dapol buckeye coupler

[BROADTRAIN1979]

Hi, Im thinking of buying a set of these, as they look very realistic, as i thought i could maybe use these for the freight trains 47 etc...

Mark.

[Grahame]

Has anyone managed to get their hands on any of these couplers yet and have a mess about?

Yep, odd that no-one has got some and reported on them yet. Although they do seem to be quite expensive. Are they readily available?

G.

[Karhedron]

Yep, odd that no-one has got some and reported on them yet. Although they do seem to be quite expensive. Are they readily available?

My local model shop had not received them yet the last time I asked. I only wanted a couple to experiment with and so decided to wait rather than waste money on postage. Then we got intot he Christmas run-up so modelling has taken a back seat to decorating, wrapping presents, cleaning the house etc.

Father Christmas brough me some rather nice weathered United Dairies tankers last year, sadly I don't think I will be getting anything similar in my stocking this year.

[BROADTRAIN1979]

If someone ,who has these can give some info on them , that would be great

Mark.

[fratton]

i have 2 pairs and magnets, but not allowed near them until sunday

[BROADTRAIN1979]

Same with me, my cep and 101 sunday only

Mark.

[HappyDays]

Apparently MT and dapols kuckles arent compatible with each other any suggestions on how i can use my MT stock without butchering a loco.

All my stock is fitted with MicroTrains couplers and I have just tested a Class 67 fitted with the new Dapol Coupling. It works perfectly, coupling up to the standard MT coupling gauge unit and all different forms of Dapol and Grafar stock fitted with MTs. Uncoupling is no problem using standard MT magnets mounted between the rails as normal. I also use MT 309 electromagnets but have not yet tested this with the Dapol coupler.

Now the bad news - I cannot get the delayed shunt facility to operate reliably either when coupling the Dapol coupler up to an MT fitted item of stock OR even to another item of stock fitted with another Dapol coupling. The 'lip', (in MT parlance), seems to be set too far away from the 'knuckle' to allow the lip to prevent the couplings from re-engaging. Not the end of the world if you don't do delayed uncoupling but perhaps a bit annoying.

Certainly the couplings are super easy to fit - much better than all the mods needed to fit MTs but maybe some tweaks are needed.

For uncoupling magnets I use MT 1310 which can be snapped in half by scribing the magnets with a tile cutter followed by breaking with a tile snapper as per MT instructions. This provides 4 magnets per pack.

Hope this helps.
HC

[michaelasc]

Has anyone considered using Kato couplers? I am in the US and I have both UK and US stock, mostly which I run independently and not mixed. However, in order to simulate repeating doing what the LMS did in the 1930s except with newer (1960s era) Mk1 coaching stock I've converted one end of both a Maroon Brake Mk1 and Pulllman Brake so that I can run rakes of these behind a US loco or just being shunted in a depot. I can also pretend that I am running a preservation train or perhaps a simulated luxury excursion if I use the pullmans. In fact this is not that far short of reality as there is a rake of old pullmans in the US doing the rounds as a luxury tourist train. There's another one in Canada.

I actually replaced the whole bogie with a standard Kato bogie from a smoothside passenger car and they run just fine. I mention this because Kato make longer shanks which mean that the buffers do not snag.To run these behind a UK loco I simply either swop that coach out or put it on the back end of the consist where it looks more realistic than having a Rapido stickinig out.

I also converted a Minitrix Ivatt 2-6-2 to have Kato couplers on one end so that it could couple up to either US stock or be used as the shunting loco for the above consists that have Kato couplers.

Why you might ask do I have both? Well I started out with a US layout and because Kato are the best I have a lot of their locos. If you've never experienced a Kato motor you ought to try getting your hands on one. You'll soon see how smooth they are. I really wish Farish and Dapol would look at the tooling of the Kato locos. The Kato magnetic uncoupler works very well too.

Has anyone else tried anything simular?
Michael

[Karhedron]

Well since no has had a go yet I have decided to do a bit of experimenting with the Dapol couplers and some neodymium "rare earth" magnets. The ones I used were 3mm x 2mm circular ones. I chose these as the North and South poles are aligned along the axis of the cylinder making alignment easy, they also wedge snuggly between the sleepers of Peco code 55 track.

I tried different combinations and placements of the magnets. The one that seemed to work best was with the 2 magnets just inside the rails, one sleeper apart in the 4 and 10 o'clock positions as shown below.

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee19 ... CF4292.jpg

With the magnets in this position (one northside-up and the other southside-up) uncoupling seemed quite reliable. See the images below.

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee19 ... CF4293.jpg
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee19 ... CF4294.jpg
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee19 ... CF4295.jpg

The problem was that I could not get the delayed action to work. My guess is that the magnets are not strong enough to provide sufficient deflection to operate this feature.

Now this is not the end of the world. Magnets like this can be bought on eBay for pennies so it will not break the bank to scatter them around the layout at many locations. Also they can be fitted without having to remove sleepers which makes them much easier to disguise. Simply give them a brush of matt paint to match the ballast and they are almost invisible.

