Couplers for Precision Scale HOn3 BRASS


Bodo Rasler
 

Hello all,

I recently bought a bunch of PSC HOn3 D&RGW BRASS cars. 2nd hand but like new and without couplers!

I cannot attach the KADEE # 705 - the screws have to small a diameter and don't fit into the holes on the cars which have a significantly larger diameter. The pockets on the cars match the HO size Kadee couplers. But I don't like the looks of even the smaller #58 couplers as compared to HOn3 heads of Kadee or others.

The Kadee #705 cannot be attached with the thicker PSC screws either, since they would break the cylinders guiding the HOn3 couplers.

I have bought 2nd hand another PSC car which had couplers attached with the ORIGINAL PSC screws. The problem - I cannot identify the manufacturer of the couplers! I have attached 2 photos of those couplers.

Maybe someone can identify the manufacturer of those couplers or has an idea how to solve the problem.

Thanks
Bodo Rasler
Berlin / Germany


Ric Case
 

Kadee 714 

Ric Case 
EBT Modeler 
Hamilton Ohio 
1-513-375-7694

On Dec 16, 2020, at 7:27 PM, Bodo Rasler <raslerb@...> wrote:

Hello all,

I recently bought a bunch of PSC HOn3 D&RGW BRASS cars. 2nd hand but like new and without couplers!

I cannot attach the KADEE # 705 - the screws have to small a diameter and don't fit into the holes on the cars which have a significantly larger diameter. The pockets on the cars match the HO size Kadee couplers. But I don't like the looks of even the smaller #58 couplers as compared to HOn3 heads of Kadee or others.

The Kadee #705 cannot be attached with the thicker PSC screws either, since they would break the cylinders guiding the HOn3 couplers.

I have bought 2nd hand another PSC car which had couplers attached with the ORIGINAL PSC screws. The problem - I cannot identify the manufacturer of the couplers! I have attached 2 photos of those couplers.

Maybe someone can identify the manufacturer of those couplers or has an idea how to solve the problem.

Thanks
Bodo Rasler
Berlin / Germany
<HOn3 couplers on PSC.2.JPG>
<HOn3 couplers on PSC.1.JPG>


Bill Lugg
 

Those look like the older Kadee 714 coupler.  Hard to say what the screw is holding it, maybe a 1.7 mm?  Are the 705s supplied with self-tapping or machine screws and are the car bodies at the correct height to mount the couplers?  My initial thought is to fill the holes and redrill for the smaller screws.  Note that if you already have narrow gauge equipment with the 714s, my understanding is the 714s and the 705s don't play well together.

HTH
Bill Lugg

On 12/16/20 5:27 PM, Bodo Rasler wrote:
Hello all,

I recently bought a bunch of PSC HOn3 D&RGW BRASS cars. 2nd hand but like new and without couplers!

I cannot attach the KADEE # 705 - the screws have to small a diameter and don't fit into the holes on the cars which have a significantly larger diameter. The pockets on the cars match the HO size Kadee couplers. But I don't like the looks of even the smaller #58 couplers as compared to HOn3 heads of Kadee or others.

The Kadee #705 cannot be attached with the thicker PSC screws either, since they would break the cylinders guiding the HOn3 couplers.

I have bought 2nd hand another PSC car which had couplers attached with the ORIGINAL PSC screws. The problem - I cannot identify the manufacturer of the couplers! I have attached 2 photos of those couplers.

Maybe someone can identify the manufacturer of those couplers or has an idea how to solve the problem.

Thanks
Bodo Rasler
Berlin / Germany


duncan
 

Bodo,

    Those are Kadee # 714 couplers.

                                                            Duncan Harvey

On 12/16/2020 5:27 PM, Bodo Rasler wrote:
Hello all,

I recently bought a bunch of PSC HOn3 D&RGW BRASS cars. 2nd hand but like new and without couplers!

I cannot attach the KADEE # 705 - the screws have to small a diameter and don't fit into the holes on the cars which have a significantly larger diameter. The pockets on the cars match the HO size Kadee couplers. But I don't like the looks of even the smaller #58 couplers as compared to HOn3 heads of Kadee or others.

The Kadee #705 cannot be attached with the thicker PSC screws either, since they would break the cylinders guiding the HOn3 couplers.

I have bought 2nd hand another PSC car which had couplers attached with the ORIGINAL PSC screws. The problem - I cannot identify the manufacturer of the couplers! I have attached 2 photos of those couplers.

