Date   
Re: Order with a side of knuckles

Cliff
 

Frank, order arrived, and I sent an email regarding #5692-53. Please check soon. 
Thanks

Coupler Availability

Jason Borda
 

Frank,

Do you have an update as to when the F couplers and Type SBEC87M040K couplers may be back in stock? Looking to expand my coal and covered hopper fleet.

Thanks,
Jason

Looking for S scale couplers - EC64K or EC64JK

Tom Colasurdo
 

Happened to go on the Sergent Engineering website tonight ... the S scale coupler button is no longer under the Products tab.

I'm looking to purchase any available EC64K or EC64JK couplers.

Please contact me off list ... t_colasurdo@...

Thank you in advance.

V/r,
Tom C.

Re: Looking for S scale couplers - EC64K or EC64JK

Jason Hethke
 

Looks like quite a bit was removed off of his website, I have been keeping my eye out for tailor made's for walthers passenger cars, those are gone as well.....

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:07 PM Tom Colasurdo via Groups.Io <t_colasurdo=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Happened to go on the Sergent Engineering website tonight ... the S scale coupler button is no longer under the Products tab.

I'm looking to purchase any available EC64K or EC64JK couplers.

Please contact me off list ... t_colasurdo@...

Thank you in advance.

V/r,
Tom C.

Sergent website, was: Looking for S scale couplers

Tim L
 

The S Scale and Taylor made coupler pages aren't completely gone from the website, just hidden from the menu. There are two ways to take this; Frank has hidden them as he intends to no longer make and sell them (this has happened previously with some of the narrow shank range, and of course Glatzl's couplers) or, he has hidden them as they are a longer term return to production (remember he has had plenty of issues with the new 3D printer) and hiding them reduces for him the queries on when they will be available. Hopefully it's reason number 2 but my feeling is that it's reason number 1.

Either way a note on his website would good so we would all know one way or the other and not have to speculate.

Tim

On 17/04/2019 11:08, Jason Hethke wrote:
Looks like quite a bit was removed off of his website, I have been keeping my eye out for tailor made's for walthers passenger cars, those are gone as well.....

Re: Sergent website, was: Looking for S scale couplers

Frank Sergent
 

Hi All,

I removed the S scale page (and the tailor made page) from the website because I was editing the website anyway and that was an easy thing to do and I figured it would hopefully reduce the number of inquiries about those products that I am not currently able to manufacture. The truth is that today I'm no longer tirelessly working on a solution either so I don't want to mislead anyone. There are other personal responsibilities that take priority right now.

As far as the diecast products go... I have plenty and will have plenty for the foreseeable future. (I have temporarily run out of balls but expect to have more next week -- so if you are waiting on an order that included a bulk pack that was placed within the last week, it will be shipped very soon.)

Thanks,
Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim L
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 7:06 AM
To: SergentEngineering@groups.io
Subject: [Sergent Engineering] Sergent website, was: Looking for S scale couplers

The S Scale and Taylor made coupler pages aren't completely gone from
the website, just hidden from the menu. There are two ways to take this;
Frank has hidden them as he intends to no longer make and sell them
(this has happened previously with some of the narrow shank range, and
of course Glatzl's couplers) or, he has hidden them as they are a longer
term return to production (remember he has had plenty of issues with the
new 3D printer) and hiding them reduces for him the queries on when they
will be available. Hopefully it's reason number 2 but my feeling is that
it's reason number 1.

Either way a note on his website would good so we would all know one way
or the other and not have to speculate.

Tim

Frank

Todd Fisher
 

I was hoping to see if you by chance had one extra long shank lower shelf laying around if not no worries but I've broken one off a centerbeam car. Also just curious since the lower shelfs are being produced is there a reason the long shanks can't be produced like those are? 

Re: Frank

Frank Sergent
 

Hi Todd,
 
Unfortunately I have zero of those left. The lower shelf castings are diecast. That’s why I can continue to offer the SBEC87 couplers.
 
