Kadee Couplers

[Dunsignalling]

But don't forget that the Keen Systems replacement drawbars are intended for use with the kind of coupler head that locks the two drawbars into one when mated. Kadee couplers don't do this, any more than tension-locks. So you won't get the best use out of the close-coupling drawbar if you fit Kadees. It's best to fit the Roco couplers as shown on the Keen website (or Fleichmann Profi-Kupplers) , or to save money within a semi-permanently coupled rake use the Keen Systems "dummy buckeyes".

On bogie vehicles with buffers, Kadee couplers of whatever pattern only give derailment-free running when attached to the end of the bogie, as in the photo two posts above. That's how I use Kadees at the outer ends of a rake.

Please don't tell my Bachmann Bulleids which have been running around happily with Keen links and Kadee heads at the ends of the sets for a good twenty years. 19s with corridor covers fitted, 18s if not.

 

You just need to fit the bogies with suitable guides to centre the links as they don't have springs to do it.

 

Keen links + Roco heads within sets is definitely the better way to go if you run fixed rakes.

 

John

Edited July 13, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[TimP]

Please don't tell my Bachmann Bulleids which have been running around happily with Keen links and Kadee heads at the ends of the sets for a good twenty years. 19s with corridor covers fitted, 18s if not.

 

You just need to fit the bogies with suitable guides to centre the links as they don't have springs to do it.

 

Keen links + Roco heads within sets is definitely the better way to go if you run fixed rakes.

 

John

 

Hi John, 

 

Thanks for your experience on coaches with Keen links and Kadee - I am struggling to understand what you mean by "You just need to fit the bogies with suitable guides to centre the links as they don't have springs to do it." any chance of a photo or a longer explanation for bears of little brain like myself.

 

Thanks

 

Tim

[NSE Mule]

You need the Keen Systems replacement drawbar for Bachmann Mk 2 a, b and C, fitted with Kadee #18s.

See http://www.keen-systems.com/Couplings.html and scroll down.

 

Great, thank you. Ordered the above system for use on the outer coaches of my rakes.

[Jaggzuk]

Another set of wagons done with Kadee couplings.  This time the wagons were old Hornby OBA with very big clunky TLC. 

 

I am finding this quite enjoyable and getting in to the swing of things.  Found this one much quicker to do, no cut away required, just a shim of plasticard to get the draft box at the right height.!

 

 The finished effort is so much better than the original.

 

 

A before and after comparison, rather good

 

Cutting the old coupling off with my track cutters.

 

The Kadee components, the draft box is a #242 Universal "Black Box" Snap-Together.  This one was very easy to put together because of the snap on lid,

 

The simple attachment underneath using plastic weld glue..  The white platicard sheet is 20 thou (0.5mm).

 

Checking the height, which was a nats hair too low as the metal loop was just touching the gauge.

 

Very pleased with how easy this one was and the considerable visual improvement.

 

 

 

 

[BR60103]

This picture illustrates one thing to watch out for when checking Kadee height.  Run the wagon up to the gauge to see if the dropper is too low. Placing it directly on the gauge, the dropper can get lifted up by the platform and make it look as if the coupling is at the right height.

[Dunsignalling]

Hi John, 

 

Thanks for your experience on coaches with Keen links and Kadee - I am struggling to understand what you mean by "You just need to fit the bogies with suitable guides to centre the links as they don't have springs to do it." any chance of a photo or a longer explanation for bears of little brain like myself.

 

Thanks

 

Tim

Hi, Tim,

 

I don't have a photo but the general idea is that the link should be a sliding fit in the end of the bogie so that as the bogie turns, the link follows it.

 

Note that this solution was devised when using the original Keen CCU, designed for coaches not provided with such a mechanism by their makers, and the Bachmann Bulleid bogie. The latter has quite a wide opening at the end once the tension lock is cut off, so that doesn't happen. On some other types, it is possible to create the slot in the bogie moulding itself. Where a factory CCU/Keen replacement link, with sprung centering, is provided, no guides are needed.

