|
Roger Haag wrote:
One yard has Flyer couplers and the other yard has Kadee?
HI Roger.
If you want to run both Flyer and Kadee couplers on your layout, you will benefit from an idea from the Old Days when several different coupler types were vying for popularity in HO. Kadee won out of course, but for a while there were also the X2F, Baker, Mantua and other variations of hook and loop.
What you need are two coupler conversion cars, each with a Flyer coupler on one end and a Kadee on the other. Either car would allow a Kadee equipped loco to pull a string of Flyer equipped cars, or vice versa, a Flyer loco to haul Kadee equipped cars.
Or hook the two cars altogether...Kadee to Kadee, and run them in a train of Flyer cars...or Flyer to Flyer to operate in a string of Kadee-equipped cars. Maximum flexibility.
Cheers Jim Martin
|
Conversion cars are nothing new. Back when I was a child with AF, I had some cars?with a knuckle coupler on one end and a link coupler on the other end.?
I seem to remember a prototype narrow gauge hopper (ballast) car with a?full size coupler on one end and a 3/4MCB?coupler on the other end. On my layout, I have a dual gauge conversion car so I can run standard and 3' gauge cars in the same train on three-rail dual gauge track. Yes there are prototypes for this and Rio Grande Models made a kit for them.
Dave Heine
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 3:56?PM Jim & Cheryl Martin via <themartins= [email protected]> wrote:
Roger Haag wrote:
One yard has Flyer couplers and the other yard has Kadee?
HI Roger.
If you want to run both Flyer and Kadee couplers on your layout, you will benefit from an idea from the Old Days when several different coupler types were vying for popularity in HO. Kadee won out of course, but for a while there were also the X2F, Baker, Mantua and other variations of hook and loop.
What you need are two coupler conversion cars, each with a Flyer coupler on one end and a Kadee on the other. Either car would allow a Kadee equipped loco to pull a string of Flyer equipped cars, or vice versa, a Flyer loco to haul Kadee equipped cars.
Or hook the two cars altogether...Kadee to Kadee, and run them in a train of Flyer cars...or Flyer to Flyer to operate in a string of Kadee-equipped cars. Maximum flexibility.
Cheers Jim Martin
|
The Flyer couplers don’t close at slow speeds whereas KD’s do, so realistic switching is not an option with Flyer.
|
<The Flyer couplers don’t close at slow speeds whereas KD’s do, so realistic switching is not an option with Flyer.> ? Flyer link couplers do close at very low speeds, that’s one of the reasons I prefer them to Flyer knuckle couplers.? You are quite correct about the knuckle coupler.? Another reason I like link couplers is that they are close coupling, the spaces between cars is more prototypical.? Same reason I prefer Kadee #5s over their 208s.? On my layout you will find Kadee #5s, Flyer link, and some Flyer knuckle with multiple conversion cars.? Oh, and Hi-rail, Flyer, and scale wheels. Tom Stoltz in Maine
|
I don’t get why some use the HO #5 couplers to get “closer” coupling. Prototype distance between car ends is 3’ other than modern day cushion draft couplings. I’ve found that the 802’s give that prototypical 3 foot distance. As a retired 31 year railroader I sure appreciated that amount of room to go between to couple air hoses, anything less would’ve been difficult, even before I put on the added weight! ? ? ?Bud Rindfleisch
|
Hi Bud, What’s the average length of an air hose?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Feb 14, 2025, at 5:57?PM, Bud Rindfleisch via groups.io <BlackDiamondRR@...> wrote:
?I don’t get why some use the HO #5 couplers to get “closer” coupling. Prototype distance between car ends is 3’ other than modern day cushion draft couplings. I’ve found that the 802’s give that prototypical 3 foot distance. As a retired 31 year railroader I sure appreciated that amount of room to go between to couple air hoses, anything less would’ve been difficult, even before I put on the added weight! ? ? ?Bud Rindfleisch
|
My reason for starting off with?#5 couplers was the fact that I had a lot of them after changing over from HO..
I do use the 800 series on cars that I take to the club display.
Ken G. ?
