English OO trains need help with couplers
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Rick Mitchell - 19 Aug 2006 04:35 GMT Hi All,
I need help in finding information on changing the couplers on my English Trains, I have hornby, Lima models they are about 15years old and have that hook type coupler that hooks over the bar of the next car etc.
Is they a way to change them to more realistic couplers? (The only example of the coupler I have seen in hobby shops in the US is on Thomas and friends sold by Bachmann's) I think I would have to install some sort of conversion kit but not sure.
Any suggesting or web sites I might try to help with this would be greatly appreciated.
Rick
t.cane@btinternet.com - 19 Aug 2006 09:02 GMT >Hi All, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Rick Hi Rick
The only reaiastic coupling for most UK portotypes is a small hook with a chain. This is only practical for simple layouts or larger scales.
There are are number of articles on the web about converting UK models to Kadee couplings. This is not a easy exercise on some models as the base of the existing coupling has to be removed and often the area where the Kadee is to be mounted restored to a flat surface. There is also the problem that the buffers require the Kadee to be mounted further out than on US stock.
If you put " UK kadee coupling conversion" or similar phrases into Google you will find some good advice on how to do this conversion.
Regards
Tony Cane
Beowulf - 21 Aug 2006 20:26 GMT Rick Mitchell <MitchellRA@gmail.com> skrev i diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:1155958523.259363.302590@m79g2000cwm.googlegrou ps.com...
> Hi All, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Rick Salvé tThere are a few options open, one ofcourse is to stay with the traditional british couplers which work :) Then there are link and hook couplers, which are realistic, but require at the very least a bar across the buffers to stop "buffer lock" on curves, Spratt and Winkle couplers which are a near invisible coupler worked magnetically and are cheap are another option, look in the British modelling press to obtain them, Kadee style couplers in my opinion are not an option because except on really modern stock because they look so wrong, the traditional coupler does the job very efectively they keep the stock far enough apart to stop buffer lock,and keep them coupled (!) but the kaydee is a prototypical type which looks totally wrong on any but the most modern British types, buckeye couplings have been used on coaching stock for many years but 3 link, Instanter and (on Victorian period) 5 link and screw link couplers have been the standard on prototype stock since the beginning, and a kaydee on any P/O wagon (Waggon) looks just plain ludicrous a real anachronism, maybe its just me but the usefullness of the kaydee disappears because it looks wrong , for some reason for me (And others!!) its easier to accept the unprototypical Walkley coupling ( because it is unprototypical?!) than the kaydees, Spratt and Winkles magnetically operated couplers are probably the way for you to go, they are near invisible and allow all the benefits that the Kaydee do without the visual impact of a foreign bt of kit at both ends jarring the imagination... The disadvantages of using links and hook is this, propelling a rake of chain couple wagons, without a wire across the buffer heads will cause buffer lock, you'll also need very easy curves to stop this happening too, which is only a minor problem compared to needing the hands of a neurosurgeon for uncoupling them(He may object to your sawing his mitts off so you can couple and uncouple a rake of coaches or wagons !) as well as a microscope to find the bloody things between each and every wagon/coach/loco........, As far as finding Spratt and Winkle types go try Hattons (of Liverpool) who sell everything railwayee :) hope this harangue confuses you less than it did me writing it.....oh yes there are alo the various couplers sold by PECO in their catalogue.....oh yes lots of typs matey.. urk! oh yes British modellers have been discussing this since the twenties when A.R. Walkley invented HO and his coupler..... Beowulf (now I'm going for a cup of char....)
Greg.P. - 21 Sep 2006 03:05 GMT Pre the NEM 362 coupler pocket Lima had snap-in couplers on many of it's products. These have a vertical snap peg under the frame and the alternatives were: - UK hook and loop. - European loop and buffer. - US horn-hook.
Bogie stock (including locos) did not have removable couplers, the entire bogie was normally available with either European or UK couplers. In the case of locos the coupler was a part of the sideframe moulding.
With the European coupler, there were two distinct types, the early very clumsy type and then for a few years a much finer loop and buffer type much like a Roco coupler in size. Once the NEM362 coupler pocket was added to older models a snap-in loop and buffer coupler was produced. This was slightly larger than the second generation vertical peg type.
