fezza Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 I've recently started a small Finescale 00 project and equipped my four wheel vans with Smiths 3 link couplings. However if I couple them together correctly using the third coupling loop the wagons are coupled far too far apart. I have to use the second link to get a scale distance between the vehicles. That leaves the third dangling. Am I doing something wrong or is this normal? It looks odd to me... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johndon Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 One thing to bear in mind that the Smith 3 links aren't to scale, they are larger than they should be... 1 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold BoD Posted March 19 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 19 (edited) Remember that everything in 00 modelling - even fine scale - is a compromise. Smiths couplings are, if I understand it correctly, deliberately overscale to accommodate this. You could try some other makes or reducing the size of the links. Whether or not these would work on your railway would depend on lots of factors including your minimum radii, actual fidelity of the rolling stock buffers and buffer beams, and how you have attached the couplings. That wouldn’t deal with the overscale hooks though - another can of worms. Yes, the coupling distance is greater than prototypical when using many 3 links, not just Smith’s, but is often necessary to accommodate the compressions/compromises of railway modelling in anything but the strictest of standards. Edited March 19 by BoD 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fezza Posted March 19 Author Share Posted March 19 9 minutes ago, BoD said: Remember that everything in 00 modelling - even fine scale - is a compromise. Smiths couplings are, if I understand it correctly, deliberately overscale to accommodate this. You could try some other makes or reducing the size of the links. Whether or not these would work on your railway would depend on lots of factors including your minimum radii, actual fidelity of the rolling stock buffers and buffer beams, and how you have attached the couplings. Yes, the coupling distance is greater than prototypical when using many 3 links, not just Smith’s, but is often necessary to accommodate the compressions/compromises of railway modelling in anything but the strictest of standards. I hadn't appreciated just how overscale they were. My eyes are getting old! Yes, it seems in this case using the middle (seconds) three link to couple is the sensible compromise. You get scale distance but with one link "spare". It's not ideal but it means the coupling are easy (or easier) to use. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold BoD Posted March 19 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 19 4 minutes ago, fezza said: My eyes are getting old! Mine too - and some of the ‘closer’ to scale couplings and smaller hooks are ‘flippin’ hard if not impossible to use. If you can use the second link without causing derailments then it is down to you to decide if the hanging third link is something worth putting up with to facilitate closer coupling. As an aside, I have started to move to using 3 links mostly in fixed rakes - but that is down mostly to age and eyesight rather than personal choice. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fezza Posted March 19 Author Share Posted March 19 1 minute ago, BoD said: Mine too - and some of the ‘closer’ to scale couplings and smaller hooks are ‘flippin’ hard if not impossible to use. If you can use the second link without causing derailments then it is down to you to decide if the hanging third link is something worth putting up with to facilitate closer coupling. As an aside, I have started to move to using 3 links mostly in fixed rakes - but that is down mostly to age and eyesight rather than personal choice. Yes, the hanging third link is not too noticeable really and is better I feel than having coupled stock too far apart. I've not had any buffer locking yet. I don't think I'm brave enough to go with anything finer scale - the frustration of coupling would probably ruin any pleasure I got from the improved appearance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Enterprisingwestern Posted March 20 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 20 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/193879913093? Are you aware of these and the associated separately available links? Mike. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold franciswilliamwebb Posted March 20 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 20 40 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said: Are you aware of these and the associated separately available links? I wasn't, how long have the finer ones been in production? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barclay Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Slaters links are much finer, though I usually put a Smiths hook on locos as it makes shunting easier! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted March 20 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 20 Having used Smiths links, in various forms for 30 years or so, I have the following observations: - I normally put a 'fine' link between the first link (the one in the hook) and the end link - I tend to us a normal link for the first link (in the hook), purely because with the fine links, you sometimes get difficulty lifting that link freely over the front curve of the hook. Reducing the depth of the hook by filing some material off the front is one way around this - I did switch to using the finer links for the end link, but found these more difficult to use under exhibition conditions, so switched back to using the 'normal' links - I always, without fail, now fit steel end links now and use a magnetic shunting pole wherever I can. The use of magnetic shunting poles has absolutely transformed the use of 3-link couplings, for me, it was a real game-changer. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fulton Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 I use Smiths couplings, yes the normal version is over scale, but at least that gives you half a chance to use them, I would sooner have that comprimise than have an unprototypical alterative, thats my personel view, I use an LED pen torch with a bent wire soldered on to use them, works for me, I like to uncouple where required rather than where the magnets are, having said that I use Kadees on by American layout. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheatley Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Having used Smiths and Slaters the Slaters ones are much finer but they're also shorter and you'll need to open the hook out (unless that's changed since I last bought some). Depending on what your minimum curve is you may find you need sprung buffers, or sprung hooks, or both, or that it just doesn't work at all on sharper curves. I can get them to work on R3 (19") curves but only short wheelbase wagons and dead slow. These days I can't see the hooks anyway so they're just cosmetic with a Lincs coupler or simplified AJ doing the actual coupling. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 (edited) Use the steel version of the end of the chain . Much easier using a magnet on a pole, than a hook to couple up. Edited March 20 by micklner 1 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