sagaguy Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 The tool that shot the the Dublo diesel shunter was modified to give the body for the starter sets much to Wrenns annoyance when they anounced the reintroduction of the 0-6-0 loco to their range.They had to have a new tool made at considerable cost. Ray. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, sagaguy said: Yes,a strange coupling.Possibly to get over any patent infringement.These are Playcraft. Ray. It had possibly expired? IIRC the duration of patents was extended to 25 years later on but I can't remember what it was before. It's sufficiently near to the Peco design to be an infringement. A spike on the top and the closer tip pin spacing didn't help Trix. The thick hook is rather unsightly IMHO. Edited January 20, 2021 by Il Grifone 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagaguy Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 I think Peco got half a pence royalty on every coupling that Meccano produced which enabled Sydney Pritchard to start up his company.I think Peco kept the rights to the model railway side and Meccano had the rights to the toy train trade. Ray. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 That was certainly the case regarding the rights. I don't know whether it was a royalty payment per coupling or a lump sum. I suspect the latter, since the action against Trix was a joint effort which would not have made sense unless Meccano Ltd. had a financial interest. Tri-ang were too mean to even pay the farthing a coupling Trix were charged. It would only have added a penny to the final price of the item - neither here nor there even then - and we would have been spared the tension lock horror (and maybe the 2mm over height). The original couplings are 100% compatible, but the HD will not couple to the later Magni-Simplex, as the HD head is too large to enter the jaws of the Magni-Simplex. The Peco head is smaller and does couple. I must see if the Peco types will couple with Kadee. The operating height is the same, despite the scale difference. (There is 1/64" in it, but again neither here nor there.) 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagaguy Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 Meccano did offer a lump sum but Pritchard stuck out for royalties,very shrewd move. Ray. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roythebus1 Posted January 29, 2021 Share Posted January 29, 2021 From what I've read previously, Pritchard made enough to finance Peco for a long time. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruffnut Thorston Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 (edited) On 17/01/2021 at 22:31, Ruffnut Thorston said: The first type of plastic Hornby-Dublo couplings were introduced with the Super Detail Carriages in 1960. The later plastic coupling, the better looking and performing “Delrin” type, came in later... Around 1962-3? I too am away from the reference library... The NPC, new plastic couplings, or Delrin couplings were introduced in 1963 it would seem, just towards the end of Hornby Dublo production, finished by 1964, and about a year after the introduction of the most common wagon swb chassis with open brake gear around 1962... This was the type of Hornby Dublo coupling screw fitted to the Tri-ang Hornby Converter Wagon and Horsebox... Edited January 31, 2021 by Ruffnut Thorston Typo...Change LPC to NPC 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagaguy Posted January 31, 2021 Share Posted January 31, 2021 I think they were introduced with the much collected hopper wagon. Ray. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverfox17 Posted January 31, 2021 Share Posted January 31, 2021 (edited) 31 minutes ago, sagaguy said: I think they were introduced with the much collected hopper wagon. Ray. Also the 6 wheel stove van. Fitted with a silly plastic clip instead of a screw or rivet in this case too. Garry Edited January 31, 2021 by Silverfox17 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roythebus1 Posted January 31, 2021 Share Posted January 31, 2021 In the mid 1960s Trix had a showroom in Great Portland Street, around the time they were introducing their new "fine scale" range of coaches and locos. they ere selling the old tinplate wagons off for a shilling each (5p in new money). We used to buy then just for the couplings. Pity we didn't know then what an investment they would have been 50 years later. The wagons got binned and the couplings used to convert Tri-ang stock as the MRC layout used HD/Peco couplings. