AlfaZagato Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 Kadees will do the trick, too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RFS Posted January 17 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 17 (edited) 11 minutes ago, AlfaZagato said: Kadees will do the trick, too. No, they won't as they're not rigid and will have the same issue as tension locks. You need a rigid coupling for stock with close-coupling mechanisms. I would suggest the Hunt magnetic couplings (which I use) as an alternative because they have couplings of various lengths so you can pick the one that gives the best effect. https://westhillwagonworks.com/13-hunt-couplings-elite-oo Edited January 17 by RFS 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charliepetty Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 Yes the NEM Kadee couplings come in 4 sizes: Kadee 17: Short. (To get the loco & stock closer) Kadee 18: Medium Short. Kadee 19: Medium Long. Kadee 20: Long. See: https://www.dckits-devideos.co.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=89_91 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 9 hours ago, RFS said: No, they won't as they're not rigid and will have the same issue as tension locks. You need a rigid coupling for stock with close-coupling mechanisms. I would suggest the Hunt magnetic couplings (which I use) as an alternative because they have couplings of various lengths so you can pick the one that gives the best effect. This is where the Bachmann EZ-Mate NEM couplings score, though only available in one length. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Harvey Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 10 hours ago, RFS said: No, they won't as they're not rigid and will have the same issue as tension locks. You need a rigid coupling for stock with close-coupling mechanisms. I would suggest the Hunt magnetic couplings (which I use) as an alternative because they have couplings of various lengths so you can pick the one that gives the best effect. https://westhillwagonworks.com/13-hunt-couplings-elite-oo Whilst I agree with the general principle of needing rigid couplers to work with close coupling mechanisms I think it requires the shaft of the coupler to be rigid rather than the head. Certainly in N I can run and shunt my trains using Dapol Easishunts in stock fitted with kinematic close coupling mechanisms. 20 x 4 axle grain wagons work well with each other and locos with close coupling. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted January 18 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 18 (edited) A lot will depend on various factors; how rigid the coupler head is (or isn't), minimum ruling radius, and whether you need to shunt round reverse curves (e.g. through a crossover). If none of the above are too extreme, and you can avoid the last, you can often get away with a degree of floppiness. My own policy is for full close-coupling within passenger sets or block freights (CCU + Roco) with Kadees at the outer ends. I "put up with" larger gaps (c.4mm) between loco and train for the sake of retaining the shuntability of Kadees. Generally with a CCU + NEM Kadee on the stock , but just a Kadee on the loco or tender, where I generally prefer a #141 or #146 Kadee. The greater lateral swing of those allows them to "follow" a CCU-fitted end. The caveat being that I don't propel stock round curves of less than 30" radius. If having buffer-to-buffer contact throughout really bothered me, I could use Rocos universally at the cost of having visible uncoupling ramps or using a paddle rather than buried magnets. If the rumoured development of a remote uncoupling device for Hunt magnetics comes to fruition, the Holy Grail of universally close buffer contact may at last be upon us. John Edited January 18 by Dunsignalling 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 On 16/01/2024 at 00:37, Jack P said: Any photos of the finished article? ... Slight delay sorting out nasal plumbing ! .... but .... 13 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 I am really happy with my model and feel that a great balance between price and quality has been achieved. This model is not up to the more expensive Bachmann class 47 standard with all its separate parts, gimmicks and features. And this maybe due to the somewhat slab sided simplistic nature of the original compared to a Brush type 4 that plays an influence on that. But I do feel we have the right balance in details, robustness and cost. 20003 and a class 74 would be welcome please. (I know DJM tried the latter, but these are clearly going to sell a lot better under EFE). 6 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfaZagato Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 16 hours ago, RFS said: No, they won't as they're not rigid and will have the same issue as tension locks. You need a rigid coupling for stock with close-coupling mechanisms. I would suggest the Hunt magnetic couplings (which I use) as an alternative because they have couplings of various lengths so you can pick the one that gives the best effect. https://westhillwagonworks.com/13-hunt-couplings-elite-oo I do not have this issue with Kadees on close coupling stock, which is why I suggested Kadees. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RFS Posted January 18 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 18 1 hour ago, AlfaZagato said: I do not have this issue with Kadees on close coupling stock, which is why I suggested Kadees. Yes I used to use Kadees too. The reason for using a rigid coupling is that it forces the CCM to revert to its correct position exiting curves, for example. If there's any issue with the CCM, eg a bit of stiffness, it can cause a problem. Another advantage of a rigid coupling, especially for coaching stock, is that there's no slack in the coupling, so the coaches all start simultaneously when the train moves off. And Kadees are now very expensive - now north of £10 for 2 pairs of NEM couplings. A pair of Hunt magnetic couplings, which I now use, are around £1.50. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfaZagato Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 I live in the US. Still about $6 for two pair of NEM Kadees. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold jonnyuk Posted January 18 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 18 6 hours ago, JSpencer said: I am really happy with my model and feel that a great balance between price and quality has been achieved. This model is not up to the more expensive Bachmann class 47 standard with all its separate parts, gimmicks and features. And this maybe due to the somewhat slab sided simplistic nature of the original compared to a Brush type 4 that plays an influence on that. But I do feel we have the right balance in details, robustness and cost. 20003 and a class 74 would be welcome please. (I know DJM tried the latter, but these are clearly going to sell a lot better under EFE). 100%, perfect balance, does not need a fancy stay alive etc, no need for fans or raising pantographs, the livery finish is good, it’s a good runner, enough detail to look high end, except the inconsistent running (which I need to sort out with my local shop) I think it’s the best value loco I’ve ever bought. