Coarse Scale O Gauge

[brianusa]

18 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

I beg to differ Brian.

 

Both old and modern BL/Ace/ETS type are fine, provided there is no gross height difference between couplers on adjacent vehicles.

 

Hornby hook & loop are very temperamental in my experience, creating side-thrust that causes trouble when propelling. Overall I thoroughly dislike them, and only tolerate them for reasons of integrity.

 

As I don't have much of these brands, I defer to your comments, Kev, although my experience with the early Hornby variety was not without problems.  I don't spend much time shunting anyway as all my Hornby stock is post 30s hook and loop.

      Brian.

Edited February 15, 2020 by brianusa

[goldfish]

I am afraid that my fixation with couplings continues. My latest venture is a Bassett Lowke Class 20 Diesel. I am not sure how the original couplings were fitted, these were very lose and flopping around. The replacements are fixed rigidly to the bogies. As a result they need the full width of the cut out on the bottom of the buffer beam. Rather to my surprise, the Class 20 is not only able to traverse the double reverse curves through the 2' points on my shunting plank, but is also able to propel my Bassett Lowke Brake Van through them with no trouble at all, despite both supposedly needing 27" minimum radius curves.

 

 

As a change from twentieth century tinplate toy trains, I have been experimenting with twenty first century plastic toy trains in the form of Dapol 7 plank open wagons. Much easier than those fiddly 3-link couplings.

 

[rockershovel]

I keep meaning to fit a non-functioning, scale coupler to the Williams Hudson, because the “lobster claw” is not very nice to look at, but it certainly works...

 

[brianusa]

If one is into tinplate trains then such a ting as an oversize coupler should present no problem as they add more operating opportunities.

     Brian.

[rockershovel]

Well, true, but surely having no front coupler is a ‘Murican toy train tradition?  

[Edley]

On 14/02/2020 at 07:06, goldfish said:

If you will forgive my continuing obsession with couplings. Drop link couplings were only a standard fitting on Leeds products from about 1920 to 1928, before and after that period 3-link couplings were the standard fitment. It is possible to use 3-link couplings with LMC pattern drop link couplings, but the problem of potential buffer lock remains. My solution is to graft a sprung drawbar onto a LMC pattern hook and drop link.

 

 

The original idea was to use them on LMC Bakelite wagons...

 

 

But they work equally well on Locomotives...

 

 

Or, with bit of metal bashing, as a replacement for ETS couplings...

 

 

[Edley]

These seem to be what were " Fleet " brand couplings in Australia many decades ago. Exley were  almost the same but the drop link was wire bent. Both  are a nightmare to couple  a train of carriages with corridor connections. i'd often wondered how Dublo couplings would go in O gauge. { the early steel ones not later plastic.

[Il Grifone]

Tri-ang's Big-Big train and Lima vehicles came new with a large plastic version of the Dublo coupling. (My lone Lima 16T mineral had had it removed before it came into my possession.) It works well in 00, so should in 0 too, though I think it would require a scaled up version. They couple quite closely in 00, requiring dumpy buffers.

 

 

Edited April 5, 2020 by Il Grifone

[goldfish]

On 04/04/2020 at 06:20, Edley said:

i'd often wondered how Dublo couplings would go in O gauge. { the early steel ones not later plastic.

 

Hornby Dublo style couplings have been used by ETS for their own brand products for many years. My experience of them is limited but they seem to work well enough when new.

 

[Nearholmer]

I’ve only got a few things with those couplers, and they are OK, but see to get the droops after many years.

[Il Grifone]

They look like a large version of the Peco Magni-Simplex coupling, which offer delayed uncoupling. Unfortunately, though they will couple with the standard Peco couplings, the head of a Dublo (or Trix or Playcraft) coupling is too large to engage.

Drooping is an inherent fault of all plastic couplings! 

Edited May 3, 2020 by Il Grifone

[Nearholmer]

They’re metal.

[rockershovel]

One thing I’ve learnt about Lionel couplers, is that the heavy Post War coil type tend to droop with age, leading to problems with remaining engaged. 

[coronach]

Some 60 year old handbuilt track recovered from my late father’s garden railway being reused in my son’s garden.   It just goes to show that regular creosoting Of the wooden sleepers not only recreates a realistic railway smell on hot days but does what it is supposed to.

[Il Grifone]

On 06/04/2020 at 11:28, Nearholmer said:

They’re metal.

 

Are the mounts too? They look like plastic. Metal couplings are not immune (even Kadee).