 

• Fill this in using a piece of plastic sheet with a slot cut in it to do the "steering". 
• Starting with the slot a bit on the snug side, you will notice a (slight) jerk as you turn the bogie.
• Gradually open the slot up with a file until everything moves smoothly with no uneven resistance.
• Once satisfied with the action refit the bogie and test-run.

 

Fortunately the bogie mounting Bachmann use lines everything up without the need to keep removing and replacing the screw.

 

I only needed to do this where fitting Kadees; within sets I use Roco coupler heads, which lock the adjacent pairs of links together much more rigidly.

 

 

Hope this helps

 

John

Edited July 15, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[TimP]

Thanks John that helps to clear it up in my mind

[Jaggzuk]

Another wagon trail done to determine which bulk order of Kadee couplings to get.  This time the wagon was an old Lima PWA fertiliser wagon with very big clunky TLC.

 

I have six of these wagons, so need to see which Kadee type works the best.  Plus as this was originally a TLC on a bogie, I need to see how best to fit the draft box on the chassis 

 

 The finished effort is so much better than the original, a real no brainer I think!!

 

Finished and coupled up to a NEM pocket Kadee (No. 19, I think) on a VDA wagon.

 

 

The original very clunky tension lock coupling

 

 

New Kadee, so much better looking.

 

 

As a lot of the bogie had to be cut away to accommodate the draft box, I added a strip of .040 thou plasticard to the underside to stiffen up the sides of the bogie.

 

 

Draft box glued with plastic weld on top of a small strip of .030 thou plasticard 

Kadee components, the draft box is a #242 Universal "Black Box" Snap-Together with a #156 "Scale" All Metal Self-Centering WHISKER® Coupler - Long (25/64") Centerset Shank

 

 

Finished view underside.  The wagon has long buffers so using the long shaft of the #156 means the draft box could be flush with the buffer draw bar.  So it look nice and discreet now.

 

 

The wagon is fine on 2nd radius curves even with the coupling now fixed on the chassis rather then the bogie.  This is my first use of the whisker type Kadee and I like them, especially the long shaft version.  Very good for the older type of model with larger over scaled buffer lengths.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Podhunter]

What are the best ones to fit to 'OO' stock?

Kadee couplers, as I'm sure you know, originate from the USA.  They are modelled after knuckle couplers that are widely used on prototype US rolling stock.  Knuckle couplers don't just pull -- they push as well -- unlike a UK 3-link coupling.  Consequently, US rolling stock tends not to have buffers, because those knuckle couplers prevent stock colliding.

On tight (small-radius) model curves you must consider the problem of buffer-lock on UK stock.  Buffer-lock occurs when couplers are too short and cause the wagon or coach buffers to latch behind the buffers of the adjoining wagon.  When using Kadee couplers on buffer-less US models, there's no possibility of buffer-lock.  On UK models, buffer-lock becomes a problem on tight curves if the Kadee shank is too short.  Hence the recommendation of others to use a long shank Kadee #21 on your small-radius curves.  If you use the #5 Ol' Reliable, you should experiment to find the best location to prevent buffer-lock.

Edited September 7, 2017 by Podhunter

[Pacific231G]

Kadee couplers, as I'm sure you know, originate from the USA.  They are modelled after knuckle couplers that are widely used on prototype US rolling stock.  Knuckle couplers don't just pull -- they push as well -- unlike a UK 3-link coupling.  Consequently, US rolling stock tends not to have buffers, because those knuckle couplers prevent stock colliding.

On tight (small-radius) model curves you must consider the problem of buffer-lock on UK stock.  Buffer-lock occurs when couplers are too short and cause the wagon or coach buffers to latch behind the buffers of the adjoining wagon.  When using Kadee couplers on buffer-less US models, there's no possibility of buffer-lock.  On UK models, buffer-lock becomes a problem on tight curves if the Kadee shank is too short.  Hence the recommendation of others to use a long shank Kadee #21 on your small-radius curves.  If you use the #5 Ol' Reliable, you should experiment to find the best location to prevent buffer-lock.