On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 5:57?PM Bud Rindfleisch via <BlackDiamondRR= [email protected]> wrote: I don’t get why some use the HO #5 couplers to get “closer” coupling. Prototype distance between car ends is 3’ other than modern day cushion draft couplings. I’ve found that the 802’s give that prototypical 3 foot distance. As a retired 31 year railroader I sure appreciated that amount of room to go between to couple air hoses, anything less would’ve been difficult, even before I put on the added weight!? ? ?Bud Rindfleisch
|
I have a mix of 802's and #5's, although they look nice and are more common the uncoupling pins on the 5's are too short if you are using magnetic uncoupling.? You can bend them down to where they will activate but they lose their lever arm and won't fully open.
|
As I don't do a lot of switching, I've cut back on replacing AM's Snap-Lock couplers with 802's.? I'll replace them occasionally, especially locomotives, but othrwise I'm in no hurry.
?
Rich G(ajnak)
|
< Prototype distance between car ends is 3’> ? Bud, I agree.? However that is not what I’ve observed with 802s.? I believe you can tinker with the 802 to get it to the 3 ft spacing.? But out of the box, without altering, I don’t think so.? Also for me is the cost.? The #5 family of couplers is significantly cheaper.? And then there is the variety of shank length and coupler placement on the shank.? Another thing is the newer ‘whisker’ design for the centering spring. ? < the uncoupling pins on the 5's are too short if you are using magnetic uncoupling> ? No need to bend the pin down if you use duel magnets for your uncoupling ramps.? See attached photos… ? Tom Stoltz in Maine
|
By my reckoning, the distance between cars using standard 802 mounting is about 3.5 scale feet be it AM, PRS or SHS.? Is 3/32nds of a real inch really worth worrying about??
?
My eyes went out of calibration some time ago.
?
Rich G(ajnak)
|
Tom, Rich, and anyone else.... ? ? Sure the Kadee 802's do stretch somewhat under pulling, especially if nothing is?done to those?annoying centering?springs. I always slip a short length?of rod inside the spring, about half the length of the spring, that was Kadee's suggestion and that greatly reduces that sloppy stretch. My measurement of 3' (give or take a scale inch or so) was just?as coupled, not under stretch, but then again, I guess I should just?leave these discussions to the "experts"! ? ? ?Bud Rindfleisch
|
< Is 3/32nds of a real inch really worth worrying about > ?Hi Rusty, the first time I encountered the 208 coupler is when a friend brought over his AM smooth side NYC passenger set.? Compared to my AM PRR smooth sides with #5s it wasn’t a calibrated eye sort of thing.? It was a jump right out at you sort of thing.? He went home and converted to #5s. I believe the unaltered 802 spacing is at least .156” if not more.? IIRC you do some doctoring to achieve your spacing, which I must admit is not much of a difference.? I also mentioned pricing though.? Taken from today’s Kadee website, with 2 pair per package, the difference in cost is $4.80… that is a difference I can see. As a side note, I considered your difference in spacing of .09375” and compared it to some other show stoppers.? I was quite surprised, the difference in rail height is .038”.? According to some people, that difference is what held back the popularity of S for the past 70 some years.? Then there is the difference in flange, depth taken from the NASG S-4 Standard of, .065”.? Which is interesting because when I compare a SHS Hi-rail flange with a SHS scale flange I get a difference in depth of .031”.? I have to look really hard to see the difference when a car is on the track.? Can’t say I notice the flange depths at all. Tom Stoltz in Maine ?
|
On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 10:43 AM, Thomas Stoltz wrote:
I believe the unaltered 802 spacing is at least .156” if not more.? IIRC you do some doctoring to achieve your spacing, which I must admit is not much of a difference.? I also mentioned pricing though.
Tom, I'll grant you the price differential.
?
I don't doctor anything.? My 802's are set up using the existing locations for SHS cars and lining up the the center mounting hole on the Kadee pocket with the PRS and AM mounting holes.? I'll grant passenger cars are a slightly different matter due to the sharpness of my curves.
?
Either way, the distance between cars loos fine to me, it's not something spend a lot of time I worrying about.
?
Rich G(ajnak)
|
Those magnets are very slick, do you have a source for them?
|
Hi Kim, This is who I use.? | |
ken garber
Bob Werre
