Hunt couplings Elite- coupling different manufacturers

[Roger Sunderland]

Hi all

Appologies if this is in the wrong place but….

Ive tried these couplings with Bachmann Mk1’s, the stepped type, and am very pleased with them. However I also have a large number of the recent Hornby Mk1’s with a NEM pocket fixed to the bogie but no cornering cams. Would like to mix these with the Bachmann Mk1’s if possible.

Has anyone tried this? If so which couplings did you use on the Hornby Mk1’s please?

Also have a large number of Hornby Stanier coaches - detail ones with NEM pockets and cams, not Railroad types. Same question here- what type of Elite do people use to get good close coupling and is it possible to mix these with Mk1’s stock?

[Mallard60022]

23 hours ago, Roger Sunderland said:

Hi all

Appologies if this is in the wrong place but….

Ive tried these couplings with Bachmann Mk1’s, the stepped type, and am very pleased with them. However I also have a large number of the recent Hornby Mk1’s with a NEM pocket fixed to the bogie but no cornering cams. Would like to mix these with the Bachmann Mk1’s if possible.

Has anyone tried this? If so which couplings did you use on the Hornby Mk1’s please?

Also have a large number of Hornby Stanier coaches - detail ones with NEM pockets and cams, not Railroad types. Same question here- what type of Elite do people use to get good close coupling and is it possible to mix these with Mk1’s stock?

Ask Gilbert on Peterborough North. He has used all sorts of these with success. I think for your Hornby Mk 1s, the 'swivel' for NEM sockets Elites might be the ones to use. These couplings aren't inexpensive but they are bloody brilliant; so versatile and so many different types.

 

Phil

[brossard]

Agree Phil, I don't use them myself but my mate has been fitting Hunts to his coach rakes and the performance is just stunning, way better than Kadee.

 

John

[Mallard60022]

I have also fitted some of the originals (A and B polarity so going cheap) to a set of Plastic Walrus kits; not to the Bogies but in a scratch way to the Headsock. Had to add extra weight to the wagons, but they work like a dream. 8 rake easy work.

P

[brossard]

29 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

I have also fitted some of the originals (A and B polarity so going cheap) to a set of Plastic Walrus kits; not to the Bogies but in a scratch way to the Headsock. Had to add extra weight to the wagons, but they work like a dream. 8 rake easy work.

P

 

Headstocks are where couplings are supposed to be.  As long as you are not bothered about height, you could put Kadees in the headstock as well.

 

I finally got round to putting my actions where my theories are by doing that with my 0 gauge Gresley coaches.

 

 

John

[Roger Sunderland]

Thanks very much, both of you, a PM has already winged its way to Gilbert.

I use Kadees on the ends of all my coaching rakes, have for a long time, and on freight stock to allow uncoupling but I’ve experimented with a few solutions for coach rakes, I even had some 3D printed for use on our exhibition layout, Bournemouth West. Have to say though these Hunt couplings are the neatest solution yet, so easy to change a coach, split up etc, plus they look good and keep the sock at a fixed distance apart.

[brossard]

My main issue with Kadees and coaches is the back and forth slop.  IIRC, I measured to be something like 5mm.  This made close coupling nigh on impossible.  Before Hunts came along I made a hook and bar system for coach coupling using a method by Tony Wright.  This worked quite well but was a lot of work.  Rake ends still required Kadees.

 

Hunts are a game changer I think.  If the loco has NEM pockets (few don't these days), you can install Hunts as my buddy has done.

 

John

[THS92-GWR-NO]

Hey all

I'm wondering about changing my couplings aswell from standard tension lock to Kadees or something else. 

 

These Hunts, what are the advantage over Kadees? 

[brossard]

2 hours ago, THS92-GWR-NO said:

Hey all

I'm wondering about changing my couplings aswell from standard tension lock to Kadees or something else. 

 

These Hunts, what are the advantage over Kadees? 

 

Well, Thomas, as I see it anything is better than T/L.  As for Kadees, when it comes to coaches, they have quite a large slop (~5mm) so if you want close coupling it is hard.  Hunts, on the other hand have no slop.  If you want to shunt goods wagons, I think Kadees are a good option.

 

John

[THS92-GWR-NO]

2 minutes ago, brossard said:

 

Well, Thomas, as I see it anything is better than T/L.  As for Kadees, when it comes to coaches, they have quite a large slop (~5mm) so if you want close coupling it is hard.  Hunts, on the other hand have no slop.  If you want to shunt goods wagons, I think Kadees are a good option.