Thanks,
Frank
 

Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 2:37 PM
Subject: [Sergent Engineering] Frank
 
I was hoping to see if you by chance had one extra long shank lower shelf laying around if not no worries but I've broken one off a centerbeam car. Also just curious since the lower shelfs are being produced is there a reason the long shanks can't be produced like those are?

Re: Frank

Todd Fisher
 

I understand frank. I am curious however if the lower shelfs are diecast is there a reason the long shank ones cant be done thru diecast? I'm not familiar with all the casting so I'm just wondering what determines the two different castings. 


On Sat, Apr 27, 2019, 3:37 PM Frank Sergent <fsergent@...> wrote:
Hi Todd,
 
Unfortunately I have zero of those left. The lower shelf castings are diecast. That’s why I can continue to offer the SBEC87 couplers.
 
Thanks,
Frank
 
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 2:37 PM
Subject: [Sergent Engineering] Frank
 
I was hoping to see if you by chance had one extra long shank lower shelf laying around if not no worries but I've broken one off a centerbeam car. Also just curious since the lower shelfs are being produced is there a reason the long shanks can't be produced like those are?

Re: Frank

Frank Sergent
 

Die casting requires a dedicated steel mold for each variant of part. Those molds are very expensive. That’s why I always used investment casting for the specialized stuff that I didn’t expect to sell tons of. I could justify paying for the mold for the lower shelf casting because I could use it with a lot of different top castings. For top castings with non-standard lengths, I couldn’t justify the cost of the steel mold.
 
There are also things that can’t be done practically with die casting (like the type F coupler), so investment casting is capability I needed anyway. Unfortunately, its not a capability I have now.
 
Thanks,
Frank
 

Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2019 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Sergent Engineering] Frank
 
I understand frank. I am curious however if the lower shelfs are diecast is there a reason the long shank ones cant be done thru diecast? I'm not familiar with all the casting so I'm just wondering what determines the two different castings.
 
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019, 3:37 PM Frank Sergent <fsergent@...> wrote:
Hi Todd,
 
Unfortunately I have zero of those left. The lower shelf castings are diecast. That’s why I can continue to offer the SBEC87 couplers.
 
Thanks,
Frank
 
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 2:37 PM
Subject: [Sergent Engineering] Frank
 
I was hoping to see if you by chance had one extra long shank lower shelf laying around if not no worries but I've broken one off a centerbeam car. Also just curious since the lower shelfs are being produced is there a reason the long shanks can't be produced like those are?

Re: Frank

Todd Fisher
 

Ok that helps put it in perspective, it would be nice to see those longer shanks be able to be made that way but also in general it'd be nice to eventually see everything come back in stock. I know you're working on attempting to and for those of us still dedicated to using your line I do appreciate it. 


On Sat, Apr 27, 2019, 9:59 PM Frank Sergent <fsergent@...> wrote:
Die casting requires a dedicated steel mold for each variant of part. Those molds are very expensive. That’s why I always used investment casting for the specialized stuff that I didn’t expect to sell tons of. I could justify paying for the mold for the lower shelf casting because I could use it with a lot of different top castings. For top castings with non-standard lengths, I couldn’t justify the cost of the steel mold.
 
There are also things that can’t be done practically with die casting (like the type F coupler), so investment casting is capability I needed anyway. Unfortunately, its not a capability I have now.
 
Thanks,
Frank
 
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2019 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Sergent Engineering] Frank
 
I understand frank. I am curious however if the lower shelfs are diecast is there a reason the long shank ones cant be done thru diecast? I'm not familiar with all the casting so I'm just wondering what determines the two different castings.
 
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019, 3:37 PM Frank Sergent <fsergent@...> wrote:
Hi Todd,
 
Unfortunately I have zero of those left. The lower shelf castings are diecast. That’s why I can continue to offer the SBEC87 couplers.
 
Thanks,
Frank
 
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 2:37 PM
Subject: [Sergent Engineering] Frank
 
I was hoping to see if you by chance had one extra long shank lower shelf laying around if not no worries but I've broken one off a centerbeam car. Also just curious since the lower shelfs are being produced is there a reason the long shanks can't be produced like those are?

