Working with 3 link couplings in 4mm

[Guest WM183]

Hi all,

I am quite new to modelling British prototype railways, and am getting used to couplings - coming from US modelling, we had Kadee's and of course never needed to seek anything else; Kadees look the business, work great, and are a cinch to uncouple and couple, even manually uncoupling with a skewer. However, it seems for my steam era British models, my choices are ease of operation OR it looks good? Three links look wonderful, but they're quite difficult to work with - I have to actually pick up the wagons to couple them together, which isnt great. The tension locks are easier to use, naturally, but look terrible. Our first layout project is in Peco's new Code 75 bullhead track in 00, though I'd prefer EM, the husband isnt so convinced!

So... is there a tool or trick for these three links? I am going to the trouble of etched brake gear, etc on the wagons, detailing our locos with brass cab plates, figures, fine details... i'd hate to use tension locks.

[Barclay]

I just use a length of brass wire, with a hook bent into the end, and soldered into some brass tube for better grip. Some people tape this to a small torch so they can see what they are doing too ! I find it works fine, and worth it for the appearance, but I do have a slow moving shunting layout....

 

While I use more or less scale 3 link couplings on wagons, a slightly larger hook on loco's helps with shunting.

 

Ps. Go for EM!

[Kier Hardy]

There's no doubt, for appearances sake 3-link couplings do look better than anything else in 4mm scale. Our group all use them, but each one of us prefer different tools for coupling and uncoupling.

 

My preference is tweezers with a slight angle to the tip.

 

Others prefer a magnetic pole (or wire with a small magnet on the end) which really only works well if you have a steel link on the end of brass links. As a matter of course nowadays, I try to fit the steel link on the end so that there's compatibility when my stock goes visiting other layouts, although block trains don't really require this feature.

 

As suggested above, a bit of fine brass wire with a hook bent into the end is another option (mounted on a wooden handle), but I always find myself getting tangled up with this method.

 

Another PS. Go for EM! 

[Gordon A]

A shunting has a metal curly pigs tail on the end.

 

https://janfordsworld.blogspot.com/2017/08/

 

See the first chapter headed "shunter". There are a couple of pictures of a shunters pole.

Use a piece of wire with a sharpened curly end. As mentioned some people find it easier attaching the wire to a small torch which will illuminate the space between the wagons.

 

Gordon A

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

4 hours ago, WM183 said:

... Kadees look the business, work great, and are a cinch to uncouple and couple, even manually uncoupling with a skewer. However, it seems for my steam era British models, my choices are ease of operation OR it looks good? ...

A large proportion of UK steam era coaches were fitted with knuckle couplers (first introduced in UK service on UK constructed stock in the 1890s)  so it is not wholly alien to the period. Many are happy to fit Kadees for their excellent performance.

 

Three links look wonderful, but are something of a trial if there is to be much coupling and uncoupling. Most of us need far more time to perform these operations on models than the shunter needed on the real vehicles.

[Barclay]

To add balance we should also mention that there are a number of craft-based auto-couplings out there based on etches and bits of wire, etc. Google 'Alex Jackson coupling', or 'Spratt and Winkle coupling', there are others too. These all give automatic uncoupling (often with the use of magnets under the track) and are visually much nicer than the standard tension lock. However I personally still think they are too obtrusive, and that only 3 links will do...

[TheQ]

Having spent a day on a shunting layout at a show, which only had 3 links fitted, I wouldn't do it again. On top of that I find the hand of God appearing over the top to uncouple, even more disturbing than Hornby couplings.

 Yes have 3 links on fixed groups of wagons, but for uncoupling, I'd recommmend Dingham couplings on which you can use steel 3 links as the "magnet attractor" ..

 

http://www.dingham.co.uk/

 

 

[John Tomlinson]

To slightly repeat what's been said, correct pattern 3-link, instanter or screw couplings do IMHO look infinitely better on a British layout than anything else.

 

In my case I don't exhibit my layout, and it functions to run longish mainline trains with little shunting, so once a rake is assembled that's it! If I was exhibiting a shunting layout I might well have a different view. As others have said, a piece of wire bent with a hook does the trick, if you can attach this to a slim torch it helps see a bit better.

 

John.

[Fat Controller]

Whilst 3-link/Instanter/Screw couplings are a PITA to couple and uncouple, they are very pleasing to look at and listen to. It's very satisfying watching the slack being taken up, wagon by wagon, then hearing buffers making contact as the train moves off down hill.

[Flyingscotsmanfan]

I have used three link and screw link couplings for years, I have standardised on the over scale smiths hooks and links and for screw links I have used  Markits screw coupler and smiths hooks. To uncouple and couple up I have a uncoupling hook attached to a torch, this I picked up from Ally Pally one year. As with anything, with enough practise, I find it fairly easy and the benefit of shunting anywhere on the layout makes up for the extra work of fitting the couplings. 

[micklner]

I use on wagons only , Smiths 3 link with the bottom link/chain in steel , which Smiths sell in separate packs, very easy to use with a pencil torch with a small magnet attached to the end of a piece of wire . I also use their screw couplings, for which I use another pencil torch with a shaped hook, not as easy as the magnet version.

 

 

I gave up on Coaches, and still use the narrow version new tension lock couplings.