Maybe someone can identify the manufacturer of those couplers or has an idea how to solve the problem.

Thanks
Bodo Rasler
Berlin / Germany


Wayne
 

The couplers in the photos are KaDee couplers. 
2 Solutions:
1) Drill a larger hole through the coupler so the right size screw fits.
2) Use the undersize screws and put a very small dab of 5 minute epoxy in the screw hole of the car.
I've used both methods and prefer the epoxy solution.

--
Wayne Taylor


Randy Hees
 

Bodo, I likely have some of the 714 couplers on hand... 

Randy Hees

On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 4:54 PM duncan <train3guy@...> wrote:

Bodo,

    Those are Kadee # 714 couplers.

                                                            Duncan Harvey

On 12/16/2020 5:27 PM, Bodo Rasler wrote:
Hello all,

I recently bought a bunch of PSC HOn3 D&RGW BRASS cars. 2nd hand but like new and without couplers!

I cannot attach the KADEE # 705 - the screws have to small a diameter and don't fit into the holes on the cars which have a significantly larger diameter. The pockets on the cars match the HO size Kadee couplers. But I don't like the looks of even the smaller #58 couplers as compared to HOn3 heads of Kadee or others.

The Kadee #705 cannot be attached with the thicker PSC screws either, since they would break the cylinders guiding the HOn3 couplers.

I have bought 2nd hand another PSC car which had couplers attached with the ORIGINAL PSC screws. The problem - I cannot identify the manufacturer of the couplers! I have attached 2 photos of those couplers.

Maybe someone can identify the manufacturer of those couplers or has an idea how to solve the problem.

Thanks
Bodo Rasler
Berlin / Germany


Bodo Rasler
 

Thanks to all for your suggestions.

 

Wayne Taylor:

Your solution 1. Will not work since it will break the cylinder IN the coupler pocket of Kadee #705 and then the coupler does not move any longer.

 

Bill Lugg:

I will order one pack of #714 and try. The car I have with that coupler, couples acceptably to 705, although I agree there is a small difference. But since these cars will stay in a consist, I don’t think it will be a big issue.

The 705 are supplied with machine screws. The body height is compatible to the other cars I have – not an issue.

 

Wayne Taylor:

If what Bill suggests (#714) does not work, I will try your suggestion #2.

 

To all others who replied:

Thanks for your time and input!

 

Bodo Rasler

Berlin / Germany

 

 

From: HOn3@groups.io [mailto:HOn3@groups.io] On Behalf Of Wayne
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2020 02:14
To: HOn3@groups.io
Subject: Re: [HOn3] Couplers for Precision Scale HOn3 BRASS

 

The couplers in the photos are KaDee couplers. 

2 Solutions:

1) Drill a larger hole through the coupler so the right size screw fits.

2) Use the undersize screws and put a very small dab of 5 minute epoxy in the screw hole of the car.

I've used both methods and prefer the epoxy solution.


--

Wayne Taylor


Ray
 

I suggest Kadee #158 couplers.  They are dimensionally the same as the #714 couplers.  They don't droop and don't have to be assembled.
--
Ray in Colorado


Bodo Rasler
 

Ray,

 

the head looks to me like HO size and not HOn3…

 

Bodo

 

From: HOn3@groups.io [mailto:HOn3@groups.io] On Behalf Of Ray
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2020 00:34
To: HOn3@groups.io
Subject: Re: [HOn3] Couplers for Precision Scale HOn3 BRASS

 

I suggest Kadee #158 couplers.  They are dimensionally the same as the #714 couplers.  They don't droop and don't have to be assembled.
--
Ray in Colorado


Jim Marlett
 

Most Colorado narrow gauge railroads used standard gauge couplers. The question really is whether Kadee’s narrow gauge couplers are actually standard gauge size and the so-called “scale" #158s are actually still oversized for standard gauge couplers. Or does it matter that much.

The question I have of #158 users is are there any problems associated with their use. I’m thinking of springs being too strong for the weight of the car and issues with electrical conductivity on Blackstone products. It looks like they would be a darned sight easier to use as #714 replacements than the new #705s.