I have not bought a Dapol uncoupling magnet yet so I would be interested to hear how reliable the delayed action uncoupling is with this. If others find it works well, I may try with a row of magnets.

[HappyDays]

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee199/Karhedronuk/DSCF4295.jpg

The problem was that I could not get the delayed action to work. My guess is that the magnets are not strong enough to provide sufficient deflection to operate this feature.

Hi Karhedron,

Like you, I have had problems with delayed uncoupling.

Perhaps it is less about how strong the magnets are as those little beasts are amazingly powerful. I suspect it is more about the position relative to the centre-line of the track. 9mm track does not appear to allow the magnets to be spaced far enough apart to move the knuckles beyond the fixed projecting part of the opposite coupling. Your 4th photo, (above), shows this and it is obvious that as soon as the train clears the magnets the knuckles will re-couple as they have not moved far enough off centre to be behind the projecting part of the opposing coupling.

You could try moving the metal trip pins ever so slightly towards the centre-line of the track so the knuckles wll be displaced further out from the centre and hopefully end up behind the opposite coupling's fixed projection.

Maybe this is why with alternative autocouplings the projecting part is not rigidly fixed but moves slightly with the knuckle guaranteeing it blocks the opposite knuckle and prevents re-coupling in delayed mode?

Hope this helps.
HD

[Karhedron]

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee199/Karhedronuk/DSCF4295.jpg

The problem was that I could not get the delayed action to work. My guess is that the magnets are not strong enough to provide sufficient deflection to operate this feature.

Like you, I have had problems with delayed uncoupling.

Perhaps it is less about how strong the magnets are as those little beasts are amazingly powerful. I suspect it is more about the position relative to the centre-line of the track. 9mm track does not appear to allow the magnets to be spaced far enough apart to move the knuckles beyond the fixed projecting part of the opposite coupling. Your 4th photo, (above), shows this and it is obvious that as soon as the train clears the magnets the knuckles will re-couple as they have not moved far enough off centre to be behind the projecting part of the opposing coupling.

You could try moving the metal trip pins ever so slightly towards the centre-line of the track so the knuckles wll be displaced further out from the centre and hopefully end up behind the opposite coupling's fixed projection.

Simple but brilliant! I moved the trip pins in towards the centre-line as you suggested and the delayed-action now works fine.

See below.

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee19 ... CF4301.jpg
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee19 ... CF4296.jpg
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee19 ... CF4297.jpg
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee19 ... CF4298.jpg

[HappyDays]

quote]
Simple but brilliant! I moved the trip pins in towards the centre-line as you suggested and the delayed-action now works fine.

See below.

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee19 ... CF4298.jpg

Great - your DSCF4298 photo above looks good. Very glad to be of help.

It shows how critical it is going to be to maintain the round cross-section trip pins in the 'best' position in the longer term. Kadee and MT trip pins are square in cross-section and so cannot rotate in their fixings.

HD

[mikeharvey23]

For what its worth my pair of couplings worked fine in pre-uncoupling mode using a piece of Atlas track I have owned for years. This had a Microtrains style magnet built into it. Getting the magnet well away from the centre line seems to address the same issue as moving the trip pin a bit closer to the centre line. I would suggest securing the pin after moving it probably using a touch of varnish rather than cyano which has a propensity to run anywhere it wants! I have lost a spring from one of my couplers so no Easi-Shunting now until the bulk packs arrive. They will be getting a dab of varnish on each end of the spring before installation in wagons to improve the security. Even if I ever find the spring I have my doubts about whether I could reinstall it.

Mike

[Karhedron]

I have lost a spring from one of my couplers so no Easi-Shunting now until the bulk packs arrive. They will be getting a dab of varnish on each end of the spring before installation in wagons to improve the security. Even if I ever find the spring I have my doubts about whether I could reinstall it.

You are not alone in losing springs from these. Based on reports from other users, I secured both ends of the springs with a dab of matt varnish before I fitted them.

It might be worth contacting Dave or Joel at Dapol. They seem to have offered others replacement springs so a polite request could help.

[locoworks]

sorry to revive this but i just got some to play with and have a few issues.

karhedron, i notice in picture CF 4297 in the got the delayed part working section that although there seems to be just enough lateral clearance to allow pushing without recoupling to take place i also notice that both items of stock seem to be sitting with wheel flanges towards opposite rails making the side play available between the rails and flanges the reason for the success?? i think if both items were against the same rail it still may not work?

i think the lateral pivot in the NEM pocket needs to allow free movement and have a very soft spring to centre it like microtrains stuff. maybe some graphite lube like microtrains 'grease em' would ease things a bit but on my NEW 08 and my older 04 it is possible to push the shank left and right and it comes back a little to centre but not all the way. i can see me getting some wagons to have a play with in the easing department to maybe get the shank to swivel a bit to give more movement?

edit;
i just looked at some dapol pics and it doesn't look like 4 wheel wagons have any swivel on the couplings. the pockets on my farish loco's do????