Re: Frank

Nathan Rich
 

If we knew the cost of a set of steel molds, what if we did a GoFundMe to pay for the other molds for the different shank lengths? I'd kick in a few bucks toward the cost if it meant they would stay available.

Just an idea...

Nathan Rich

On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 7:35 PM Todd Fisher <tftrainman1@...> wrote:
Ok that helps put it in perspective, it would be nice to see those longer shanks be able to be made that way but also in general it'd be nice to eventually see everything come back in stock. I know you're working on attempting to and for those of us still dedicated to using your line I do appreciate it. 

On Sat, Apr 27, 2019, 9:59 PM Frank Sergent <fsergent@...> wrote:
Die casting requires a dedicated steel mold for each variant of part. Those molds are very expensive. That’s why I always used investment casting for the specialized stuff that I didn’t expect to sell tons of. I could justify paying for the mold for the lower shelf casting because I could use it with a lot of different top castings. For top castings with non-standard lengths, I couldn’t justify the cost of the steel mold.
 
There are also things that can’t be done practically with die casting (like the type F coupler), so investment casting is capability I needed anyway. Unfortunately, its not a capability I have now.
 
Thanks,
Frank
 
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2019 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Sergent Engineering] Frank
 
I understand frank. I am curious however if the lower shelfs are diecast is there a reason the long shank ones cant be done thru diecast? I'm not familiar with all the casting so I'm just wondering what determines the two different castings.
 
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019, 3:37 PM Frank Sergent <fsergent@...> wrote:
Hi Todd,
 
Unfortunately I have zero of those left. The lower shelf castings are diecast. That’s why I can continue to offer the SBEC87 couplers.
 
Thanks,
Frank
 
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 2:37 PM
Subject: [Sergent Engineering] Frank
 
I was hoping to see if you by chance had one extra long shank lower shelf laying around if not no worries but I've broken one off a centerbeam car. Also just curious since the lower shelfs are being produced is there a reason the long shanks can't be produced like those are?

Re: Frank

Tim L
 

Probably around $20,000. I think it'd take more than a few dollars from each of us to fund what Frank has already determined isn't viable cost wise to have a mold made for (The sales numbers probably don't add up to recover the cost to the mold). We'd likely be better off funding Frank a better 3D printer, one that actually works so he doesn't have to tinker to try and make the current one work.

The only thing is Frank doesn't particularly want to keep doing this in the future and I believe the specialty (non diecast) couplers have become a bit of a chore over other things for him these days (hence why he's not giving a whole lot of time to getting the 3D printer working). Frank has given us the designs for the couplers so we can make/get made our own. I'm still looking into this. I know for many the casting process would be beyond their ability or beyond what they can locate at home but any place that does investment casting should be able to cast the couplers, and should have a 3D printer of sufficient quality to make the investment parts as well if one doesn't have one one's self.

- Tim

On 28/04/2019 14:47, Nathan Rich wrote:
If we knew the cost of a set of steel molds, what if we did a GoFundMe to pay for the other molds for the different shank lengths? I'd kick in a few bucks toward the cost if it meant they would stay available.
Just an idea...
Nathan Rich

Re: Frank

Mark
 

Tim I believe you make great points, but I do think Nathan is onto at least part of the solution.

i think I have already purchased enough of Frank’s wonderful couplers for My personal needs but that doesn’t mean I would not be prepared to participate in a crowd funding venture to help Frank get what he needs to get on track.

I believe it would be in our best interests to support Frank to do what is required.   

Mark Stafford
Macedon Australia

Re: Frank

John Larkin
 

Just as a suggestion, how about we let Frank decide if he would like to have a better 3D printer for him to make coupler parts or would he prefer (because of time for smaller lots, for example) to let another party use his drawings to make parts for the low run specialty parts?  It might then be easier to set up a small corporation (of whatever type, C, S, etc.) and those who'd like to pitch in could own stock in the company.  The individual who is willing to make parts with it could be granted additional shares for the time, and then even get some added funds if the printer was used to make additional model railroad items that required time.  I'm trying to avoid saddling somebody with the burden of learning how to do 3D printing, then making and shipping parts, etc., without at least offering them something in return.

