Whats what and whats RIGHT with NEM couplings and Kadee's.

[steved99]

I'm going slowly insane trying to get my locos and rolling stock fitted with NEM tail Kadees 17, 18 and 19,   It appears that all the blasted Bachmann coaches are at one height whilst Hornby and Dapol appear to use assorted heights for their coupling pockets.   My Hornby Adams Radials NEM sockets apear to be far to low even for Hornby coaches  ????   only attaching about 50% of the coupler head, and Bachmann are even worse with only about 30% contact .     If the yanks can and do stick within NEM specs why cannot our manufacturers.  I've got ONE steam loco the Adams Radial fitted with #18s and I own 8 coaches NONE of which will couple properly ( same height) with the Loco.

 

I'm seriously beginning regretting coming over from 0-16.5 to 00 as 00 is even more messed up than the piecemeal standards of 0-16.5.

Edited March 28, 2021 by steved99

[Dungrange]

3 hours ago, steved99 said:

If the yanks can and do stick within NEM specs why cannot our manufacturers.

 

The 'Yanks' don't do NEM specs.  NEM is a European specification.  The pocket size, height and position are all specified for European H0.  Kadee only produce #17, #18, #19 and #20 to try and sell their product into the European market.  American modellers will have little use for these particular couplings.  Unfortunately manufacturers of UK outline stock have been rather poor at complying with all aspects of the NEM standard, particularly in relation to height.  There are some models that have the NEM box of the correct size, height and position, but there are many where the box is too high. I think that probably stems from the fact that it's an H0 standard, so they don't think they have to necessarily fully comply with it and can adjust some of the dimensions such as height as they see fit.  

 

Probably the best advice would be to buy the Kadee height gauge and use the NEM couplings in the models where the pockets are at the right height and then find an alternative solution for all of the models which don't comply with the standard.  Obviously it would be preferable if all manufacturers adopted the correct size, height and position of the box, but alas, that's not reality.

[frobisher]

2 hours ago, Dungrange said:

Probably the best advice would be to buy the Kadee height gauge and use the NEM couplings in the models where the pockets are at the right height and then find an alternative solution for all of the models which don't comply with the standard.

 

One thing that sometimes works is inverting the NEM pocket on wagons where it is detachable, or where it is too high putting a plasticard shim under the pocket to bring it down to near the right height. 

[newbryford]

 

 

It was Bachmann that really c*cked up the NEM pocket with their Mk1s. They didn't get anywhere near to the NEM362 spec.

They use "stepped" T/L couplers to compensate - but they aren't alone - same applies to a few other vehicles/manufacturers as well.

The NEM pocket is more tolerant of European hook/loop couplers than the knuckle of a Kadee.

 

As with an above poster - if using Kadees - a height gauge is a "must-have" item in the toolbox - especially if fitting non-NEM mounted Kadees.

 

And it's not just Kadees/NEMs that need a standard - T/Ls are all over the place as well.

 

At the end of the day, it's your stock. Have something with a standard height and set everything else to it.

I used one loco to set all my B&B couplings (DG clone) to a datum on a small shunting layout.

 

For info - the US use the NMRA as a baseline - not NEM.

 

[tomparryharry]

It's all about a standard not set in law, so a manufacturer can more or less produce what they like.  What might be helpful, if product reviewers noted the product couplings in relation to the NEM 362 standard.  In fairness, I'm certainly not a reviewer, but I can see what you mean. 

 

" The latest offering from xxxx is certainly good in all respects, and conforms very well to the prototype.  The reviewer noted the clever inclusion of the 13amp  plug on the rear coupling, which is a recent addition. Modellers in 0 gauge are recommended to use the round pin 15A plug...."

[BR60103]

The top of the NEM pocket should be the same height as the top of a tension lock. I'm not sure how this came about.

If the tension lock has a crank in the shaft, the pocket is at non-standard height.

Some pockets require a shim (piece of very thin plastic) under or over the tail of the coupler.

If the pocket is the wrong height, other NEM couplers will also be wrong.

I have a few vehicles where the original tension lock sags a bit.

 

[kevinlms]

1 hour ago, newbryford said:

 

 

It was Bachmann that really c*cked up the NEM pocket with their Mk1s. They didn't get anywhere near to the NEM362 spec.

They use "stepped" T/L couplers to compensate - but they aren't alone - same applies to a few other vehicles/manufacturers as well.

The NEM pocket is more tolerant of European hook/loop couplers than the knuckle of a Kadee.

 

As with an above poster - if using Kadees - a height gauge is a "must-have" item in the toolbox - especially if fitting non-NEM mounted Kadees.