 

 

[Jeff Smith]

Worth mentioning that 3-link couplings probably need sprung buffers for tight curves.

[Guest WM183]

I dont plan to go below 36 inches on my curves, so hopefully that does the trick. 

[steve1]

There can be another modest bonus with using 3 links. A rake of wagons fitted with them when buffered up takes up less room than ones with t/locks or other automatic couplings. Therefore you may be able to get more wagons into a given siding or, possibly more important, headshunt.

steve.

[Guest WM183]

Thank you for all the replies all! I must admit they look SO much better with 3 links, that I will make sure my cars are all weighted to 50g or so and stay with the 3 links. If i need to go to sprung , so be it!

[John Tomlinson]

Interesting you mention weight. My own layout has inclines of around 1:55, and so I need to keep the weight down in order to run decent length trains - say 22 four wheel wagons. Much of my freight stock is kitbuilt, Parkside mainly, and I aimed for 30g as a maximum, but not under 25g - that's the whole wagon not per axle. This is light by recommended standards but I've found it works and I can reverse a freight uphill, round a curve and through facing pointwork so long as the wagons are matched and there isn't buffer locking. I have 27" minimum radius curves and most wagons don't have sprung buffers. I did however take a lot of care laying the track (Peco 75), to ensure no kinks or bumps, and smooth transitions into curves, and I think this makes a lot of difference.

 

John.

[57xx]

20 minutes ago, John Tomlinson said:

Much of my freight stock is kitbuilt, Parkside mainly, and I aimed for 30g as a maximum, but not under 25g - that's the whole wagon not per axle.

 

I build all my kits to 30g as well. I arrived at that figure by weighing some RTR wagons and they came to around this figure, so to keep everything consistent, they are now all 30g.

[Enterprisingwestern]

On 25/06/2019 at 19:57, Jeff Smith said:

Worth mentioning that 3-link couplings probably need sprung buffers for tight curves.

 

With selective choice of wagon and locomotive 3 links can be cajoled around 24" radius curves.

 

Mike.

[43110andyb]

With some longer fixed buffer stock I fit 4 links on one end giving more play and they aren't noticeable if you hook them back over if on the end of a rake!

[Judge Dread]

I have had my moments with 3 link couplings on other peoples layouts and got myself into a real tangle to put it mildly. I resolved never to use them on any layout of mine.

Not so long ago I was given a full size shunting example that, on examination, reveled the reason for my problems.

  The heal is there to stop the couplings sliding down and every model example I have used certainly didn't have such a thing.

I hope this maybe helpful.

Edited June 28, 2019 by Judge Dread

[Enterprisingwestern]

21 hours ago, Judge Dread said:

I have had my moments with 3 link couplings on other peoples layouts and got myself into a real tangle to put it mildly. I resolved never to use them on any layout of mine.

Not so long ago I was given a full size shunting example that, on examination, reveled the reason for my problems.

  The heal is there to stop the couplings sliding down and every model example I have used certainly didn't have such a thing.

I hope this maybe helpful.

 

To achieve this on mine I squeeze the wire just above the loop with a pair of fine nose pliers to flatten it.

 

Mike.

[SM42]

Having a bottom link made of steel, a lightly magnetised needle file or similar implement can be used to pick up the coupling and drop it over the hook of the adjacent vehicle

 

The problem if your magnet is too strong is that you cannot easily release the coupling.

 

Just enough oomph  to lift the weight of the coupling  is ideal and then your coupling will release from the magnet with a slight twist, the link being over the hook providing the resistance to release the coupling.

 

Andy

[Ruston]

I have found that it's better to have the steel link at one end of each item of rolling stock only and have all stock facing the same way. That way when you put the magnet between vehicles you only pick up one chain, which makes things far easier than having steel links on both ends of the stock. Probably not so easy to do if you have engines being turned on turntables and that sort of thing though.

[Jack P]

From what i've managed to deduct, if you're planning to exhibit, or have a complex shunting layout 3 links are tedious and will shatter the illusion (hand of god), and possibly you should look for something that has some form of auto coupling. If exhibiting, isn't your thing and/or you don't mind being actively involved with shunting, and you prefer the look of 3 links/screw links then you should do it. Depends on where you model as to what you can get away with, I run Kadees in my coach rakes, but i'm lucky because the Southern Railway ran rakes as fixed sets, and actually used knuckle couplers. 

 

I use a bit of a mashup of couplings/hooks/loops.  Screw links are Roxey Mouldings coupling hooks, soldered together to make them double thickness, with the included loops and 'screw' link. 3 link couplings are Smiths loops with Brassmaster hooks - which are again soldered to double thickness.

[brossard]

I did 4mm for nearly 30 years and always used Kadees.  The OP has it right about looks and reliability.  I did dabble with 3 link for a short while but found that coupling was a trial and reversing around curves resulted in buffer lock.  In EM this should not be as bad since curve radii tend to be bigger.

 

Now that I am into 7mm, I am using 3 link very happily.  I had no problems when I exhibited 2 years ago.  It helps to make a tool:

 

 

Find a torch with a thumb switch that operates easily (I have some where the thumb switch is very stiff).  A section of dowel, shaped steel wire and tape.  Pretty simple really.  It will take some practice but I find uncoupling and coupling quite practical.

 

John