Bottom line - you would need to order replacement bogies from Britain to convert older European models to British couplers, bogies from Europe to convert older British models to European couplers and from the US to convert older models to US couplers. If you have models with NEM 362 pockets then there are Bachmann hook and loop couplers (and possibly Hornby and Dapol) which will snap in. Lima only produced a limited selection of it's total range for the US market but a surprisingly large selection for the UK market.
Regards, Greg.P.
> Rick Mitchell <MitchellRA@gmail.com> skrev i > diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:1155958523.259363.302590@m79g2000cwm.googlegrou [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > invented HO and his coupler..... > Beowulf (now I'm going for a cup of char....) David Bromage - 21 Sep 2006 04:14 GMT "Realistic" for British and European prototypes means drawhooks and screw couplers. Not sure about HO but some UK manufacturers such as Exactoscale make them in 4mm. http://www.exactoscale.co.uk/drawings/4CP%20S01A.pdf
Even high speed trains have screw couplers. See for example the end of a TGV La Poste half set and the new Siemens ES64U2, one of which recently set a world record for electric locos of 357km/h. http://www.trainweb.org/tgvpages/images/laposte/laposte5.jpg http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/at/electric/1116/110-119/1116er_At.jpg
Of course you could always put Kadees on them. Knuckle couplers aren't common in the UK and even less common in Europe so they won't look right, but they won't look any less realistic on a British/European prototype than the Hornby or Lima types.
Much of Europe bypassed knuckle couplers completely and went straight to multi-function couplers for multiple unit trains. http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/de/diesel/dmu/648/648_Kiel.jpg
Cheers David
Greg.P. - 21 Sep 2006 07:04 GMT > "Realistic" for British and European prototypes means drawhooks and screw > couplers. Not sure about HO but some UK manufacturers such as Exactoscale [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Cheers > David A problem with knuckle couplers on European stock is that when set at "Kadee/correct" height they connect with the buffers. Because there is a much greater disparity in length between the longest and shortest rolling stock, the couplers need greater sideways movement than they would on US stock. Add to that the smaller spaces generally available to European modellers and the problem is compounded. Most European/British modellers who successfully use Kadees have straight line layouts. I've yet to see a worse looking coupler than the Hornby type, other than the Lima variation of the same thing.
Regards, Greg.P.
Beowulf - 21 Sep 2006 20:11 GMT > A problem with knuckle couplers on European stock is that when set at > "Kadee/correct" height they connect with the buffers. Because there is a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Regards, > Greg.P. There was a method for adapting the Lima coupler to carry the Fleischman, and the best cuopler for invisibility is still the Spratt and Winkle magnetic which is made out of piano wire , The fact is that in order to work with buffers a coupler must hold the wagon away from the preceeding wagon at a distance to stop buffer lock whilst proppelling or crossing points or curves the fact is that most coupler disappear between the wagons just as the prototypes did so Just by dismantling the forward coupler from the engine and the rear coupler from the guards vanan immediate improvement can be made. As to Buckeye couplers I can with absolute authority say that they were disliked by most Train Guards due to the ride given by them being rather jerkier than that of a similar coach connected by screw link (not instanter or 3 link which were exclusively or goods stock) I can say this because I was a guard basaed at Watford Junction so know my onions! atleast pre 80´s :) Beowulf
Greg.P. - 21 Sep 2006 22:01 GMT >> A problem with knuckle couplers on European stock is that when set at >> "Kadee/correct" height they connect with the buffers. Because there is a [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > and the best cuopler for invisibility is still the Spratt and Winkle > magnetic which is made out of piano wire , Isn't the Spratt and Winkle an etched brass loop/rising hook coupler? There's another commonly used British coupler named for the inventor's initials (won't come to mind just now) which used a wire hook under the buffer beams and steel chain loops for a magnetic dropper. I tried it but there is too much side play in HO NEM wheels for reliable coupling.
> The fact is that in order to work > with buffers a coupler must hold the wagon away from the preceeding wagon > at a distance to stop buffer lock whilst proppelling or crossing points or > curves the fact is that most coupler disappear between the wagons just as > the prototypes did so That's another problem in substituting Kadees, one ends up with 5 pivot points in the couplings between wagons.
> Just by dismantling the forward coupler from the > engine and the rear coupler from the guards vanan immediate improvement > can > be made. I rejected that option as it places limitations on operations.
> As to Buckeye couplers I can with absolute authority say that they > were disliked by most Train Guards due to the ride given by them being [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > atleast > pre 80´s :) That has been one of the reasons why European railways stayed with screw couplings, in spite of the extra work involved in coupling and uncoupling.