 

And it's not just Kadees/NEMs that need a standard - T/Ls are all over the place as well.

 

At the end of the day, it's your stock. Have something with a standard height and set everything else to it.

I used one loco to set all my B&B couplings (DG clone) to a datum on a small shunting layout.

 

For info - the US use the NMRA as a baseline - not NEM.

 

The NRMA 'Standard' for couplers is very simple and really only designates the height of the centre of the knuckle, above the top of the rail.

 

https://www.nmra.org/sites/default/files/standards/sandrp/pdf/s-2_2010.09.pdf

 

Note it shows 'HO' and 'OO' as separate heights, with the 'OO' one being merely scaled up in proportion.

 

A British modeller, COULD use the 'OO' standard, but in my opinion that is just making it hard for yourself. Why because that isn't a true standard, it's just been multiplied out. It's much easier to use the 'HO' standard, with the use of the essential coupler gauge, to get them right.

Unfortunately, Bachmann and some others have made their models wrong, usually by making the NEM sockets too high.

 

 

[frobisher]

3 hours ago, kevinlms said:

The NRMA 'Standard' for couplers is very simple and really only designates the height of the centre of the knuckle, above the top of the rail.

 

https://www.nmra.org/sites/default/files/standards/sandrp/pdf/s-2_2010.09.pdf

 

Note it shows 'HO' and 'OO' as separate heights, with the 'OO' one being merely scaled up in proportion.

 

A British modeller, COULD use the 'OO' standard, but in my opinion that is just making it hard for yourself. Why because that isn't a true standard, it's just been multiplied out. It's much easier to use the 'HO' standard, with the use of the essential coupler gauge, to get them right.

 

That would be for American 00 though which is not the same beasty as British 00 really (19mm track gauge for starters) and is about moving the coupling to the correct prototypical height for US practice...

 

 

[Gilbert]

I use the HO gauge with OO stock. It's an essential tool.

I also use a mixture of NEMs and new mountings for non-NEM KDs. If you want good operation its not just plug and play sadly.

This is a Bachmann MK1 Full  brake.

Edited March 29, 2021 by Gilbert

[kevinlms]

1 hour ago, frobisher said:

 

That would be for American 00 though which is not the same beasty as British 00 really (19mm track gauge for starters) and is about moving the coupling to the correct prototypical height for US practice...

 

 

Agreed, you would need to create your own standard, although I suspect the US version would be rather close, but is the 19mm track gauge relevant, as the coupler MUST be on the centre line?

[Oldddudders]

The other gotcha with Kadees in OO is buffer-locking on tighter or reverse curves. The Kadee was developed for a market where trains do not have buffers - the coupler itself absorbs buffing loads throughout the train. So 18s can look great between coaches on the straight track, and be too short on twistier bits. Roco and Hornby close-couplers can help sometimes. I fear the OP has yet to get that far, from what he says!

[frobisher]

1 hour ago, kevinlms said:

Agreed, you would need to create your own standard, although I suspect the US version would be rather close, but is the 19mm track gauge relevant, as the coupler MUST be on the centre line?

 

But the height would then be scale height for US practice (hence the note about AAR tolerances in the document linked) rather than something relevant for British practice, which is not what is being aimed at in any case. 

 

54 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

So 18s can look great between coaches on the straight track, and be too short on twistier bits. Roco and Hornby close-couplers can help sometimes. I fear the OP has yet to get that far, from what he says!

 

With coaching stock, I've found the Bachmann EZ-Mate NEM couplings to be a help in the mix in association with close coupling mechanisms.  They don't have the swivel-ly head which causes Kadees to be less than cooperative with CCMs sometimes.

Edited March 29, 2021 by frobisher

[kevinlms]

3 hours ago, frobisher said:

 

But the height would then be scale height for US practice (hence the note about AAR tolerances in the document linked) rather than something relevant for British practice, which is not what is being aimed at in any case. 

 

 

I'll stick to my first statement, that it's easier to maintain the US HO standards.

[kevinlms]

4 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

The other gotcha with Kadees in OO is buffer-locking on tighter or reverse curves. The Kadee was developed for a market where trains do not have buffers - the coupler itself absorbs buffing loads throughout the train. So 18s can look great between coaches on the straight track, and be too short on twistier bits. Roco and Hornby close-couplers can help sometimes. I fear the OP has yet to get that far, from what he says!

Another difference with US models, is that they tend not to use steel axles & wheels, but non ferrous materials. Thus they don't have the British model problem of steel axles and tyres being attracted by the magnets. The Road Runner effect! Beep, beep!