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Decorum Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 19 hours ago, JSpencer said: 20003 and a class 74 would be welcome please. (I know DJM tried the latter, but these are clearly going to sell a lot better under EFE). Yes and yes! EFE/Kernow might hesitate to tool up for 20003 (fewer livery options) but I hope it’s being given some thought in the light of how well the first two Boosters have been selling. As for the 74, DJ has made me want one. It was cancelled due to insufficient orders but then, didn’t it require payment up front? Many more models of types more obscure than the 74s have been produced. 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium spamcan61 Posted January 19 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 19 (edited) 37 minutes ago, No Decorum said: As for the 74, DJ has made me want one. It was cancelled due to insufficient orders but then, didn’t it require payment up front? Many more models of types more obscure than the 74s have been produced. I'd like a 74 (singular) but I guess the lack of livery / build variations limits the sales potential. Still seems a bit odd when things like 10800 are seemingly viable. Edited January 19 by spamcan61 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Decorum Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 17 minutes ago, spamcan61 said: I'd like 74 (singular) but I guess the lack of livery / build variations limits the sales potential. Still seems a bit odd when things like 10800 are seemingly viable. Perhaps manufacturers have been put off because a proposed model failed to gain enough interest. The real 74s were not a success but then 10800 was worse and there was only one of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted January 19 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 19 I would suggest that while both 10800 and 74 were less-than-truly-successful, the former can reasonably be run on any layout, while the Big EDL really doesn't look right far from third rail. The number of layouts with third rail is relatively small. 2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 Just now, No Decorum said: Yes and yes! EFE/Kernow might hesitate to tool up for 20003 (fewer livery options) but I hope it’s being given some thought in the light of how well the first two Boosters have been selling. As for the 74, DJ has made me want one. It was cancelled due to insufficient orders but then, didn’t it require payment up front? Many more models of types more obscure than the 74s have been produced. Yep payment up front at a time when people's faith in DJ was starting to decrease. (I am eternally grateful to the way Kernow handled it.) 32 minutes ago, Oldddudders said: I would suggest that while both 10800 and 74 were less-than-truly-successful, the former can reasonably be run on any layout, while the Big EDL really doesn't look right far from third rail. The number of layouts with third rail is relatively small. The same could be said for the booster, but they seem to be quickly selling out. I still think the issue with the 74 was on who was doing it rather than what. I was overall disappointed by the DJ 71 (Hornby's is a far more practical functional model with better shape even if not better everywhere). I am sooooooo glad that Kernow & EFE got togethor for the Booster and had it been just Kernow, I would have pre-ordered it and paid up front right away. 20003 and a class 74 will easily sell... 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted January 19 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 19 22 minutes ago, JSpencer said: The same could be said for the booster, but they seem to be quickly selling out. The booster stretches back across many modellers' eras, as does 10800 to a lesser extent, while the 74 only covers 1967 onwards. Great for BR blue aficionados, less so for anyone running steam. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Fair Oak Junction Posted January 19 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 19 An awful lot of Southern Region 3rd rail layouts in general seem to be set during the BR green era, backed up by the fact the BR green booster sold out much faster than the others. I'd say it's at least a somewhat good argument for 20003. I can't comment on the 74 as I don't much about that era or layouts set during it. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 4630 Posted January 19 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 19 49 minutes ago, Oldddudders said: ...while the Big EDL really doesn't look right far from third rail. The number of layouts with third rail is relatively small. I guess from a modelling point of view the question is how far from the third rail? As I'm sure you know, in real life the 74s regularly went off the juice with boat trains to Southampton East and West Docks and also over the West London line and on to the Western Region with coal trains to Acton Yard. Perhaps Southampton Docks isn't that far away from the third rail, but the diagram to Acton Yard was a bit more of a challenge trek for them. There's photo evidence of them occasionally running west of the then limit of the third rail at Branksome, on parcels workings as far as Weymouth. And rail tours taking them to Blandford, Chandlers Ford and Romsey. The market for a 4mm version of them is no doubt small and the corporate blue only livery, perhaps supplemented with a weathered option as they were rarely clean for long, is definitely a limiting factor. But I can still dream. 5 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold simon b Posted January 19 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 19 (edited) Realistically if anyone does the 74 it will be Hornby, they only need to make a retooled body shell as the chassis is already there. It's on my list to do at some point, I've got a 71 here to butcher using the silver fox 74 body shell fitted with the Hornby cabs. Although the 74 is limited to one livery and the southern area of operation, it will still sell out. Many people will just want it to complete their collection, even if nowhere to run it in a prototypical fashion. 20003 could be a bit more of a problem as it was longer than the other two, depends on how accurate you want it to be. Edited January 19 by simon b Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green too Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 I'd hazard a guess that your dream is unlikely to be fulfilled unless by a manufacturer who already has a suitable chassis ........ er ...... as Simon says ! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 1 hour ago, Wickham Green too said: I'd hazard a guess that your dream is unlikely to be fulfilled unless by a manufacturer who already has a suitable chassis ........ er ...... as Simon says ! It might depend where the DJM tooling and CAD ended up, and which manufacturer/brand has reinvigorated some of that in the past already as to what relative chances might be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfaZagato Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 Mine finally arrived! So far, twelve square and shuffles to-and-fro on a meter of Maerklin K. (Chicago USPS was struggling with consecutive winter storms and sub-0 deg F temps.) 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amdaley Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 Question for anyone running one of these on DCC ? I can switch on the headlights but I can't switch on the cab lights from my NCE Power Cab. Anyone have this problem ? I can switch the cab lights on & off with the wand but not from the handset ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now