Jump to content
 

Kadee Couplings On Comet Coaches (Alliteration!)


Guest WM183
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi all.

I have had loads of issues with couplings in 4mm, and finally decided if you're gonna have something unreasonable looking sticking out of the end of your stuff, may as well use Kadees - at least on coaching stock!

The big question is, of course, installing them on coaches; most RTR coaches come with bogie mounted couplings, but in most US model railways the couplings are body mounted. As a 57' coach in 4mm is no larger than an 86 foot autorack in HO, body mounting is fine on all but terribly sharp curves and S curves, which I mean to avoid. However, if mounting on the bogies is best, I'll do that. But...

How do people mount them? Comet coaches of course come with no NEM pockets. In addition, LMS bogies have a strengthening bar bit across the ends, which would have to go for bogie mounts. Also I'd have to not have any steam or brake hoses on the ends. If i body mount them, I simply notch the headstock, but dont know if this will put them TOO high. This would work a treat; the screw hole that holds the coaches together is literally in the perfect spot for the Kadee box, and I would not have to modify the truck. I could still have my hoses too.

So... what would y'all do? I feel like body mounting is best, but... opinions?

 

MzPUO65.jpg

Edited by WM183
added image
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am having similar problems although with RTR coaches. If you fit a Kadee box just below the headstock (the height for the to of the coupler seems to be about 0.5 mm, or perhaps a little more below the standard height beam), you will find that the box interferes with the bogie motion, causing derailment on curves.

 

But notching the headstock would put the coupling significantly higher than the Kadee gauge.

 

Fitting the coupler to the coach end as opposed to the bogie does work, once you can sort out any interference with bogie movement. My minimum curve is the inside curve of the Peco Code 75 curved point, which is nominally 30", and they are OK with that, albeit over the relatively short distance of the point itself. Most other curves are 36" radius or more and certainly no problem.

 

I was thinking of mounting the coupler using NEM style drilled and screwed to a fitting behind the headstock, recommended here on another thread which I have not been able to find, of course. Be useful if someone knows where it is?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Derek,

 

I have noticed the exact same thing! If I mount it to the floor, and notch the headstock, it's too high. I could probably use some shims to get it to the right installed height, but then, yepper - the bogie strikes the box. I will get some of the smaller Kadeee 252 boxes and see if I can make *that* fit. 

Seriously it shouldn't take an engineering degree to mount couplers on a coach. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got it!

Comet bogies have an appendage from one end that is clearly intended as a pocket for some kind of coupling. Now, while that is nice and all, if we bend it in a bit of a double offset, we can lower the top edge of it to be even with that reinforcing strap across the end of the bogie - and get a lovely flat place to glue a Kadee pocket! A kadee 148 (Long shank) then fits perfectly, and has plenty of clearance between the headstock and all. I need one with a slightly overslung shank (No 149) for perfect mounting height, but the 148 works a treat on the test board here. A couple of photos show the bogie bodge mentioned above, and the coach coupled to a Bachmann Jinty with an NEM pocket Kadee (18) on a large radius Peco bullhead turnout - the distance between closes up so the buffers even contact during pushing turns. Truck mounting isn't my favourite, but... seems few options are available.

At least on THESE bogies... we've got it!

bZ4BJba.jpg

 

7lBfEH9.jpg

Edited by WM183
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Derekl said:

I am having similar problems although with RTR coaches. If you fit a Kadee box just below the headstock (the height for the to of the coupler seems to be about 0.5 mm, or perhaps a little more below the standard height beam), you will find that the box interferes with the bogie motion, causing derailment on curves.

 

But notching the headstock would put the coupling significantly higher than the Kadee gauge.

 

Fitting the coupler to the coach end as opposed to the bogie does work, once you can sort out any interference with bogie movement. My minimum curve is the inside curve of the Peco Code 75 curved point, which is nominally 30", and they are OK with that, albeit over the relatively short distance of the point itself. Most other curves are 36" radius or more and certainly no problem.

 

I was thinking of mounting the coupler using NEM style drilled and screwed to a fitting behind the headstock, recommended here on another thread which I have not been able to find, of course. Be useful if someone knows where it is?

 

I have a Bachmann Collett coach also, I will have a look at it tonight and see what I can manage. I am sure there's a way!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Vw

2 hours ago, WM183 said:

Hi all.