Regards, Greg.P.
Peter W. - 21 Sep 2006 23:48 GMT Whoa!
There are three Greg P. postings on this thread and no Mark Newton couterposts yet?! He must be snoozin' at the keyboard. Or maybe he is not a OO scale coupler expert? Neah...
Actually, I find it quite refreshing to see a thread without bickering.
I still remember the Newton/Flynn battles about a year ago. I know, I should find this stuff amusing. But I only find it annoying.
Peteski
Greg.P. - 22 Sep 2006 05:29 GMT > Whoa! > > There are three Greg P. postings on this thread and no Mark Newton > couterposts yet?! He didn't comment on the one where I recommended DCC either!
> He must be snoozin' at the keyboard. Or maybe he is not a OO scale > coupler expert? Neah... He uses old shoelaces for couplings.
> Actually, I find it quite refreshing to see a thread without bickering. > > I still remember the Newton/Flynn battles about a year ago. I know, I > should find this stuff amusing. But I only find it annoying. Me too - make him stop!
Regards, Greg.P.
mark_newton - 22 Sep 2006 12:41 GMT > Whoa! > > There are three Greg P. postings on this thread and no Mark Newton > couterposts yet?! He must be snoozin' at the keyboard. Or maybe he is > not a OO scale coupler expert? Correct. I know nothing about 00 scale couplers.
But unlike Procter, I don't feel the overwhelming need to post opinions on subjects I know nothing about.
Greg.P. - 22 Sep 2006 20:51 GMT > > Whoa! > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > But unlike Procter, I don't feel the overwhelming need to post opinions > on subjects I know nothing about. Of course you do, Mork. There's the various threads on DCC vs DC and train operation for a start!
Regards, Greg.P.
Peter W. - 23 Sep 2006 03:01 GMT > > > Whoa! > > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Regards, > Greg.P. Ahh... Mark found it! Here goes another thread. I'm sure it too will soon turn into another pissin' contest.
At least I've clearly marked this piece of it as "OT". :-)
Peteski
Greg.P. - 23 Sep 2006 09:42 GMT >> > > Whoa! >> > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > At least I've clearly marked this piece of it as "OT". :-) I'll be gone for a week from about Wednesday - someone else will have to spar with Mark for me.
Regards, Greg.P.
Peter W. - 25 Sep 2006 05:24 GMT > I'll be gone for a week from about Wednesday - someone else will have to > spar with Mark for me. > > Regards, > Greg.P. Maybe Terry Flynn will step up to fill the void.... Just like the old times...
Peteski
Greg Rudd - 26 Sep 2006 08:09 GMT > > I'll be gone for a week from about Wednesday - someone else will have to > > spar with Mark for me. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Peteski I seem to notice that you have steped up to the mark yourself.
Greg Rudd Hypocrite NSW
Peter W. - 27 Sep 2006 06:54 GMT > > > I'll be gone for a week from about Wednesday - someone else will have to > > > spar with Mark for me. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Greg Rudd I don't think so. I'm done here. I'm sure you see marks full potential in the current GregP battles of words. I'm small potatoes compared to GregP and Terry Flynn.
BTW, clever play on words.
Peteski
mark_newton - 25 Sep 2006 13:41 GMT >>> Whoa! >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Of course you do, Mork. There's the various threads on DCC vs DC and > train operation for a start! Yeah, Procter - that's why I'm employed by a railway operator as train crew, to run trains, and why you still can't get your pointy little troll head around something simple like TT/TO.
mark_newton - 25 Sep 2006 13:43 GMT > Whoa! > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I still remember the Newton/Flynn battles about a year ago. I know, I > should find this stuff amusing. But I only find it annoying. Ah, I remember now why I had you killfiled.
Peter W. - 26 Sep 2006 03:11 GMT > > Whoa! > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Ah, I remember now why I had you killfiled. Your memory is fading a bit Mark, isn't it? But your caustic personallity hasn't changed a bit. And I'm not biting this time. I'm not going to ask you to create alt.mark.likes.to.spew.crap group and vent there. I got used to the likes of you frequenting this group and spewing OT bickering all over the group. Carry on! And have lots of fun doing it.
And judging by the copious quantities of vile posts from you, it seems that you much rather argue than provide some useful on-topic contrbutions. Occasionally however, you do seem to be in a good and constructive mood. Like I said, whatever works for you...
:-) Peteski
|
|
|