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


On Dec 18, 2020, at 6:13 PM, Bodo Rasler <raslerb@...> wrote:

Ray,
 
the head looks to me like HO size and not HOn3…
 
Bodo
 
From: HOn3@groups.io [mailto:HOn3@groups.io] On Behalf Of Ray
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2020 00:34
To: HOn3@groups.io
Subject: Re: [HOn3] Couplers for Precision Scale HOn3 BRASS
 
I suggest Kadee #158 couplers.  They are dimensionally the same as the #714 couplers.  They don't droop and don't have to be assembled.
-- 
Ray in Colorado 



Wayne
 

KaDee HOn3 couplers look way out of proportion on HOn3 rolling stock.  I use Kadee N scale couplers, which are now made by Micro Trains Line (1025).  They look more realistic than the HOn3 couplers and will grip any rolling stock that has an HOn3 coupler perfectly and will also uncouple without any problem.  Being smaller, they also work better on the rolling stock where the coupler size interferes
with the swivel of the trucks.


On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 9:17 AM Jim Marlett <jmarlett@...> wrote:
Most Colorado narrow gauge railroads used standard gauge couplers. The question really is whether Kadee’s narrow gauge couplers are actually standard gauge size and the so-called “scale" #158s are actually still oversized for standard gauge couplers. Or does it matter that much.

The question I have of #158 users is are there any problems associated with their use. I’m thinking of springs being too strong for the weight of the car and issues with electrical conductivity on Blackstone products. It looks like they would be a darned sight easier to use as #714 replacements than the new #705s.

On Dec 18, 2020, at 6:13 PM, Bodo Rasler <raslerb@...> wrote:

Ray,
 
the head looks to me like HO size and not HOn3…
 
Bodo
 
From: HOn3@groups.io [mailto:HOn3@groups.io] On Behalf Of Ray
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2020 00:34
To: HOn3@groups.io
Subject: Re: [HOn3] Couplers for Precision Scale HOn3 BRASS
 
I suggest Kadee #158 couplers.  They are dimensionally the same as the #714 couplers.  They don't droop and don't have to be assembled.
-- 
Ray in Colorado 




--
Wayne Taylor


Jim Marlett
 

I would really like to get rid of the Kadee bounce. Admittedly, I am not a rivet counter and am much more into smooth operation. My feeling is that Kadee/Microscale N scale couplers are still the same design as the Kadee #714. I would gladly stick with 714s if it weren’t for the bounce, and so far I have. But I really hate that bounce. I guess I should just buy a few of the various other kinds and see what I like.

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


On Dec 20, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

KaDee HOn3 couplers look way out of proportion on HOn3 rolling stock.  I use Kadee N scale couplers, which are now made by Micro Trains Line (1025).  They look more realistic than the HOn3 couplers and will grip any rolling stock that has an HOn3 coupler perfectly and will also uncouple without any problem.  Being smaller, they also work better on the rolling stock where the coupler size interferes
with the swivel of the trucks.



Wayne
 

Yes, the KaDee/Microscale N scale couplers are identical to the KaDee #714s, only scaled down.  I use the same assembly jig for both.


On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 10:18 AM Jim Marlett <jmarlett@...> wrote:
I would really like to get rid of the Kadee bounce. Admittedly, I am not a rivet counter and am much more into smooth operation. My feeling is that Kadee/Microscale N scale couplers are still the same design as the Kadee #714. I would gladly stick with 714s if it weren’t for the bounce, and so far I have. But I really hate that bounce. I guess I should just buy a few of the various other kinds and see what I like.

On Dec 20, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

KaDee HOn3 couplers look way out of proportion on HOn3 rolling stock.  I use Kadee N scale couplers, which are now made by Micro Trains Line (1025).  They look more realistic than the HOn3 couplers and will grip any rolling stock that has an HOn3 coupler perfectly and will also uncouple without any problem.  Being smaller, they also work better on the rolling stock where the coupler size interferes
with the swivel of the trucks.




--
Wayne Taylor


John Niemeyer
 

I've been using Sergent Sharons for years. While doing research for the 2014 HOn3 Annual article. I found very few narrow gauge equipment that used standard gauge couplers. They were K-36, K-37, class 23 - 41 foot flats and some MOW. Most everything else was either Sharon or Miller that is the same size as a Sharon.

The Sergent doesn't have any couper "bob" and I was able to get a fit in everything that I own. Not possible with Kadee. However Sergents aren't for everybody, but then, neither are Kadees. They both have their plus and minus.
John Niemeyer


On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:18 AM Jim Marlett <jmarlett@...> wrote:
I would really like to get rid of the Kadee bounce. Admittedly, I am not a rivet counter and am much more into smooth operation. My feeling is that Kadee/Microscale N scale couplers are still the same design as the Kadee #714. I would gladly stick with 714s if it weren’t for the bounce, and so far I have. But I really hate that bounce. I guess I should just buy a few of the various other kinds and see what I like.