The big question is, of course, installing them on coaches; most RTR coaches come with bogie mounted couplings, but in most US model railways the couplings are body mounted.

 

 

 

Generally only older RTR coaches come with bogie mounted tension locks, newer ones come with body mounted Close Coupling Units with NEM pockets.

On coaches without CCUs (not many these days) I sometimes use a #146 mounted under the body behind the bufferbeam. (The #146 comes with the #252 box)

More often on the bogie though.

As mentioned fouling of the bogie when on the body is possible.

 

BTW I wouldn't use NEM Kadees with CCUs between coaches, they are OK on the end of a rake.

 

Edited by melmerby
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an idea I adopted:

 

 

Tony Wrights hook and bar system.  I posted some pictures of my coaches too.

 

In general you want to try to avoid having a coupling attached to the bogie, coach itself is preferable, although it is sometimes not possible.

 

I found Kadees problematic in that there is some 5mm slop so getting coaches to close couple is difficult.

 

For RTR coaches with NEM pockets, Hunt couplings are excellent.

 

You still need to use a Kadee at the loco end.  Your coupling arrangement pictured looks good.

 

John

 

BTW, I don't know if you ran into this issue but the Comet bogie casting always seem to have a wonky tie bar.  I replaced them with wire.

 

 

 

Edited by brossard
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
30 minutes ago, brossard said:

 

For RTR coaches with NEM pockets, Hunt couplings are excellent.

 

You still need to use a Kadee at the loco end.  Your coupling arrangement pictured looks good.

John

 

BTW, I don't know if you ran into this issue but the Comet bogie casting always seem to have a wonky tie bar.  I replaced them with wire.

 

So are the supplied Roco/Hornby close couplings

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all.

 

Thanks much for the ideas! I may look a bit further into mounting them on the body. I can, after all, always pack some spacers behind it! Bogie mounting is blergh, particularly when pushing coaches through pointwork, but I figured given the weight of a brass and white metal coach, it is tolerable. I would very much like to avoid having different coupling systems for different stock. If I am going to switch stuff to Kadees, may as well switch everything to Kadees. They're reliable as anything, versatile, and certainly look no worse than tension locks, Sprat and Winkles, or anything else save 3 links and perhaps Dinghams.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 minutes ago, WM183 said:

Hi all.

 

Thanks much for the ideas! I may look a bit further into mounting them on the body. I can, after all, always pack some spacers behind it! Bogie mounting is blergh, particularly when pushing coaches through pointwork, but I figured given the weight of a brass and white metal coach, it is tolerable. I would very much like to avoid having different coupling systems for different stock. If I am going to switch stuff to Kadees, may as well switch everything to Kadees. They're reliable as anything, versatile, and certainly look no worse than tension locks, Sprat and Winkles, or anything else save 3 links and perhaps Dinghams.

If you model the Southern Railway or LNER (or have Pullman coaches) then Kadees are more like the prototype than the other options.

I only tried Kadees a few years ago but have now enthusiastically adopted them for practically everything, except between coaches with CCUs

 

Much of my current model railway spending is bulk-buys of Kadees!

#17, #18, #19 for correctly sited NEM mounts*, Nos 141 - 149 for everything else plus a bit of cobbling here and there.

(*except Roco/Hornby couplings between CCU fitted coaches)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, melmerby said:

If you model the Southern Railway or LNER (or have Pullman coaches) then Kadees are more like the prototype than the other options.

I only tried Kadees a few years ago but have now enthusiastically adopted them for practically everything, except between coaches with CCUs

 

Much of my current model railway spending is bulk-buys of Kadees!

#17, #18, #19 for correctly sited NEM mounts*, Nos 141 - 149 for everything else plus a bit of cobbling here and there.

(*except Roco/Hornby couplings between CCU fitted coaches)

 

 

Of course I am interested in the other two bits of the Big Four, but I would rather have a "improper" coupling than annoying fiddly systems and/or poor running.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I started this hobby about 30 years ago, one of my first decisions was to standardize on Kadee couplings.  For me it seemed to be the best of all the choices.  I really never looked back because Kadees were always reliable and relatively easy to install despite NEMs being years away.  Most of the time I snipped off the trip pin because it really does look ridiculous.  I always used a bamboo skewer to uncouple.