Using Kadees on side buffered stock, as with any model coupler that pushes as well as the pulls,  does involve a balance between having the buffers far enough apart to avoid any risk of buffer locking, with an unrealistic separation particularly for passenger corridor, and keeping them as close together as possible. Ideally they would be just touching as the couplers mate but that's not easy to arrange. There's no one answer to this as it depends on the minimum radius curves you're using (or to be strictly accurate the transition into them) and particularly any reverse "S" curves such as crossovers.

 

I mostly use Kadee's NEM couplers, though they are a bit more clunky than the standard type, and simply keep a selection to use as appropriate for any item of rolling stock.   With my own layout I generally find that if the buffing face of the Kadee is just proud of a line between the buffer surfaces then that usually works OK but I'm mostly using three foot or above radius curves and points. 

According to the NEM standard,  the distance between the front face of the coupler box and the front face of the buffers should always be the same but when did manufacturers follow standards?

Edited September 8, 2017 by Pacific231G

[BR60103]

The Kadee used will vary with the car. Considerations are where the coupler pocket is and how far out the buffers are.

I would try taking your wagon and another and putting them on your tightest curve with the inside buffers touching, then measure how far apart the outside buffers are. Half the latter distance is how far the pulling face needs to go farther than the buffer heads. (am I still making sense?)  Then start fiddling with the mounting. The distance may turn out to be different with different types of stock.

 

My Duke of Gloucester has a Kadee 20 (longest NEM) on the front  and it doesn't come out past the buffer shanks.

[Dunsignalling]

Kadee couplers, as I'm sure you know, originate from the USA.  They are modelled after knuckle couplers that are widely used on prototype US rolling stock.  Knuckle couplers don't just pull -- they push as well -- unlike a UK 3-link coupling.  Consequently, US rolling stock tends not to have buffers, because those knuckle couplers prevent stock colliding.

On tight (small-radius) model curves you must consider the problem of buffer-lock on UK stock.  Buffer-lock occurs when couplers are too short and cause the wagon or coach buffers to latch behind the buffers of the adjoining wagon.  When using Kadee couplers on buffer-less US models, there's no possibility of buffer-lock.  On UK models, buffer-lock becomes a problem on tight curves if the Kadee shank is too short.  Hence the recommendation of others to use a long shank Kadee #21 on your small-radius curves.  If you use the #5 Ol' Reliable, you should experiment to find the best location to prevent buffer-lock.

The #5, whatever its virtues, is almost never the right coupler for stock with side buffers. Way back when I started using Kadees, they made and promoted a particular type for that usage, the #16, which was subsequently discontinued in favour of the #26 and #36. 

 

In order to get the knuckle in the correct alignment with the buffers, the draft box of the #5 has to be mounted with a big chunk of it protruding outside the buffer beam, with the mounting screw barely behind it. Unsightly, mechanically dubious, and completely unnecessary. As you (and Kadee) say, buffers demand longer couplers.  

 

UK stock requires one or other of the long Kadees, 26, 36 or 146 if the mounting height suits the #5 (it does on most UK wagons but locos and coaches are more variable. . 

 

The 26 is essentially a longer #5, though the "business end" is made from engineering plastic rather than metal. There was a short-lived metal version (#46) but this was quickly superseded by the #146 unit.

 

The 36 uses the same shaft/knuckle in a much smaller draft box, very useful for clearing vacuum pipe standards on wagon ends, but a bit fiddly to assemble until you get the knack.

 

The 146, is from the current "Whisker" coupler range, dimensionally similar to the 26 but with metal shaft/knuckle, and for which alternative draft boxes (252, 262) are offered, offering an 'easier-to-assemble' coupler to fit in most places that previously required a 36.

 

The 21, 31, or 141 are "Underset" which means the knuckle is offset upwards from the shaft for use where the mounting point available for the box is lower than the #5 and 'xx6' coded units require. They are particularly useful on vehicles with deep buffer beams, mainly tenders and BR Mk1 CCTs etc.with the fishbelly style.

 

A high mounting point requires a coupler ending in '9', though in 25 years of using Kadees, I'm still only half way through my first packet!