On Dec 20, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

KaDee HOn3 couplers look way out of proportion on HOn3 rolling stock.  I use Kadee N scale couplers, which are now made by Micro Trains Line (1025).  They look more realistic than the HOn3 couplers and will grip any rolling stock that has an HOn3 coupler perfectly and will also uncouple without any problem.  Being smaller, they also work better on the rolling stock where the coupler size interferes
with the swivel of the trucks.



Earl Knoob
 

It should be pointed out that the D&RGW and other Colorado narrow gauge roads used full sized MCB couplers.  The coupler uses the same profile as any standard gauge coupler.  This profile is the same today as it was in 1900.

There were various manufacturers of couplers the built couplers of different "mass", but they all had the same knuckle profile.  the biggest coupler in mass is the "AAR" coupler.  You find this mostly on converted standard gauge cars like the 6500 class flats and 9600 class pipe-gons.  The smallest being the "passenger Janney" that was used on all the passenger equipment.  

Still... they all couple together.  Next time you are in Durango find an open gon (former 9600 pipe gon with AAR couplers) coupled to a San Juan vestibuled car (with a Passenger Janney coupler).  It looks like an HO standard gauge Kadee coupled to an N scale coupler.

I recall both AAR and Sharons on K-36's, both front and back.

Someone should measure up all the available HO couplers on the market and compare them to the prototype dimensions.


From: HOn3@groups.io <HOn3@groups.io> on behalf of John Niemeyer <reverend455@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2020 10:55 AM
To: HOn3@groups.io Group Moderators <HOn3@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [HOn3] Couplers for Precision Scale HOn3 BRASS
 
I've been using Sergent Sharons for years. While doing research for the 2014 HOn3 Annual article. I found very few narrow gauge equipment that used standard gauge couplers. They were K-36, K-37, class 23 - 41 foot flats and some MOW. Most everything else was either Sharon or Miller that is the same size as a Sharon.

The Sergent doesn't have any couper "bob" and I was able to get a fit in everything that I own. Not possible with Kadee. However Sergents aren't for everybody, but then, neither are Kadees. They both have their plus and minus.
John Niemeyer

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:18 AM Jim Marlett <jmarlett@...> wrote:
I would really like to get rid of the Kadee bounce. Admittedly, I am not a rivet counter and am much more into smooth operation. My feeling is that Kadee/Microscale N scale couplers are still the same design as the Kadee #714. I would gladly stick with 714s if it weren’t for the bounce, and so far I have. But I really hate that bounce. I guess I should just buy a few of the various other kinds and see what I like.

On Dec 20, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

KaDee HOn3 couplers look way out of proportion on HOn3 rolling stock.  I use Kadee N scale couplers, which are now made by Micro Trains Line (1025).  They look more realistic than the HOn3 couplers and will grip any rolling stock that has an HOn3 coupler perfectly and will also uncouple without any problem.  Being smaller, they also work better on the rolling stock where the coupler size interferes
with the swivel of the trucks.



Robert Bell
 

Jim Marlett,
To get rid of the coupler "bounce", simply install two of the springs rolled together - slightly (4-5 coils) offset.  I have made this my norm and don't get any bounce anymore.

Rob Bell
Modeling the White Pass & Yukon Route in HOn3
Waynesville, NC

On Sunday, December 20, 2020, 12:18:02 PM EST, Jim Marlett <jmarlett@...> wrote:


I would really like to get rid of the Kadee bounce. Admittedly, I am not a rivet counter and am much more into smooth operation. My feeling is that Kadee/Microscale N scale couplers are still the same design as the Kadee #714. I would gladly stick with 714s if it weren’t for the bounce, and so far I have. But I really hate that bounce. I guess I should just buy a few of the various other kinds and see what I like.

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


On Dec 20, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

KaDee HOn3 couplers look way out of proportion on HOn3 rolling stock.  I use Kadee N scale couplers, which are now made by Micro Trains Line (1025).  They look more realistic than the HOn3 couplers and will grip any rolling stock that has an HOn3 coupler perfectly and will also uncouple without any problem.  Being smaller, they also work better on the rolling stock where the coupler size interferes
with the swivel of the trucks.