This is just an idea and I'm not trying to say this is a final solution, only one idea that might work.  I'm sure you guys would have better ideas so consider this a start.  Those who put money in could receive some compensation, or it might be in parts, of just good hearted helping, whatever is fair and works for everybody.

John Larkin



On Sunday, April 28, 2019, 12:46:15 AM CDT, Mark <markstafford15@...> wrote:


Tim I believe you make great points, but I do think Nathan is onto at least part of the solution.

i think I have already purchased enough of Frank’s wonderful couplers for My personal needs but that doesn’t mean I would not be prepared to participate in a crowd funding venture to help Frank get what he needs to get on track.

I believe it would be in our best interests to support Frank to do what is required.   

Mark Stafford
Macedon Australia

Re: Frank

Tim L
 

John,

I wasn't advocating that we should crowd fund Frank a 3D printer, I was trying to lightheartedly point out that *if* crowdfunding for Frank was something that happened then a 3D printer that "worked" (as opposed to a 3D printer that doesn't work like he has now) would be a more viable proposition than a set of steel molds for diecasting a single coupler. Frank fully intends for us to use his drawings to make couplers, that's why he's given the drawings to us - he wants us (us = hobby in general) to continue the couplers into the future long after he's done with it all. How well we (as a hobby) succeed in that is another matter.

Mark,

I wasn't trying to slap down Nathan's idea, just pointing out the likely realities of the outcome of a set of steel molds considering Frank would have already done the homework on the cost recovery front. Don't get me wrong, I don't want Frank to stop, at least not until I've worked out how to do it all (probably years!) as I need some speciality couplers still.

Noting your location, good to see another person from down here using Sergents; your only the third or fourth person in this country that I know of using them.

- Tim

On 28/04/2019 15:56, John Larkin via Groups.Io wrote:
Just as a suggestion, how about we let Frank decide if he would like to have a better 3D printer for him to make coupler parts or would he prefer (because of time for smaller lots, for example) to let another party use his drawings to make parts for the low run specialty parts? It might then be easier to set up a small corporation (of whatever type, C, S, etc.) and those who'd like to pitch in could own stock in the company.  The individual who is willing to make parts with it could be granted additional shares for the time, and then even get some added funds if the printer was used to make additional model railroad items that required time.  I'm trying to avoid saddling somebody with the burden of learning how to do 3D printing, then making and shipping parts, etc., without at least offering them something in return.
This is just an idea and I'm not trying to say this is a final solution, only one idea that might work.  I'm sure you guys would have better ideas so consider this a start.  Those who put money in could receive some compensation, or it might be in parts, of just good hearted helping, whatever is fair and works for everybody.
John Larkin

Re: Frank

Todd Fisher
 

Nathan I would definitely be on board with helping to pay for new molds if it meant getting to at least keep the long shanks going. I understand the others have to be done investment cast due to the higher detail on them and would love to see them back as well but Id be satisfied with some long shanks as a very large majority of what I still need to convert are cushioning cars and long cars. 


On Sun, Apr 28, 2019, 4:30 AM Tim L <tim@...> wrote:
John,

I wasn't advocating that we should crowd fund Frank a 3D printer, I was
trying to lightheartedly point out that *if* crowdfunding for Frank was
something that happened then a 3D printer that "worked" (as opposed to a
3D printer that doesn't work like he has now) would be a more viable
proposition than a set of steel molds for diecasting a single coupler.
Frank fully intends for us to use his drawings to make couplers, that's
why he's given the drawings to us - he wants us (us = hobby in general)
to continue the couplers into the future long after he's done with it
all. How well we (as a hobby) succeed in that is another matter.