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted January 31, 2021 Share Posted January 31, 2021 1 hour ago, sagaguy said: I think they were introduced with the much collected hopper wagon. Ray. I still need one of these. I turned down a boxed Wrenn example at £9 about twenty years ago. I must have had a brainstorm that day, but IIRC the colour of the plastic was rather unlike BR grey. The last few are being sold off on eBay at the moment as bodies and underframe castings, but you need to buy six and then source all the missing bits. I also need SD6 restaurant cars, stove van, EMU, AL1 and the mythical track cleaning wagon. Seeing the prices asked, I fear they will remain needs. TTR tinplate wagons are still not worth much. At a shilling each, I think you'd about break even. Back then the Peco couplings were 1/6d a pair, so some saving, but they need modifying to uncouple. The Wrenn magnetic uncoupler does however work with Trix etc couplings and requires the trip pin bent inwards to uncouple HD and Peco couplings. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruffnut Thorston Posted January 31, 2021 Share Posted January 31, 2021 (edited) I'm just looking in the Hornby Dublo Technical Manual...by David B. Neale. This has 03/06/62 as the approximate date of the introduction of the NPC new pattern plastic couplings. PW Pre-war coupling from 16/10/1937. FMC metal couplings from 07/04/1946. The Manual uses FMC to cover all varieties of post-war metal couplings. EPC early plastic couplings from 06/04/1960. The HDTM parts list states:- FMC Metal Coupling pre 06/04/60. EPC Early Nylon Coupling post 06/04/60. NPC Fine Plastic Coupling post 03/06/62. Changed from Nylon to Black Delrin 12/06/63. These dates are mainly from Meccano drawing office dates, so actual production would be a bit later... Edited January 31, 2021 by Ruffnut Thorston added info from HDTM parts list...tidying up... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted January 31, 2021 Share Posted January 31, 2021 The first Dublo plastic couplings seem rather fragile to be nylon. Horrible things! I would say that it took about a year for the changes to take effect. The range was launched in late1938 and the first post-war sets appeared in 1947 (like me!). The first two rail locomotives had metal couplings. April 1960 seems about right for the short circuit problem to surface and a couple of years for customer reaction (complaints/disappointing sales figures) to filter through. The metal couplings have no markings, then patent nos. and finally the two tags on the knuckle to distinguish them, AFAIK. (The first/second, "Who cares?" and the third cures a design fault (spurious uncoupling). 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
locomad2 Posted February 6, 2021 Share Posted February 6, 2021 Still interesting this thread found a couple of old trix coupling pre 1954, the ones with the spike on top allowing coupling to old pre war type. First mentioned in 1948 catalogue 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted February 6, 2021 Share Posted February 6, 2021 (edited) 'Spur'! I always wondered what to call it! Interestingly the illustration shows it bent inwards, whereas, on all the ones I've seen, it is vertical. Possibly they found that bent it interfered with coupling/uncoupling. It couples OK with the pre-war/Express* coupling , but the inter-vehicle distance is then rather large. *German Trix kept the pre-war coupling. Edited February 6, 2021 by Il Grifone 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roythebus1 Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 (edited) The early Trix coupling seems like an early form of remote uncoupling adapted by Kadee. ISTR a friend had an R1 in the mid 1960s with a shiny metal coupling and a bit of rubber or plastic sleeving on a tail behind the mounting, presumably to aid self-centring. Edited February 9, 2021 by roythebus1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruffnut Thorston Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 The shiny coupling with rubber tube “spring” was standard equipment for the Hornby Dublo R1 locos... The rubber tube is similar to the valve rubber used on old style bicycle tyre inner tube valves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
locomad2 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 4 hours ago, Ruffnut Thorston said: The shiny coupling with rubber tube “spring” was standard equipment for the Hornby Dublo R1 locos... The rubber tube is similar to the valve rubber used on old style bicycle tyre inner tube valves. Thanks that could be a source of them, I've always called them "tails" and quite common to find they rot, split or come off. For years I've used insulation from wiring, often chew the end to ease fitting. Heat strink works well, its important to get correct flex. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roythebus1 Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 How about the rubber sleeving we use for sleeving wires on relays on layout wiring? I get it in small rolls from RS Components. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