 

The pushing action of prototype buckeyes is somewhat less effective in model form - the couplers have much more horizontal swing, allowing them to be pushed outwards when propelling round curves, thereby reducing the buffer-to-buffer gap that you started with when your train was standing on straight track.   

 

Hope this clarifies the somewhat muddy waters surrounding the "Which Kadee?" conundrum.  

 

John

 

EDIT: I have only mentioned the Kadees with original-height knuckles. Modern US-outline r-t-r stock is much more uniform dimensionally and the scale units are not offered with the various offsets which are useful "over here".

Edited September 8, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[Dunsignalling]

 

Another wagon trail done to determine which bulk order of Kadee couplings to get.  This time the wagon was an old Lima PWA fertiliser wagon with very big clunky TLC.

 

I have six of these wagons, so need to see which Kadee type works the best.  Plus as this was originally a TLC on a bogie, I need to see how best to fit the draft box on the chassis 

 

 The finished effort is so much better than the original, a real no brainer I think!!

 

IMG_8528.JPG

Finished and coupled up to a NEM pocket Kadee (No. 19, I think) on a VDA wagon.

 

 

IMG_8532.JPG

The original very clunky tension lock coupling

 

 

IMG_8531.JPG

New Kadee, so much better looking.

 

 

IMG_8535.JPG

As a lot of the bogie had to be cut away to accommodate the draft box, I added a strip of .040 thou plasticard to the underside to stiffen up the sides of the bogie.

 

 

IMG_8534.JPG

Draft box glued with plastic weld on top of a small strip of .030 thou plasticard 

Kadee components, the draft box is a #242 Universal "Black Box" Snap-Together with a #156 "Scale" All Metal Self-Centering WHISKER® Coupler - Long (25/64") Centerset Shank

 

 

IMG_8533.JPG

Finished view underside.  The wagon has long buffers so using the long shaft of the #156 means the draft box could be flush with the buffer draw bar.  So it look nice and discreet now.

 

 

The wagon is fine on 2nd radius curves even with the coupling now fixed on the chassis rather then the bogie.  This is my first use of the whisker type Kadee and I like them, especially the long shaft version.  Very good for the older type of model with larger over scaled buffer lengths.

 

Nicely done.

 

If you need/want closer coupling, or your curves are so tight as to cause trouble at that spacing, consider one of the after-market close coupler units with a Kadee NEM-fit head.

 

This involves quite a bit of extra "Plastic surgery" and is possibly best left until using Kadees has become truly familiar.

 

The available space on the Lima wagon illustrated may not be sufficient to accommodate a Keen Systems unit, so check out the Symoba brand obtainable from www.dccsupplies.com

 

John   

Edited September 8, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[BR60103]

Further comment on dunSignalling's post

The KD #5 is only universal on American plastic kits. Any other application has to be examined case by case.

[ejstubbs]

The #5, whatever its virtues, is almost never the right coupler for stock with side buffers.

 

I'd agree with that.

 

The only use I have found for #5s is on non-NEM-fitted Hornby tenders (specifically: a Black 5 number 5055, and a streamlined Duchess of Devonshire) where, entirely by coincidence, if you attach a #5 using the same self-tapping screw in the same screw hole as the Hornby coupling, the #5 turns out to be exactly the right height and length. (You do have to cut away a bit of the lower cross member at the rear of the chassis to allow the coupling to protrude.  The modification isn't visible in normal operation but it does mean that the loco can't be sold on as "as new", if this is a concern.)

 

IME the absence of sideways wiggle on the tender coupling is actually useful for actuating close coupling mechanisms on coaches, and isn't a problem with wagons (not that my streamlined Duchess does very much freight work!)

 

The pushing action of prototype buckeyes is somewhat less effective in model form - the couplers have much more horizontal swing, allowing them to be pushed outwards when propelling round curves, thereby reducing the buffer-to-buffer gap that you started with when your train was standing on straight track.

 

I agree with this observation as well.  Apart from the increased risk of buffer locking, it looks unsightly and - especially if the couplings don't 'unwind' when the train gets back on to straight track - the off-centre push can contribute to derailments in its own right.  I think it primarily manifests itself as a problem between the loco and the first coach/wagon - which is another reason why limiting the sideways wiggle on the tender coupling can actually be beneficial.