[jonhall]

The other must have tool in a NEM world is the Symoba NEM height gauge. put it on the track with a NEM pocket on the spigot and with the buffers touching the plate, then NEM pocket is in the right place.

 

https://www.dccsupplies.com/item-p-103650/symoba-102-nem-362-height-gauge.htm

 

Every magazine reviewer should have one, and in my opinion, start calling out manufacturers who don't meet the spec. as a service to their readers who are, after all, paying for the review.

 

Jon

[Derekl]

6 hours ago, Gilbert said:

I also use a mixture of NEMs and new mountings for non-NEM KDs. If you want good operation its not just plug and play sadly.

This is a Bachmann MK1 Full  brake

Gilbert - did you remove the cross member on the bogie of the FB to allow clearance for the bogie swing behind the coupler pocket. If so, did it have any effect on the rigidity of  the bogie?

[D9020 Nimbus]

If manufacturers claim (for example, in their catalogues) that a model has NEM couplings and it doesn't meet the standards, then surely it's a breach of the Trades Descriptions Act?

[Gilbert]

5 hours ago, Derekl said:

Gilbert - did you remove the cross member on the bogie of the FB to allow clearance for the bogie swing behind the coupler pocket. If so, did it have any effect on the rigidity of  the bogie?

I'l dig out the FB tomorrow and check but I don't recall any problems....

[newbryford]

7 hours ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

If manufacturers claim (for example, in their catalogues) that a model has NEM couplings and it doesn't meet the standards, then surely it's a breach of the Trades Descriptions Act?

 

 

Just because it has a NEM coupling, that doesn't imply that it meets the standards........

 

 

[kevinlms]

3 hours ago, newbryford said:

 

 

Just because it has a NEM coupling, that doesn't imply that it meets the standards........

 

 

Technically then, it's a blob of plastic that looks like a NEM coupling. So on those grounds, it's a fake!

[PMP]

On 29/03/2021 at 02:57, tomparryharry said:

It's all about a standard not set in law, so a manufacturer can more or less produce what they like.  What might be helpful, if product reviewers noted the product couplings in relation to the NEM 362 standard.  In fairness, I'm certainly not a reviewer, but I can see what you mean. 

 

 

Cutting to the chase, (as you mention) there is no agreed UK standard, legal or otherwise for UK tension lock couplings.

 

There’s no point in reviewers mentioning a non applicable standard, they may as well quote an equally inappropriate NMRA standard. 

 

Most RTR purchasers stick with tension locks and  the percentage of those who change their couplings and want to retain the existing RTR mount is very small. As @Gilbert says if you want to fit Kadee etc, you’re on your own. UK modellers wanted manufacturers to up their game and provide good looking and functional models, which they did, but there were requirements to be able to match legacy TL couplings. The big issue people forget is that US stock ‘generally’ has the RTR knuckle coupling in the same place as the prototype, which obviously isn’t the case with UK/Euro stock.

Edited March 30, 2021 by PMP

[frobisher]

5 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Technically then, it's a blob of plastic that looks like a NEM coupling. So on those grounds, it's a fake!

 

Er nope.  Bachmann, for instance only make claim for NEM coupling pockets and no adherence to any standard for those pockets or indeed what NEM stands for, so I would suggest that in a legal sense they are using NEM in it's accepted meaning for the public to mean plug in couplings using a certain type of plug.

[PMP]

5 minutes ago, frobisher said:

 

Er nope.  Bachmann, for instance only make claim for NEM coupling pockets and no adherence to any standard for those pockets or indeed what NEM stands for, so I would suggest that in a legal sense they are using NEM in it's accepted meaning for the public to mean plug in couplings using a certain type of plug.

Hornby do the same, a bit like the hoover/vacuum cleaner thing, we all know what a ‘NEM coupling’ is. We don’t go into a shop and ask for a ‘plastic moulded receptacle for UK ready to run couplings’. We ask for an NEM pocket.

[Gilbert]

19 hours ago, Derekl said:

Gilbert - did you remove the cross member on the bogie of the FB to allow clearance for the bogie swing behind the coupler pocket. If so, did it have any effect on the rigidity of  the bogie?

I'm not sure if it had a cross member to start with but I have done so on other stuff with no noticeable effect.

[Derekl]

1 minute ago, Gilbert said:

I'm not sure if it had a cross member to start with but I have done so on other stuff with no noticeable effect.

Thank you - that is very helpful. I have hesitated to remove the cross members as I was concerned that it might affect the integrity of the bogie. I have instead removed material from the cross member to try to avoid the coupler box, but it is fiddly and a bit hit and miss. Your experience suggests I was being unnecessarily cautious.