Mark,

I wasn't trying to slap down Nathan's idea, just pointing out the likely
realities of the outcome of a set of steel molds considering Frank would
have already done the homework on the cost recovery front. Don't get me
wrong, I don't want Frank to stop, at least not until I've worked out
how to do it all (probably years!) as I need some speciality couplers still.

Noting your location, good to see another person from down here using
Sergents; your only the third or fourth person in this country that I
know of using them.

- Tim


On 28/04/2019 15:56, John Larkin via Groups.Io wrote:
> Just as a suggestion, how about we let Frank decide if he would like to
> have a better 3D printer for him to make coupler parts or would he
> prefer (because of time for smaller lots, for example) to let another
> party use his drawings to make parts for the low run specialty parts? 
> It might then be easier to set up a small corporation (of whatever type,
> C, S, etc.) and those who'd like to pitch in could own stock in the
> company.  The individual who is willing to make parts with it could be
> granted additional shares for the time, and then even get some added
> funds if the printer was used to make additional model railroad items
> that required time.  I'm trying to avoid saddling somebody with the
> burden of learning how to do 3D printing, then making and shipping
> parts, etc., without at least offering them something in return.
>
> This is just an idea and I'm not trying to say this is a final solution,
> only one idea that might work.  I'm sure you guys would have better
> ideas so consider this a start.  Those who put money in could receive
> some compensation, or it might be in parts, of just good hearted
> helping, whatever is fair and works for everybody.
>
> John Larkin



Re: (topic was Frank) New topic - progress is being made

Tom Colasurdo
 

All:

Let Frank weigh in on the crowd funding idea for a 3-D printer ... no sense speculating, or setting parameters.

I don't know Frank other than the e-mails we have exchanged and the posts on the Groups.io site, but I have sensed that his family or business or both are requiring larger amounts of his time ... and both are reasonable priorities in anyone's life.

Do not despair at the additional work now required of us ... Frank created an amazing product that all of us on this site desire.  Frank also provided his intellectual property in the form of 3-D electronic files ... when's the last time IBM, GE, Microsoft, Apple, etc did that ?  The beauty of having these files is we can modify to create never before available couplers ... let your imagination wander ... this can be fun if you let it.

Short of someone coming forth to purchase Frank's coupler business, we have to set our minds on what we desire and how to achieve that within our means.

I'm not making any promises today, and I'm not offering another's time without their permission ... so please be patient, and I'll let everyone interested know exactly what I've been up to.  Model railroading is a community, and it's amazing how often strangers become friends and mentors.  True networking is often mistaken for chance ... but I do not believe in chance.

I've attached the first samples of 3-D printed parts from Frank's S scale coupler files ... there is hope.

I have a day job, and a family ... I typically check e-mail once a day (after work on week days, and morning on weekends), so please be patient if you post or send me an e-mail.  In this microwave society I understand that self governance and control are in short supply ... I have no malice relative to my modeling, and my only agenda is to figure out how to obtain the needed parts for my modeling in the environment which we find ourselves ... so please, do not create a narrative in your mind and type for all to consume ... way too much of that in this day and age.

Have a great day ... more to follow.

V/r,
Tom C.



On Sunday, April 28, 2019, 7:14:31 AM CDT, Todd Fisher <tftrainman1@...> wrote:


Nathan I would definitely be on board with helping to pay for new molds if it meant getting to at least keep the long shanks going. I understand the others have to be done investment cast due to the higher detail on them and would love to see them back as well but Id be satisfied with some long shanks as a very large majority of what I still need to convert are cushioning cars and long cars. 

On Sun, Apr 28, 2019, 4:30 AM Tim L <tim@...> wrote:
John,

I wasn't advocating that we should crowd fund Frank a 3D printer, I was
trying to lightheartedly point out that *if* crowdfunding for Frank was
something that happened then a 3D printer that "worked" (as opposed to a
3D printer that doesn't work like he has now) would be a more viable
proposition than a set of steel molds for diecasting a single coupler.
Frank fully intends for us to use his drawings to make couplers, that's
why he's given the drawings to us - he wants us (us = hobby in general)
to continue the couplers into the future long after he's done with it
all. How well we (as a hobby) succeed in that is another matter.