Edited September 9, 2017 by ejstubbs

[Jaggzuk]

I have read all the recent posts on Kadee #5 with interest.  In the light of them, I was wondering how I could use up my stock of #5s, as indeed I have found them too short for most of my long wheelbase chassis rolling stock, without having the gear box overtly overhanging.  Well during a deep tidy up session in the railway room over the weekend, I came across a box of wagons I had forgotten about.  These were from my old days of thinking I would go down the route of three link couplings!!

 

There was about 15 short wheel based trucks; a mix of POW and Conflats, a great find!  Historically, they have all had their tension hook couplings removed and some have had the 3-links added.  So I had brief ponder on what to do with them, being useless coupling wise on our layout, and then had a light bulb moment - they would make great trucks for a shunting puzzle in our goods yards.

 

A quick check reviled that the #5 work perfectly on them as the trucks have really short buffers.  So I have now converted a few already, really easy as the gear box is at a perfect height when glued to the chassis underside; no packing or cutting required, phew!

 

But here is the problem; the trucks are all quite light weight, even replacing the steel weight with a lead stip.  On the layout when shunting with a Class 08 at slow speed, the trucks tend to just get pushed along without Kadees actually coupling up.  The trucks all run very freely.

 

What is going to be the best way to solve this problem, specifically if I want to use these trucks as the rolling stock for the shunting puzzle?  I do not want to make the trucks so heavy that they cannot be pulled up my inclines when formed into a rake of trucks.  Is there an optimum dead weight for a truck and the operation of Kadee?

[Buhar]

I would suggest braking the trucks rather than trying to cram more lead in.  A bit of foam bearing down on an axle would do it, or a length of sprongy something.

[Dungrange]

Is there an optimum dead weight for a truck and the operation of Kadee?

 

I would probably suggest that you refer to the NMRA recommended practise (https://www.nmra.org/beginner/weight) on the basis that Kadee couplings are intended for North American stock.  I've only started converting some stock to Kadee couplings, so can't really advise from experience.

[HLT 0109]

A spot of oil on the pivots and some graphite powder on the face of the knuckles mighht solve it.  I believe also that 50grams would be a good weight for each wagon.

 

Harold.

[BR60103]

One trick that might work is a bit of nylon thread (or fishing line), stuck in a hole in the ballast or sleeper and sticking up vertically far enough to touch the axle.

This has also been used to hold cars on a slight grade.

Might also look at bristles from a nylon hairbrush.

[johnb]

I would probably suggest that you refer to the NMRA recommended practise (https://www.nmra.org/beginner/weight) on the basis that Kadee couplings are intended for North American stock.  I've only started converting some stock to Kadee couplings, so can't really advise from experience.

I have found that the weights that the NMRA give often work out too heavy for the smaller UK layouts. I did some detailed testing a few years ago on my then layout, max length13ft over Peco medium radius crossovers. I was using Kadee body mounted couplers on 3 or 4 bogie parcels vans or a few more 4 wheelers. My view is that a weight corresponding to 20grams an axle worked well. So a 4 wheeler van at 40grams and a bogie vehicle at 80grams is about right. I don't go less than 30 grams or much over 90grams total weight.

 

I also mount the Kadee so that the pushing face is level with the buffer faces which avoids buffer locking over reverse curves of 3ft radius. I'm using UK Bo-Bo diesels. Those weights and Kadee setting suit me. I also use the height as per the Kadee height gauge, I'd prefer to set them a bit higher but as I don't want all the work involved in altering NEM fitted stock I accept the compromise.

 

That's my solution to the issue and I accept the appearance, others will doubtless disagree.

 

John

[Jaggzuk]

Cheers guys, some really useful tips and info there.  I think I will try a mix of more weight and the foam axle brake.  The foam brake may also solve the issue where some of the very free running trucks keep rolling down the sidings to the buffers as the layout/track can't be perfectly level !!

