Buffer shapes

[Reorte]

Over the years buffers seem to have changed shape from round, to oval, to now rectangular (or some sort of quadrilateral). I believe the round to oval was to reduce the risks of buffers overlapping and locking, but I'm wondering about the rectangular shapes. Just a bit easier to manufacture, or is there more technical reason for them?

[18B]

Sorry to not answer your question,

but I had also wondered why there were such a variation? The Class 56s even seemed to have diferrent shapes from the differnet manufacturers...... but why?

[pH]

There is a previous short topic on buffer shapes, though mainly with reference to steam locomotives - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/66892-locomotive-buffers/?hl=%2Blocomotive+%2Bbuffers

[Fat Controller]

A rectangular buffer would weigh a lot less than a round buffer whose diameter was the same as the long axis of the rectangular buffer.

[LMS2968]

A rectangular buffer would weigh a lot less than a round buffer whose diameter was the same as the long axis of the rectangular buffer.

...but more than a similar oval one!

[Fat Controller]

...but more than a similar oval one!

True.

[Reorte]

There is a previous short topic on buffer shapes, though mainly with reference to steam locomotives - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/66892-locomotive-buffers/?hl=%2Blocomotive+%2Bbuffers

And the last post of that thread seems to answer the question, thanks! I should've searched before posting...

[Steadfast]

The shape I always wonder about is the 'bread loaf' shape that a lot of continental registered wagons have these days.

https://ukrailwaypics.smugmug.com/UKRailRollingstock/I/IIA-Hoppers/IIA-B-bogie-aggregate-hoppers/i-JJmT5R2/A

I get that the curved top is probably a weight saver, but why not do the bottom too? Or just go for a plain rectangle?

I'd also never realised the variation in profile when looking down on a buffer, some are a lot more curved than others

 

Jo