Mark,

I wasn't trying to slap down Nathan's idea, just pointing out the likely
realities of the outcome of a set of steel molds considering Frank would
have already done the homework on the cost recovery front. Don't get me
wrong, I don't want Frank to stop, at least not until I've worked out
how to do it all (probably years!) as I need some speciality couplers still.

Noting your location, good to see another person from down here using
Sergents; your only the third or fourth person in this country that I
know of using them.

- Tim


On 28/04/2019 15:56, John Larkin via Groups.Io wrote:
> Just as a suggestion, how about we let Frank decide if he would like to
> have a better 3D printer for him to make coupler parts or would he
> prefer (because of time for smaller lots, for example) to let another
> party use his drawings to make parts for the low run specialty parts? 
> It might then be easier to set up a small corporation (of whatever type,
> C, S, etc.) and those who'd like to pitch in could own stock in the
> company.  The individual who is willing to make parts with it could be
> granted additional shares for the time, and then even get some added
> funds if the printer was used to make additional model railroad items
> that required time.  I'm trying to avoid saddling somebody with the
> burden of learning how to do 3D printing, then making and shipping
> parts, etc., without at least offering them something in return.
>
> This is just an idea and I'm not trying to say this is a final solution,
> only one idea that might work.  I'm sure you guys would have better
> ideas so consider this a start.  Those who put money in could receive
> some compensation, or it might be in parts, of just good hearted
> helping, whatever is fair and works for everybody.
>
> John Larkin



Re: (topic was Frank) New topic - progress is being made

George
 

Those look great, Tom.

George Sebastian-Coleman



On Apr 28, 2019, at 10:55 AM, Tom Colasurdo via Groups.Io <t_colasurdo@...> wrote:

All:

Let Frank weigh in on the crowd funding idea for a 3-D printer ... no sense speculating, or setting parameters.

I don't know Frank other than the e-mails we have exchanged and the posts on the Groups.io site, but I have sensed that his family or business or both are requiring larger amounts of his time ... and both are reasonable priorities in anyone's life.

Do not despair at the additional work now required of us ... Frank created an amazing product that all of us on this site desire.  Frank also provided his intellectual property in the form of 3-D electronic files ... when's the last time IBM, GE, Microsoft, Apple, etc did that ?  The beauty of having these files is we can modify to create never before available couplers ... let your imagination wander ... this can be fun if you let it.

Short of someone coming forth to purchase Frank's coupler business, we have to set our minds on what we desire and how to achieve that within our means.

I'm not making any promises today, and I'm not offering another's time without their permission ... so please be patient, and I'll let everyone interested know exactly what I've been up to.  Model railroading is a community, and it's amazing how often strangers become friends and mentors.  True networking is often mistaken for chance ... but I do not believe in chance.

I've attached the first samples of 3-D printed parts from Frank's S scale coupler files ... there is hope.

I have a day job, and a family ... I typically check e-mail once a day (after work on week days, and morning on weekends), so please be patient if you post or send me an e-mail.  In this microwave society I understand that self governance and control are in short supply ... I have no malice relative to my modeling, and my only agenda is to figure out how to obtain the needed parts for my modeling in the environment which we find ourselves ... so please, do not create a narrative in your mind and type for all to consume ... way too much of that in this day and age.

Have a great day ... more to follow.

V/r,
Tom C.



On Sunday, April 28, 2019, 7:14:31 AM CDT, Todd Fisher <tftrainman1@...> wrote:


Nathan I would definitely be on board with helping to pay for new molds if it meant getting to at least keep the long shanks going. I understand the others have to be done investment cast due to the higher detail on them and would love to see them back as well but Id be satisfied with some long shanks as a very large majority of what I still need to convert are cushioning cars and long cars. 

