Most Kadee couplings are HO, does this matter for OO?

[faa77]

Never realised Kadee are actually HO gauge. Does this make much difference for OO?

[kevinlms]

35 minutes ago, faa77 said:

Never realised Kadee are actually HO gauge. Does this make much difference for OO?

Kadee make their couplers in a range of scales, but being an American company, they would barely know what British OO is - why would they?

 

Install them to the specifications for HO (especially height) and there will be no significant problems. There are modellers who do install them to 'OO standards', creating a set of revised dimensions. You can probably search and find such information on RMweb, but I personally wouldn't bother.

[Dunsignalling]

I've stuck with the HO standards since adopting Kadees for OO use back in 1993. That way you can use all the gauges etc as they come. No point looking for trouble!

 

just as well I did, because a year or so later, I joined a group that had been doing things that way since the late 1960s!

 

You will find, when attaching the #146 Whisker coupler to the underside of rtr or kit-built OO wagons, that the buffer-beam height (or the underside of the chassis moulding on rtr) coincides with the stated HO dimension for centerset couplers anyway.

 

John

Edited December 26, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[Butler Henderson]

The only issue is that short length Kadees are of little use on  UK stock due to the need to extend beyond the buffers although their are a few models with NEM mounts so pronounced that the short Kadee 17 is needed.  Similarly models with true scale buffer shanks may need the long Kadees if the draftbox is not to protrude beyond the bufferbeam which means using a 146 rather than a 5 on a non NEM mount stock while the depth of the bufferbeam may be such that an underset Kadee is needed (141)

[laurenceb]

According to Iain Rice the HO coupling is nearer to S scale anyway

[Alcanman]

As an American  company Kadee market their couplers as 'HO', however they are actually overscale and probably nearer to 'OO'

 

They also do a range of 'scale' couplers which are closer to HO but these are not available  with the NEM shank.

 

So, to answer your question it doesn't really matter, IMHO, that they are 'HO'

[Dunsignalling]

For many of us who use Kadees for OO, it doesn't much matter whether they are "scale" or not, as few of our prototypes have buckeye couplings.

 

We use them as a purely functional couplers for models (as opposed to models of couplers), in the same way we might have used Peco Simplex ones in days gone by.

 

In that respect they work admirably.

 

John

[knitpick]

The scale doesn't really matter.  I've used Kadees for various DMUs and EMUs as I find the small tension lock can cause derailments when pushing - especially when you have 2 powered units coupled together (e.g. a 153 and 142).  It's a lot easier to fit into NEM standard coupling pockets using 20s, 19s, 18s or rarely 17s.  For couplings fitted at the end of DMUs, you may find that some cutting of the guards under the buffer beam height is required for the Kadee to poke through.  I do have a Kadee coupling height gauge which I use on non-NEM fittings - well worth the spend.

[cheesysmith]

As the UK used "buckeye" couplings that were 3/4 sized US couplings, they come out near scale sized anyway. If you want to see the difference, compare the mk1 coach to the ones fitted by EWS to the HTA/class 66.