Kadees on TT120 stock?

[steve1]

Can Kadees be fitted to TT120 stock?

 

(Can’t find an answer anywhere.) 

 

Thanks

 

steve

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Hi @steve1. 

 

For North American TT, it's standard practice to use N Scale Micro-Trains couplers (the N-Scale equivalent to Kadees, which were originally the same company anyway).  For more on North American TT I'd recommend the ttnut Forum.  North American Rolling stock doesn't tend to have NEM pockets (fair enough, NEM are European standards).

 

It is also my understanding that the NEM coupler pockets on Hornby TT:120 rolling stock are the same size as those on N Scale rolling stock - rather than HO / OO compatible.  This could be why there's not been mention of Kadees?

 

Don't know if that helps?  Keith.

[Taigatrommel]

Hi Steve,

 

As far as I'm aware, the only option for a NEM plug in knuckle coupling in TT is the Dapol Easi-fit - I know this isn't a kadee, but it's something.  As Keith says, the NEM socket on TT is the same as in N.

For illustration purposes, here on a Piko 228 and a Hornby TTA.  I haven't used them in operations yet.  They are unfortunately loose in the pockets on my Tillig Tds covered hoppers, but a quick test in a couple of other Tillig vehicles (Ucs silo wagon, Halberstadt coach) seemed to suggest a good hold.

 

 

Edited January 30 by Taigatrommel

[HSB]

I recently bought some MTB items which come fitted with Kadee H0n3 couplings which look rather overscale (rather giving the appearance of Lionel 0 gauge tinplate scaled down!). I have discovered that a number of manufacturers have introduced N scale knuckle couplings since some of the Kadee/Micro-Trains patents have elapsed. Using N gauge couplings will require the uncoupling pins to be altered if they are to mounted at the correct height. Has anybody done this?

I have thought about the possibility of using the Dapol couplings but they would require the fitting of a NEM box.

[britishcolumbian]

Okay so here are my experiences: I favour the MicroTrains N scale couplers on my North American equipment, as they are reasonably close to scale size in TT. But on some items I received them with Kadee HOn3 couplers fitted - which are oversize, but do couple up well with the MT couplers, so it was never a rush to replace them. No need to make any changes to the MT coupler, either, we've never really had any problem with those on the TT-Tracks displays at shows in Vancouver and environs (unlike the Tillig ones, which are sensitive to unevenness in the track unless very precisely aligned for height).

 

I did experiment with the Dapol couplers when I made a North Korean M62. They easily went in to the NEM pocket of course, but as such were too low to couple up with NA stock with couplers at the correct height... which threw out the idea of easily doing something Cuban or South Korean out the window. But if mounted at the right height, they would (better: should) couple up with MT/Kadee couplers, too.

[HSB]

I've just been going through the NMRA Standards but can't find anything about the correct mounting height for TT couplers. Obviously, people using European stuff with NEM boxes will use the standard N scale height for those but North American models would look far better with couplers at the correct scale height.

Edited January 30 by HSB

[BR60103]

My NMRA standards are half a century old, but I think may still be in force.

Standard S1 gives "Center of coupler above top of rail".  For TT this is 9/32" or 7.1 mm.

 

There was never a standard for where the coupler shank or pocket should go.  This is why there are so many variations in the Kadee HO scale couplers.  They did design a universal pocket for HO and specified a mounting height, but I don't know if any have been made lately.