How to "re height" couplers

[Gremlin]

Hi All

 

I have some Farish Mk1 coaches, new ones, where the couplers are pointing upwards rather than being level, and this is causing random uncoupling around parts of the track.

 

Is there a good way to bend/something the coupler back to level...or should I just replace them with Dapol couplers?

[Les1952]

Assuming these are NEM couplers, my method is to keep a stock of replacement coupler heads.

 

In the case of couplers that bend upwards (not that uncommon with Farish whereas Dapol ones often droop) I swap the coupler head over.  If after two attempts the thing is still pointing upwards then it is a fault in the NEM pocket, which means eBay beckons for that coach....

 

I use the same method on Dapol droopy couplers (sometimes using a Farish head that bends upwards will solve a droopy Dapol problem )

 

Les

[Gremlin]

Thanks for that...any thoughts about replacing all the NEM couplers with more prototypical Dapol/Microytains (if they fit?)

[Kris]

Dapol couplers will fit, but they can be a tight fit. 

[Portpatrick]

My own impression - not scientifically tested -  is that Farish Rapidos can be loose in a Dapol pocket.  And Dapol easishunt can be tight in a Farish pocket.  My conclusion being that Dapol has slightly wider slots and thicker coupling shafts than Farish.

 

I have sometimes glued a slither - 5 thou typically - of styrene to the underside of a drooping coupling.  Always lifts it sufficiently.  If a coupling is pointing up perhaps a slither on the top?

[Les1952]

My own impression - not scientifically tested -  is that Farish Rapidos can be loose in a Dapol pocket.  And Dapol easishunt can be tight in a Farish pocket.  My conclusion being that Dapol has slightly wider slots and thicker coupling shafts than Farish.

 

I have sometimes glued a slither - 5 thou typically - of styrene to the underside of a drooping coupling.  Always lifts it sufficiently.  If a coupling is pointing up perhaps a slither on the top?

 

Dapol pockets (slots) are identical in size to those used by Arnold, Fleischmann, Piko, Brawa and Minitrix that I have direct experience of through my former layout Furtwangen Ost.  Their coupler heads work seamlessly in those pockets.  There is an international standard for the width of these slots and Dapol plus the Continentals use one width while Farish (initially) used a narrower width.  This does beg the question of which manufacturer didn't read the standards correctly.  

 

Recent Farish pockets SEEM now to have fallen in line with the rest, though as usual there has been no announcement of a change.

 

Les

 

edited for grammar.

Edited December 31, 2017 by Les1952

[johnlambert]

I'm sure I read somewhere that Farish NEM pockets were at the smaller end of the permitted size range.  On some Mk1 coaches I had to gently ease the pockets open with a small screwdriver before inserting Dapol couplings.

[Portpatrick]

Dapol pockets (slots) are identical in size to those used by Arnold, Fleischmann, Piko, Brawa and Minitrix that I have direct experience of through my former layout Furtwangen Ost.  Their coupler heads work seamlessly in those pockets.  There is an international standard for the width of these slots and Dapol plus the Continentals use one width while Farish (initially) used a narrower width does beg the question of which manufacturer didn't read the standards correctly.  

 

Recent Farish pockets SEEM now to have fallen in line with the rest, though as usual there has been no announcement of a change.

 

Les

Thanks for this Les.  You have confirmed my suspicions.  I have no experience on continental pockets.   John's comments confirm as well.

[scruff]

Thanks for this Les.  You have confirmed my suspicions.  I have no experience on continental pockets.   John's comments confirm as well.

I believe Dave Jones commented on this years ago while he was still at Dapol.. He said measure the pockets and see who got the size correct. if I remember rightly!

 

Cheers

Mark