 

I was talking generally. The Dublo plastic couplings are particularly prone and hard to correct.

[Nearholmer]

No, the mounts are indeed plastic, and I think the problem is that they ‘relax’ and let the whole thing sag.

[sncf231e]

Today a new (old) French Hornby Pullman arrived:

 

So I had a good reason to run a train in the garden today:

 

 

Regards

Fred

 

[Nearholmer]

Very nice day for it, assuming that your weather is as mild as ours.

Lovely coach, one of the few really good ones that Hornby made IMO.

[Venetian]

I've a mixture of prewar Hornby, including a P.E., B.L. Duchess and Royal Scot. Added a year or so back was Lionel's Kinlet Hall, a Webb 2 2 2 2 and a much modified pair of Lima 4Fs. So with both 2 rail and 3 rail plus a.c. and d.c. to contend with I bought Gargraves track as all rails are insulated from each other. But then I came up with the problem of fine and course scale wheels..... in the end I converted all engines to 3 rail to make things simpler.

The points turned out to be a problem for the fine scale wheels of the 4Fs and the Webb. The Webb's leading and trailing pair are being rewheeled but I found the only problem with the other fine scale wheels of the 4Fs and some of the stock is that the flanges drop down in the frog area leading to occasional derailing. The cure - tighten the check rail gap, and deepen the flanges by gluing a transparent plastic disc to the rear of the wheels. This prevents the wheel dropping in the gap ahead of the frog blade. This seemed to work just as well with Hornby's prewar 3 rail track points so it maybe an easy method of getting old and new to run alongside each other. 

It's pity that Lionel are not going to make the Witherslack Hall set announced for later this year. We have driven both Witherslack and Kinlet and it would have been nice to repeat the enjoyment in O gauge,  but I suppose we could get their Hogwart and do a spot of repainting....

[brianusa]

What happened to Witherslack?  I was hoping they would keep this line going!

    Brian.

[kernowtim]

I have a few ETS items and have found their coupling works well but is very susceptible to uncoupling on less than perfect track, and incompatible with the drop link coupling, a version of which is available from ETS as a spare but is expensive!

https://www.ets.cz/en/spare-parts/coupling-compatible-with-old-tin-plate-models-buco-type.html

 

[Nearholmer]

They uncouple even on pretty good track once they get old and saggy; I use short bits of garden plant tie to hold them, which is inelegant, but works!

[goldfish]

On 09/05/2020 at 08:11, kernowtim said:

I have a few ETS items and have found their coupling works well but is very susceptible to uncoupling on less than perfect track, and incompatible with the drop link coupling, a version of which is available from ETS as a spare but is expensive!

 

I have tried these, but they are a far from ideal replacement. The loop under the buffer beam is very narrow and restricts the lateral movement of the coupling to the extent that it can cause derailments. The best solution I have come up with is to cut a slot in the centre of the buffer beam and use sprung drawbar couplings, a process I find rather fraught.

 

My own obession with couplings continues despite Covid-19, hence the arrival of another batch of couplings. This time with a shortened drawbar and the mounting hole enlarged to suit Hornby tinplate. The reduction in the distance between the buffers is not great, but they are much better than the Hornby couplings. The real bonus is that you can propel a rake of wagons through 18" radius reverse curves with complete confidence, even at clockwork speeds.

 

 

 

So I can now mix 1950's Hornby  with 2020's plastic, but Hornby is much more fun and far less fragile.

 

[Nearholmer]

Are you putting fine wheels in tinplate wagons, or coarse wheels in plastic wagons?

[goldfish]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

Are you putting fine wheels in tinplate wagons, or coarse wheels in plastic wagons?

 

I have replaced the wheels on some of my stock with finer wheels so that they will negotiate ETS points which require a flange depth of 1.5mm. ETS 3-rail wheels for example will not go through ETS points.

 

Some of my Hornby stock are fitted with Slaters wheels for use on my shunting plank. These are mainly fine scale wheels, but some are course scale wheels. Hornby runs much smoother on metal wheels with proper bearings.

 

I have some Leeds Bakelite wagons that are fitted with ETS wheels and axle boxes. Which combined with sprung drawbar drop link couplings makes them as good, if not better, than the modern offerings. If the original axle boxes are in good condition it is much easier to replace them with modern wheels.

 

I find that fine scale wheels run with no problems on ETS or good quality tubular track, so I have no reason to change them. Obviously they not not run through course scale points or crossings, but they will run through Hornby points but not Hornby crossings.

 

Edited June 13, 2020 by goldfish