Wayne
 

Isn't the so-called "bounce" actually a replication of the way prototype trains work?  Every time I've watched trains start to move, including the Durango & Silverton and the Cumbres & Toltec, once the engine start in motion the slack between cars is noticeably taken up before they start to move.   That is why I prefer the KaDee couplers over all others.


On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 12:31 PM Robert Bell via groups.io <ionhoss=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Jim Marlett,
To get rid of the coupler "bounce", simply install two of the springs rolled together - slightly (4-5 coils) offset.  I have made this my norm and don't get any bounce anymore.

Rob Bell
Modeling the White Pass & Yukon Route in HOn3
Waynesville, NC

On Sunday, December 20, 2020, 12:18:02 PM EST, Jim Marlett <jmarlett@...> wrote:


I would really like to get rid of the Kadee bounce. Admittedly, I am not a rivet counter and am much more into smooth operation. My feeling is that Kadee/Microscale N scale couplers are still the same design as the Kadee #714. I would gladly stick with 714s if it weren’t for the bounce, and so far I have. But I really hate that bounce. I guess I should just buy a few of the various other kinds and see what I like.

On Dec 20, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

KaDee HOn3 couplers look way out of proportion on HOn3 rolling stock.  I use Kadee N scale couplers, which are now made by Micro Trains Line (1025).  They look more realistic than the HOn3 couplers and will grip any rolling stock that has an HOn3 coupler perfectly and will also uncouple without any problem.  Being smaller, they also work better on the rolling stock where the coupler size interferes
with the swivel of the trucks.




--
Wayne Taylor


claneon30
 

Yes and no. Yes, real trains often have springs built into the draftgear, and there is “runout” as the train stretches. But the bounce of the HO kadees is wholly out of scale, and unlike the prototype and its great weight, the cars run in and out as they are being pulled on the layout, giving a most unrealistic visual.


Chris Lane - Editor HOn3 Annual



On Dec 20, 2020, at 12:40 PM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

Isn't the so-called "bounce" actually a replication of the way prototype trains work?  Every time I've watched trains start to move, including the Durango & Silverton and the Cumbres & Toltec, once the engine start in motion the slack between cars is noticeably taken up before they start to move.   That is why I prefer the KaDee couplers over all others.

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 12:31 PM Robert Bell via groups.io <ionhoss=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Jim Marlett,
To get rid of the coupler "bounce", simply install two of the springs rolled together - slightly (4-5 coils) offset.  I have made this my norm and don't get any bounce anymore.

Rob Bell
Modeling the White Pass & Yukon Route in HOn3
Waynesville, NC

On Sunday, December 20, 2020, 12:18:02 PM EST, Jim Marlett <jmarlett@...> wrote:


I would really like to get rid of the Kadee bounce. Admittedly, I am not a rivet counter and am much more into smooth operation. My feeling is that Kadee/Microscale N scale couplers are still the same design as the Kadee #714. I would gladly stick with 714s if it weren’t for the bounce, and so far I have. But I really hate that bounce. I guess I should just buy a few of the various other kinds and see what I like.

On Dec 20, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

KaDee HOn3 couplers look way out of proportion on HOn3 rolling stock.  I use Kadee N scale couplers, which are now made by Micro Trains Line (1025).  They look more realistic than the HOn3 couplers and will grip any rolling stock that has an HOn3 coupler perfectly and will also uncouple without any problem.  Being smaller, they also work better on the rolling stock where the coupler size interferes
with the swivel of the trucks.






--
Wayne Taylor


Russ Norris
 

Using a long string of BS hoppers I can imitate the slack when I start and stop.  But once the train is rolling the cars, and especially the caboose, are constantly bobbing back and forth.  I have read articles that suggest using wires that lightly drag on the caboose wheels to reduce the bouncing.

Russ  Norris 


On Sun, Dec 20, 2020, 4:28 PM claneon30 <chrislaneon30@...> wrote:
Yes and no. Yes, real trains often have springs built into the draftgear, and there is “runout” as the train stretches. But the bounce of the HO kadees is wholly out of scale, and unlike the prototype and its great weight, the cars run in and out as they are being pulled on the layout, giving a most unrealistic visual.


Chris Lane - Editor HOn3 Annual



On Dec 20, 2020, at 12:40 PM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

Isn't the so-called "bounce" actually a replication of the way prototype trains work?  Every time I've watched trains start to move, including the Durango & Silverton and the Cumbres & Toltec, once the engine start in motion the slack between cars is noticeably taken up before they start to move.   That is why I prefer the KaDee couplers over all others.