locomad2 Posted February 24, 2021 Share Posted February 24, 2021 Interesting I found that the Hornby Dublo EPC coupling will actually couple to the Airfix coupling but not the metal type or the peco type unless modification made. Coupling is achieved by a bit of "Raming", plus the airfix wagon needs a bit of weight. Pulling is fine, pushing is ok on curves over 3ft radius but prehaps a bit stronger elastic band. I also noticed closer coupling which looks quite realistic, it's one advantage of the airfix type. Course you have to watch buffer height as locking might occur Uncoupling automatically I need to experiment a bit, still not worked out how the 2 airfix type works. The Hornby dublo hand ramp works to an extent but tends to lift the airfix wagon if pushed over to far. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted February 24, 2021 Share Posted February 24, 2021 The Airfix coupling is a variation on the American 'horn-hook' X2f coupling. They require a centring spring to couple and stay engaged. If this is too strong, the lateral force will lead to derailments. Uncoupling occurs by pressing the trip pins inwards (the opposite of the Peco/HD type) with a suitable guide. For some reason they made a couple of modifications which result in the Airfix and X2f couplings being incompatible. They will couple (as they do with the Peco/HD), but operation is unreliable. The centre 'buffer' part of the coupling is different in design. I have almost completed removal of X2fs in favour of Kadee on my American stock. I have seen them compared to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasaurolophus 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
muir Posted December 9, 2021 Share Posted December 9, 2021 I know it's a bit late in the day, but I've never figured out how dublo (and by extension Mr Prichard) got awarded a patent on the coupler design. All I can think is that American flyer just never bothered to patent the design, or perhaps the dublo patent only extended as far as UK shores... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagaguy Posted December 9, 2021 Share Posted December 9, 2021 Sidney Pritchard of Peco fame invented this coupling and offered it to Meccano ltd.Meccano wanted to buy it but Pritchard held out for a royalty on each coupling they used.It appeared that Meccano paid Peco a half a pence in old money and with that,peco was founded.Trix tried to use the coupling but infringed the patent leading to a legal battle which Trix lost but came to an arrangement to be able to use it.It still remains today as the Peco simplex auto coupler.At least,when you want to take a vehicle out of a train,you don`t end up with a string of sausages like modern couplings. Ray. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacific231G Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, sagaguy said: Sidney Pritchard of Peco fame invented this coupling and offered it to Meccano ltd.Meccano wanted to buy it but Pritchard held out for a royalty on each coupling they used.It appeared that Meccano paid Peco a half a pence in old money and with that,peco was founded.Trix tried to use the coupling but infringed the patent leading to a legal battle which Trix lost but came to an arrangement to be able to use it.It still remains today as the Peco simplex auto coupler.At least,when you want to take a vehicle out of a train,you don`t end up with a string of sausages like modern couplings. Ray. I'm curious to know how many people are using these in preference to the tension-lock. I use Kadees which have the same virtue of being able to lift a vehicle out of a train without any swearing. Tri-ang adoped the tension lock to avoid having to pay royalties for any of the patented couplers. This was a rather thuggish version of the LaNal coupler invented by Eric Lanal (the pen name of Dr. Alan Lake Rice) in the USA in the 1930s and possibly developed from the coupler devised by H0 pioneer (though both 3.5mm/ft and 4mm/ft were then called 00) A.R. Walkley in 1925. I went over to Tri-ang TT-3 from HD as a youngster and can remember being distinctly unimpressed by the enormous couplers that seemed as determined to get tangled together at any opportunity as the wretched hinged loop NEM standard coupler (the coupler not the coupler box) I have come across the Pritchard coupler fitted to Hornby Acho and even some Jouef stock though in both cases it could easily be unscrewed and replaced wth the hinged loop type. Edited December 10, 2021 by Pacific231G 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 (edited) Me for one. I find the tension lock ugly and a PITA to uncouple manually. This applies to British Stock. American gets Kadees and Continental keeps its dunny seats*. *A highly appropriate Australian term. Edited December 10, 2021 by Il Grifone 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now