On Sun, Apr 28, 2019, 4:30 AM Tim L <tim@...> wrote:
John,

I wasn't advocating that we should crowd fund Frank a 3D printer, I was
trying to lightheartedly point out that *if* crowdfunding for Frank was
something that happened then a 3D printer that "worked" (as opposed to a
3D printer that doesn't work like he has now) would be a more viable
proposition than a set of steel molds for diecasting a single coupler.
Frank fully intends for us to use his drawings to make couplers, that's
why he's given the drawings to us - he wants us (us = hobby in general)
to continue the couplers into the future long after he's done with it
all. How well we (as a hobby) succeed in that is another matter.

Mark,

I wasn't trying to slap down Nathan's idea, just pointing out the likely
realities of the outcome of a set of steel molds considering Frank would
have already done the homework on the cost recovery front. Don't get me
wrong, I don't want Frank to stop, at least not until I've worked out
how to do it all (probably years!) as I need some speciality couplers still.

Noting your location, good to see another person from down here using
Sergents; your only the third or fourth person in this country that I
know of using them.

- Tim


On 28/04/2019 15:56, John Larkin via Groups.Io wrote:
> Just as a suggestion, how about we let Frank decide if he would like to
> have a better 3D printer for him to make coupler parts or would he
> prefer (because of time for smaller lots, for example) to let another
> party use his drawings to make parts for the low run specialty parts? 
> It might then be easier to set up a small corporation (of whatever type,
> C, S, etc.) and those who'd like to pitch in could own stock in the
> company.  The individual who is willing to make parts with it could be
> granted additional shares for the time, and then even get some added
> funds if the printer was used to make additional model railroad items
> that required time.  I'm trying to avoid saddling somebody with the
> burden of learning how to do 3D printing, then making and shipping
> parts, etc., without at least offering them something in return.
>
> This is just an idea and I'm not trying to say this is a final solution,
> only one idea that might work.  I'm sure you guys would have better
> ideas so consider this a start.  Those who put money in could receive
> some compensation, or it might be in parts, of just good hearted
> helping, whatever is fair and works for everybody.
>
> John Larkin



<S scale coupler body left side.JPG><S scale coupler body right side.JPG><S scale coupler bottom view.JPG><S scale coupler end view.JPG><S scale coupler top view.JPG><S scale fitted piece  left side.JPG><S scale fitted piece bottom view.JPG><S scale fitted piece right side.JPG><S scale fitted piece top view.JPG>

Re: (topic was Frank) New topic - progress is being made

Tom Colasurdo
 

Thanks George ... but I cannot take create for creating these parts, I'm working with some amazingly talented folks that have a common interest.

I'm sure Frank, and others who focus on detail, can see there are issues at the pivot posts.  The 3-D printed posts are too cylindrical to function properly with the diecast knuckles.

Another area of concern is the ball socket.  The ball rides too high in the 3-D printed parts ... meaning the socket is not the correct diameter for the balls utilized.  Going to a smaller ball is not the option we are following at the current time.

Once we work these issues, and have a reliably functioning coupler, I will post how we got there.

Not sure the end game is producing metal parts ... Frank mentioned to me not to discount resin parts, and the folks helping this along are in alignment with Frank.  Also good to have a back up plan, and metal parts may be the back up plan or option.  Time will tell.

I'm optimistic ... Frank really has done a wonderful job on these couplers, and was amazingly generous with his CAD files.

Have a great day.

V/r,
Tom C.



On Sunday, April 28, 2019, 11:18:19 AM CDT, George <gsebastiancoleman@...> wrote:


Those look great, Tom.

George Sebastian-Coleman



On Apr 28, 2019, at 10:55 AM, Tom Colasurdo via Groups.Io <t_colasurdo@...> wrote:

All:

Let Frank weigh in on the crowd funding idea for a 3-D printer ... no sense speculating, or setting parameters.

I don't know Frank other than the e-mails we have exchanged and the posts on the Groups.io site, but I have sensed that his family or business or both are requiring larger amounts of his time ... and both are reasonable priorities in anyone's life.