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 12:31 PM Robert Bell via groups.io <ionhoss=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Jim Marlett,
To get rid of the coupler "bounce", simply install two of the springs rolled together - slightly (4-5 coils) offset.  I have made this my norm and don't get any bounce anymore.

Rob Bell
Modeling the White Pass & Yukon Route in HOn3
Waynesville, NC

On Sunday, December 20, 2020, 12:18:02 PM EST, Jim Marlett <jmarlett@...> wrote:


I would really like to get rid of the Kadee bounce. Admittedly, I am not a rivet counter and am much more into smooth operation. My feeling is that Kadee/Microscale N scale couplers are still the same design as the Kadee #714. I would gladly stick with 714s if it weren’t for the bounce, and so far I have. But I really hate that bounce. I guess I should just buy a few of the various other kinds and see what I like.

On Dec 20, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

KaDee HOn3 couplers look way out of proportion on HOn3 rolling stock.  I use Kadee N scale couplers, which are now made by Micro Trains Line (1025).  They look more realistic than the HOn3 couplers and will grip any rolling stock that has an HOn3 coupler perfectly and will also uncouple without any problem.  Being smaller, they also work better on the rolling stock where the coupler size interferes
with the swivel of the trucks.






--
Wayne Taylor


--
Russ Norris, MMR
Cape Cod, Massachusetts
http://blacklogvalleyrailroad.blogspot.com/


Wayne
 

I can't find the source now but years ago I read that the extra pair of larger and shorter bronze springs included in the KaDee spring capsule that comes with the couplers is for eliminating the "bounce".  You place 1 spring on each truck, on one axle between the outer edge of the wheel and the inner face of the journal box.  This creates a tiny amount of drag to eliminate the bounce.  I simply make my cars heavier, to simulate real loads and to "grab" the rails better, especially when going through turnouts.


On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 2:58 PM Russ Norris <rbnorrisjr@...> wrote:
Using a long string of BS hoppers I can imitate the slack when I start and stop.  But once the train is rolling the cars, and especially the caboose, are constantly bobbing back and forth.  I have read articles that suggest using wires that lightly drag on the caboose wheels to reduce the bouncing.

Russ  Norris 


On Sun, Dec 20, 2020, 4:28 PM claneon30 <chrislaneon30@...> wrote:
Yes and no. Yes, real trains often have springs built into the draftgear, and there is “runout” as the train stretches. But the bounce of the HO kadees is wholly out of scale, and unlike the prototype and its great weight, the cars run in and out as they are being pulled on the layout, giving a most unrealistic visual.


Chris Lane - Editor HOn3 Annual



On Dec 20, 2020, at 12:40 PM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

Isn't the so-called "bounce" actually a replication of the way prototype trains work?  Every time I've watched trains start to move, including the Durango & Silverton and the Cumbres & Toltec, once the engine start in motion the slack between cars is noticeably taken up before they start to move.   That is why I prefer the KaDee couplers over all others.

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 12:31 PM Robert Bell via groups.io <ionhoss=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Jim Marlett,
To get rid of the coupler "bounce", simply install two of the springs rolled together - slightly (4-5 coils) offset.  I have made this my norm and don't get any bounce anymore.

Rob Bell
Modeling the White Pass & Yukon Route in HOn3
Waynesville, NC

On Sunday, December 20, 2020, 12:18:02 PM EST, Jim Marlett <jmarlett@...> wrote:


I would really like to get rid of the Kadee bounce. Admittedly, I am not a rivet counter and am much more into smooth operation. My feeling is that Kadee/Microscale N scale couplers are still the same design as the Kadee #714. I would gladly stick with 714s if it weren’t for the bounce, and so far I have. But I really hate that bounce. I guess I should just buy a few of the various other kinds and see what I like.

On Dec 20, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Wayne <waynewtaylorii@...> wrote:

KaDee HOn3 couplers look way out of proportion on HOn3 rolling stock.  I use Kadee N scale couplers, which are now made by Micro Trains Line (1025).  They look more realistic than the HOn3 couplers and will grip any rolling stock that has an HOn3 coupler perfectly and will also uncouple without any problem.  Being smaller, they also work better on the rolling stock where the coupler size interferes
with the swivel of the trucks.






--
Wayne Taylor


--
Russ Norris, MMR
Cape Cod, Massachusetts
http://blacklogvalleyrailroad.blogspot.com/



--
Wayne Taylor