 

In trying to get the balance right of either adding weight vs friction, any thoughts on which solution has a more negative effect on a loco hauling capability, especially up gradients ?

[Dunsignalling]

I have read all the recent posts on Kadee #5 with interest.  In the light of them, I was wondering how I could use up my stock of #5s, as indeed I have found them too short for most of my long wheelbase chassis rolling stock, without having the gear box overtly overhanging.  Well during a deep tidy up session in the railway room over the weekend, I came across a box of wagons I had forgotten about.  These were from my old days of thinking I would go down the route of three link couplings!!

 

There was about 15 short wheel based trucks; a mix of POW and Conflats, a great find!  Historically, they have all had their tension hook couplings removed and some have had the 3-links added.  So I had brief ponder on what to do with them, being useless coupling wise on our layout, and then had a light bulb moment - they would make great trucks for a shunting puzzle in our goods yards.

 

A quick check reviled that the #5 work perfectly on them as the trucks have really short buffers.  So I have now converted a few already, really easy as the gear box is at a perfect height when glued to the chassis underside; no packing or cutting required, phew!

 

But here is the problem; the trucks are all quite light weight, even replacing the steel weight with a lead stip.  On the layout when shunting with a Class 08 at slow speed, the trucks tend to just get pushed along without Kadees actually coupling up.  The trucks all run very freely.

 

What is going to be the best way to solve this problem, specifically if I want to use these trucks as the rolling stock for the shunting puzzle?  I do not want to make the trucks so heavy that they cannot be pulled up my inclines when formed into a rake of trucks.  Is there an optimum dead weight for a truck and the operation of Kadee?

About 40-45 grams seems to work well - current out-of the box wagons average about  32-35, so not a massive increase.

 

Your comment about very short buffers is interesting and rang a bell. Opening one of my lesser-used stock boxes revealed, sure enough, several old Bachmann tankers that I had fitted with #5 couplers............

 

John

Edited September 13, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[Dunsignalling]

I'd agree with that.

 

The only use I have found for #5s is on non-NEM-fitted Hornby tenders (specifically: a Black 5 number 5055, and a streamlined Duchess of Devonshire) where, entirely by coincidence, if you attach a #5 using the same self-tapping screw in the same screw hole as the Hornby coupling, the #5 turns out to be exactly the right height and length. (You do have to cut away a bit of the lower cross member at the rear of the chassis to allow the coupling to protrude.  The modification isn't visible in normal operation but it does mean that the loco can't be sold on as "as new", if this is a concern.)

 

IME the absence of sideways wiggle on the tender coupling is actually useful for actuating close coupling mechanisms on coaches, and isn't a problem with wagons (not that my streamlined Duchess does very much freight work!)

 

 

I agree with this observation as well.  Apart from the increased risk of buffer locking, it looks unsightly and - especially if the couplings don't 'unwind' when the train gets back on to straight track - the off-centre push can contribute to derailments in its own right.  I think it primarily manifests itself as a problem between the loco and the first coach/wagon - which is another reason why limiting the sideways wiggle on the tender coupling can actually be beneficial.

When using 140-series Whisker couplers, sideways wiggle can be reduced by using the narrower #262 draft boxes in place of the ones that come with the couplers. 

 

Sticking bits of microstrip to the inside walls of the standard #242 boxes works too, but requires a fair bit of care.

 

For tenders, try the underset #47 coupler, same length as a #5 but with the head offset upwards allowing a lower mounting height and (usually) avoiding the need to cut into the buffer beam. 

 

John

Edited October 13, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[Roy Langridge]

I hope this is the appropriate place to ask this, I couldn't find anywhere better...

 

Does anybody have experience of weathering Kadee couplers? I found a thread on an American forum which seemed to recommend slapping paint on them by brush (I'm highly sceptical on that one), through airbrushing and then to powders. It didn't seem to have any real measure of success, only people saying "I did that and it didn't work" to pretty much every suggestion.

 

Those that I have applied to stock after weathering stand out like a sore thumb and I just want to tone them down a bit so they are less noticeable.

 

Any advice appreciated. Thanks in advance.

 

Roy