Do not despair at the additional work now required of us ... Frank created an amazing product that all of us on this site desire.  Frank also provided his intellectual property in the form of 3-D electronic files ... when's the last time IBM, GE, Microsoft, Apple, etc did that ?  The beauty of having these files is we can modify to create never before available couplers ... let your imagination wander ... this can be fun if you let it.

Short of someone coming forth to purchase Frank's coupler business, we have to set our minds on what we desire and how to achieve that within our means.

I'm not making any promises today, and I'm not offering another's time without their permission ... so please be patient, and I'll let everyone interested know exactly what I've been up to.  Model railroading is a community, and it's amazing how often strangers become friends and mentors.  True networking is often mistaken for chance ... but I do not believe in chance.

I've attached the first samples of 3-D printed parts from Frank's S scale coupler files ... there is hope.

I have a day job, and a family ... I typically check e-mail once a day (after work on week days, and morning on weekends), so please be patient if you post or send me an e-mail.  In this microwave society I understand that self governance and control are in short supply ... I have no malice relative to my modeling, and my only agenda is to figure out how to obtain the needed parts for my modeling in the environment which we find ourselves ... so please, do not create a narrative in your mind and type for all to consume ... way too much of that in this day and age.

Have a great day ... more to follow.

V/r,
Tom C.



On Sunday, April 28, 2019, 7:14:31 AM CDT, Todd Fisher <tftrainman1@...> wrote:


Nathan I would definitely be on board with helping to pay for new molds if it meant getting to at least keep the long shanks going. I understand the others have to be done investment cast due to the higher detail on them and would love to see them back as well but Id be satisfied with some long shanks as a very large majority of what I still need to convert are cushioning cars and long cars. 

On Sun, Apr 28, 2019, 4:30 AM Tim L <tim@...> wrote:
John,

I wasn't advocating that we should crowd fund Frank a 3D printer, I was
trying to lightheartedly point out that *if* crowdfunding for Frank was
something that happened then a 3D printer that "worked" (as opposed to a
3D printer that doesn't work like he has now) would be a more viable
proposition than a set of steel molds for diecasting a single coupler.
Frank fully intends for us to use his drawings to make couplers, that's
why he's given the drawings to us - he wants us (us = hobby in general)
to continue the couplers into the future long after he's done with it
all. How well we (as a hobby) succeed in that is another matter.

Mark,

I wasn't trying to slap down Nathan's idea, just pointing out the likely
realities of the outcome of a set of steel molds considering Frank would
have already done the homework on the cost recovery front. Don't get me
wrong, I don't want Frank to stop, at least not until I've worked out
how to do it all (probably years!) as I need some speciality couplers still.

Noting your location, good to see another person from down here using
Sergents; your only the third or fourth person in this country that I
know of using them.

- Tim


On 28/04/2019 15:56, John Larkin via Groups.Io wrote:
> Just as a suggestion, how about we let Frank decide if he would like to
> have a better 3D printer for him to make coupler parts or would he
> prefer (because of time for smaller lots, for example) to let another
> party use his drawings to make parts for the low run specialty parts? 
> It might then be easier to set up a small corporation (of whatever type,
> C, S, etc.) and those who'd like to pitch in could own stock in the
> company.  The individual who is willing to make parts with it could be
> granted additional shares for the time, and then even get some added
> funds if the printer was used to make additional model railroad items
> that required time.  I'm trying to avoid saddling somebody with the
> burden of learning how to do 3D printing, then making and shipping
> parts, etc., without at least offering them something in return.
>
> This is just an idea and I'm not trying to say this is a final solution,
> only one idea that might work.  I'm sure you guys would have better
> ideas so consider this a start.  Those who put money in could receive
> some compensation, or it might be in parts, of just good hearted
> helping, whatever is fair and works for everybody.
>
> John Larkin



<S scale coupler body left side.JPG><S scale coupler body right side.JPG><S scale coupler bottom view.JPG><S scale coupler end view.JPG><S scale coupler top view.JPG><S scale fitted piece  left side.JPG><S scale fitted piece bottom view.JPG><S scale fitted piece right side.JPG><S scale fitted piece top view.JPG>