 

John

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The old bamboo skewer is a godsend for Kadees and their little cousins, Micro-Trains. I may try magnetic decoupling someday, but never have before, so... no real urge to start now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

My Kadees are all fitted to the end of the coach floors. Just like where they would be on a real coach. They need to be set so the the knuckle on the coupler meets the needs of being able to go around your tightest curves.

 

Mine have been used on a number of Exhibition layouts * Herculaneum Dock, Shap and Chapel en le Frith) and work fine.. I have had to modify them slightly for use on my own layout as it has a couple of tigher radii than the other layouts (don to just below 2ft 6inch radius.

 

I have fitted them to 12 wheel ex LMS Catering vehicles and sleeping cars - no problem.. 

 

Baz

 

 

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WM183 said:

The old bamboo skewer is a godsend for Kadees and their little cousins, Micro-Trains. I may try magnetic decoupling someday, but never have before, so... no real urge to start now!

 

I wouldn't use magnets.  One of the club members decided to install a Kadee permanent magnet on the main running line at the station.  Every time a train went past something uncoupled.  It didn't last long.

 

John

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't plan to go below 36 inch radius on any 4mm layout, and 42" is better yet. I do want to body mount them - it works better - but need to add some spacers or... something. For testing now, at least, the bogie mount works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 minute ago, brossard said:

 

I wouldn't use magnets.  One of the club members decided to install a Kadee permanent magnet on the main running line at the station.  Every time a train went past something uncoupled.  It didn't last long.

 

John

Must be doing something wrong.

I've several permanent magnets around my layout and nothing uncouples unless intending to.

As long as they are being held in tension Kadees can't come apart.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried Kadees in the 1960s and always had a problem mounting them and they were very expensive in those days. Went over to the miniature Airfix style tension locks with wire loops on the locos, but switched to German stuff in the early 1980s. With that I went over to Kadees as an experiment and never looked back.

 

Now with British stuff again with Kadees. I use a mixture of the NEM couplers and the differing box monutings. I usually get the ones with the coupler head centrally mounted, I find that's best for most British stuff and looks neater than the NEM variants. On coaches with out CCUs I use the CCUs from Kean Systems, available from Peters Spares and use Hornby/Roco KK between coaches. They're a bit of a pig to couple to get very close coupling, but do-able. 

 

As long as you allow sifficient clearance between the buffer heads and use the coupling height gauge  there shouldn't be any problems. If the coupler box is mounted under floor, use a coupler with the offset head to get it to the right height and trim a bit off the bogie to get sufficient clearance. It's worth the trouble and shunting wagons is fun with the magnetic uncoupling. :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For my old coaches I standardised on Kadee 31. Smaller rounded box which can be assembled in different ways to adjust the height and an underset longer shank to clear the buffers and raise the coupling head without resorting to cutting the coach body. For a shorter reach there is the 37. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

All coach floors should be at the same height.. but watch out for Bachmann coaches with Commonwealth Bogies - they are too high(!) .. simple thing to get right when designing them but a right badger to fix them when you buy them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, AndrewC said:

For my old coaches I standardised on Kadee 31. Smaller rounded box which can be assembled in different ways to adjust the height and an underset longer shank to clear the buffers and raise the coupling head without resorting to cutting the coach body. For a shorter reach there is the 37. 

 

Sadly the comet coach body is, if anything, too high. I need to lower the coupler head a few MM to get it to match the Kadee spec of 25/64 to the center of the knuckle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Forget the Kadee spec.. I have my own gauge for setting the heights - its is just important to make sure they are all at the same height and that any "SLOP" in the coupler box is taken out..

 

Baz

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, WM183 said:

 

Sadly the comet coach body is, if anything, too high. I need to lower the coupler head a few MM to get it to match the Kadee spec of 25/64 to the center of the knuckle.

In that case a 32 or 39 will lower the knuckle height

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AndrewC said:

In that case a 32 or 39 will lower the knuckle height

I have some underslung couplings as well - 142 - and they still do not lower quite enough. I'd have to space the box up a bit from the floor yet.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

On my recent Comet coach builds I have used the NEM coupling socket available from Dart Castings ref 2583 (  MJT Range ) . This can be soldered to the bogie or indeed if suitable fixed onto the bogie pivot . I've attached photo's showing this type of socket attached to a Bachmann Collett bogie and an MJT etched bogie - Fitting to a Comet bogie follows similar principles 

 

 

IMG_2091.JPG

MJT Bogie Coupling Bottom.JPG

MJT Bogie Coupling Top.JPG

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...