 

John

 

Hi John! 
Good to see there are more of us slaving through the night (well here in Norway it is at least) 

Would you then recommend Kadees on locomotives and both end of trains (if not separating them) those wagons? 

 

Thomas,

[brossard]

Thomas, I did 00 for nearly 30 years and one of the first decisions I made when I started was to ditch the T/L couplings and go with Kadee.  Things were not as easy then as they are now because NEM standards were in the future.

 

So, yes I can recommend Kadee, they work well, are reliable and, these days, easy to install.  The only decision is what shank length to use.  I always used #18 on goods wagons but if you have very tight curves, you might need #19.  It's a matter of experimentation and optimization.

 

John

[THS92-GWR-NO]

2 minutes ago, brossard said:

Thomas, I did 00 for nearly 30 years and one of the first decisions I made when I started was to ditch the T/L couplings and go with Kadee.  Things were not as easy then as they are now because NEM standards were in the future.

 

So, yes I can recommend Kadee, they work well, are reliable and, these days, easy to install.  The only decision is what shank length to use.  I always used #18 on goods wagons but if you have very tight curves, you might need #19.  It's a matter of experimentation and optimization.

 

John

 

Thanks a lot John!
 

 

[RFS]

Have been following the threads on Hunt couplings and decided to give them a try. I've fitted them to a couple of rakes of Bachmann MK1s and I'm very pleased with them. At first I had a couple of derailments, but these were caused by the bogies being a bit loose - just needed a tightening of the fixing screws.  I used the Elite Close version and the corridor partitions touch on straight track which looks very realistic. Up till now I've been using the Hornby-Roco coupling for Bachmann MK1s. These do give good close-coupling like the Hunts, but are an absolute pain to couple up, whereas the Hunts couple simply even on curved track. Coupling to locos is via Kadees. 

 

However for my second batch I decided to use the stepped, buckeye version as they looked a better option. But I was dismayed after fitting the first couple of coaches that there was clear daylight between the coaches. Both versions of the couplings are described as being 9.5mm from NEM socket to front of coupling. This is correct for the plain couplings but for the buckeye it's actually 10.9, hence no close coupling. 

 

Called West Hill today and the guy knew they were longer but could not remember the reason. He agreed to replace them with the plain close couplings. I did politely suggest they really ought to correct their description and state the correct length. 

 

I've also been fitting some of the ultra-close NEM couplings to Hornby Maunsell coaches which also run well too. Again corridor connections touch on straight track. 

[The Evil Bus Driver]

On 01/08/2022 at 22:01, RFS said:

Have been following the threads on Hunt couplings and decided to give them a try. I've fitted them to a couple of rakes of Bachmann MK1s and I'm very pleased with them. At first I had a couple of derailments, but these were caused by the bogies being a bit loose - just needed a tightening of the fixing screws.  I used the Elite Close version and the corridor partitions touch on straight track which looks very realistic. Up till now I've been using the Hornby-Roco coupling for Bachmann MK1s. These do give good close-coupling like the Hunts, but are an absolute pain to couple up, whereas the Hunts couple simply even on curved track. Coupling to locos is via Kadees. 

 

However for my second batch I decided to use the stepped, buckeye version as they looked a better option. But I was dismayed after fitting the first couple of coaches that there was clear daylight between the coaches. Both versions of the couplings are described as being 9.5mm from NEM socket to front of coupling. This is correct for the plain couplings but for the buckeye it's actually 10.9, hence no close coupling. 

 

Called West Hill today and the guy knew they were longer but could not remember the reason. He agreed to replace them with the plain close couplings. I did politely suggest they really ought to correct their description and state the correct length. 

 

I've also been fitting some of the ultra-close NEM couplings to Hornby Maunsell coaches which also run well too. Again corridor connections touch on straight track. 

I've fitted the Airfix version to my mk2Ds and I'm very pleased with them. That said they could be closer. I also bought some NEM Elites at Warley and have had a play around. I reckon with the Keen systems floating gangways and these within my rakes they are far better than anything else.

I even tried them out on my Hachette mk1s and these got the best result of all. Really close with virtually no gap at all, plus these coaches have a good strong spring so they pull together well. I'll have to add them to my third Hachette and see what happens. I've lost the kinematic drawbar from one but it doesn't really matter as these are my 'experimental' coaches so its not such an issue. The Hachettes will be the first rake to receive floating gangways so I'll see what happens once they're fitted. 

Edited December 1, 2022 by The Evil Bus Driver