a hard time finding them today.  Finally found them by using
Shapeway's search with "Hon3 coupler boxes".   Actually got 21 pages worth of
references, but Dale's were the second item listed.

John Stutz


On 10/11/2018 06:46 AM, Dusty wrote:
> Some people use the N scale couplers. They are smaller but close up they still
> are a split coupler.
>
> Dusty Burman




Re: Looking for Silverton Information

Doug Boudakian <dboudrrtrain@...>
 

Look at the Durango book by Richard Dorman and Colorado Rail annual 17 talks about the Silverton line. 

Doug Boudakian 




On Oct 11, 2018, at 8:59 PM, David Hunt <david.hunt@...> wrote:

I'm looking for information about Silverton in the late 1940's.  A track diagram would be a good start.  Information about any local rail shippers and types of loads in and out would also be useful.  Pictures of the structures in town during this period would be the icing on the cake.

 

I would guess that I have the information in my library somewhere, but I haven't run across it yet.  If members of the group could point me in the right direction I would be most appreciative.

 

Thanks.

 

Dave Hunt


Virus-free. www.avast.com


Looking for Silverton Information

David Hunt
 

I'm looking for information about Silverton in the late 1940's.  A track diagram would be a good start.  Information about any local rail shippers and types of loads in and out would also be useful.  Pictures of the structures in town during this period would be the icing on the cake.

 

I would guess that I have the information in my library somewhere, but I haven't run across it yet.  If members of the group could point me in the right direction I would be most appreciative.

 

Thanks.

 

Dave Hunt


Virus-free. www.avast.com


Re: Couplers

John Stutz
 

I have previously advocated using the so called "N-scale" couplers made by MicroTrains(MT) for HOn3. When compared to a Sargent "Sharon" they are vary near the right size for a circa 1900 full size MCB coupler, as used by the Colorado NG roads. They are still oversize for the 3/4 size MCBs that were mostly used on the 3' gauge elsewhere.

You are correct that MT couplers "... still are a split coupler.", but there are two distinct types of MT split couplers. The MT 1024 & 1025 are downsized versions of the Kadee 714, and suffer the same problems. I have scrapped all that I once had.

The MT 1015, 1016, & 1019 reverse the 714's spring arrangement, placing the spring outboard of the pivot instead of inboard of it. This eliminates the objectionable spring action that occurs while pulling cars equipped with 714s, although you then get spring action while pushing cars. The big advantage of the MT 1015 & etc. is how the spring placement affects coupling to a car. With the original style split couplers, the moment that two couplers touch the coupling force is applied to the standing car. If the couplers do not immediately open, you are pushing the car down the siding. With the revised style split couplers, the centering springs must close before significant force is applied to the standing car. This gives you almost 1/16"(1.6mm) of free play, where the couplers are prying each other open under mere spring pressure, before you actually start pushing the standing car. This makes a big difference when coupling to light cars, and still helps with heavier ones.

That said, I am quite attracted to Sargent's Sharon couplers.

Note: I had never run across Dale Buxton's HOn3 coupler boxes for Sargent couplers. Even had a hard time finding them today. Finally found them by using Shapeway's search with "Hon3 coupler boxes". Actually got 21 pages worth of references, but Dale's were the second item listed.

John Stutz

On 10/11/2018 06:46 AM, Dusty wrote:
Some people use the N scale couplers. They are smaller but close up they still are a split coupler.
Dusty Burman


Re: Couplers

Climax@...
 




-----Original Message-----
>From: duncan
>Sent: Oct 11, 2018 4:48 PM
>To: HOn3@groups.io
>Subject: Re: [HOn3] Couplers
>
>Dale,
>
>     I sure didn't mean to upset you, or anyone else, for that matter! 
>Didn't intend to be unfair.  I had read the comment about his opening
>the design work up for others to use.  I thought I had also heard of cut
>backs in assembled couplers and certain quantities of others.  I have
>also heard from others, locally and off line, wondering about future
>production.  So, thought my question was well reasoned.  I'm glad to
>hear production is still ongoing and that it will be for the foreseeable
>future.  I wonder how many others are out there with the same
>misconception as I had?
>
>     I am glad that I brought up the self centering coupler box you had
>designed.  It sounds like there are some others out there who didn't
>know about them.  Maybe that comment will perk up your sales.  I'm sure
>going to give it some thought and maybe give the couplers another try
>using your coupler box.  It sounds like no one has any answers to my
>other questions.  So apparently no one has found a way to integrate
>operations with Kadees until you can get your whole fleet converted.
>
>     It would be good to know more about your thoughts on your different
>operation process.  I know we do a lot of things in our model world that
>the real roads didn't do.  Our trains run on electricity, our turnouts
>(or switches) are often thrown by electric motors, or by air pressure,
>we often throw the turnout before the train gets to the turnout and so
>on.  Sometimes it is just our size that makes these things necessary. 
>We're too big to get down beside the car and lift the cut lever to
>uncouple the car.  So, in a couple of the cases I cited, my size makes
>it so I can't do that operation as realistically as I'd like.  And it is
>in those situations where I need help understanding how others
>accomplish what I can't seem to figure out.
>Although I have not tried it, I have seen and heard of people that use a long pointed stick that they put down into the coupler and and twist is to pop the couplers open when not over a magnet.
>     Those are the things I was wanting to get clarity on.  Thanks for
>your help clarifying Sergent availability.  And thanks for your work on
>the coupler box to facilitate coupler self centering.  Further knowledge
>of how to accomplish that at the back of a big yard, or where there is
>some impediment between the operator and the car and its coupler would
>be helpful and appreciated.
>
>Duncan Harvey
>
>
>
>


Re: Couplers

duncan
 

Dale,

    I sure didn't mean to upset you, or anyone else, for that matter!  Didn't intend to be unfair.  I had read the comment about his opening the design work up for others to use.  I thought I had also heard of cut backs in assembled couplers and certain quantities of others.  I have also heard from others, locally and off line, wondering about future production.  So, thought my question was well reasoned.  I'm glad to hear production is still ongoing and that it will be for the foreseeable future.  I wonder how many others are out there with the same misconception as I had?

    I am glad that I brought up the self centering coupler box you had designed.  It sounds like there are some others out there who didn't know about them.  Maybe that comment will perk up your sales.  I'm sure going to give it some thought and maybe give the couplers another try using your coupler box.  It sounds like no one has any answers to my other questions.  So apparently no one has found a way to integrate operations with Kadees until you can get your whole fleet converted.

    It would be good to know more about your thoughts on your different operation process.  I know we do a lot of things in our model world that the real roads didn't do.  Our trains run on electricity, our turnouts (or switches) are often thrown by electric motors, or by air pressure, we often throw the turnout before the train gets to the turnout and so on.  Sometimes it is just our size that makes these things necessary.  We're too big to get down beside the car and lift the cut lever to uncouple the car.  So, in a couple of the cases I cited, my size makes it so I can't do that operation as realistically as I'd like.  And it is in those situations where I need help understanding how others accomplish what I can't seem to figure out.

    Those are the things I was wanting to get clarity on.  Thanks for your help clarifying Sergent availability.  And thanks for your work on the coupler box to facilitate coupler self centering.  Further knowledge of how to accomplish that at the back of a big yard, or where there is some impediment between the operator and the car and its coupler would be helpful and appreciated.

Duncan Harvey

7601 - 7620 of 9022