Couplings...

[Mountain]

Thread discussing various designs to make ones own couplings.

I had tried this idea myself years ago before I just found it on youtube. I did not adopt it myself as I found it not so easy to couple though it certainly works and it does look good and is simple to make.


https://youtu.be/hk9j7lieBvs?si=vuMV2Pf2gLZorNOi


So I thought I would start with this simple design...


I will say that couplings depend on what one wants them to replicate. On real railways in the UK the two most widely used catagories come in vehicles using twin buffers or vehicles using a central buffer type design, and there are more variety of central buffer designs than twin buffered vehicle designs as central buffer type couplings can act as both the coupling and the buffer in one as well as being separate from the buffers themselves...

I will later add my design for central buffer couplings used on narrow gauge, as can be seen on the narrow gauge thread, just because I know they work and are easily made, but for those using standard gauge with twin buffers, I would like to offer alternative suggestions, as I feel that though there are excellent commercially made couplings out there, they usualy don't come cheap, especially when one may have many vehcles to convert should one want to change couplings. So this thread is designed to explore and help offer suggestions like the one above.

[Dad-1]

Couplongs ? Wrong key me thinks.

That aside, for functionality I use two types but BOTH using
standard NEM pockets. I'm not looking for a visual prototypical
look, if I was I'd use 3 link (Instanter or screw), I have them on
my 'O' gauge, tried on '00' and too damn fiddly.

Short Bachmann tension locks, with a 1/4 of a paper staple stuck along the brass hook
top. This offers enough lift from a very small magnet on the end of a probe. Fully reliable
for any length train, just release the tension, lift the hooks & draw forward. Very simple
and very cheap. Although 'Hand of God' , but the BR needed a shunter with a pole.
With this method very free running stock is the ideal for trains of 40. 50, 60 wagons.

Kadees, depending on NEM pocket locations Nos 17; 18; 19; 20: These used over both (in my case)
hidden magnets, or between the rails magnets. Hands free - However - To get small British
outline wagons to be worked individually they need to be 'dead' and not roll. I use small hard
sponge axle brakes that just allow wheels to rotate. These brakes while making the hands free
and free shunt operate very reliably you can only pull short trains. My Ruston's struggle at
more than 6 wagons, a weighted Hornby Sentinel can start to struggle above 10.
They are also very expensive, not far off £5 per wagon !!!

By using the NEM pockets I can swap between the two types as required for any specific use,
giving my rolling stock complete flexibility. Well, it gives me all I want !!

Geoff T

[Bigmet]

What I really like about the Bachmann couplongs is that they are shorter than Hornby's and it is possible to shorten the pocket and coupler plug to close loose coupled wagons up at scale separation: perhaps I should follow your lead and title these 'coupshorts'? The effect is very good, a loose coupled train buffers up when pushed, opens out with 2mm between bufferheads when pulled.

I am moving to magnetic couplers for trains of fully fitted vehicles to eliminate the loose coupled effect, perhaps these are 'coupmags'?

The Kadee is fitted to most locos for magnetic uncoupling, it's only slow freight only locos that get the tension lock, and I have about 20 wagons with Kadee one end and an alternative coupler the other end.

[Mountain]

I just corrected the title. Hope it corrects for the rest of the thread.

[Mountain]

https://youtu.be/gk534gDfysE?si=bt7czxzc-Qqjht1y

[Mountain]

Now these will work on 00 gauge 1st radius curves.

https://youtu.be/C1jKnW3b3A8?si=1l2n49aJz0C0haj5

I have tried these out in the past.

And here is a home-made version.

https://youtu.be/24R_ocq86Yw?si=EzTiGRTfHpPneAhW

Ideal for the budget concious modeller!

[centenary]

Cannot for the life of me fathom why the dreaded tension lock has held sway in the UK for so long. I absolutely hate them. You get a hunting type movement with a rake of rolling stock as one or two bash into whatever is in front of them and they are a b*tch to separate.

The old Hornby Dublo couplings were far better, akin to a kaydee.

Thankfully, the newer magnetic couplings are starting to appear in the accessories bag and give both a better look plus stopping the hunting you can get with the tension locks. No coupling is perfect and if you're into shunting and uncoupling without the hand of god, even magnetics wont be your solution.

As far as home made solutions go, I prefer Peter Dixon's of Torridon Road YT channel. He uses magnetics and has crafted one that means he can fully detail the buffer beam of all his locos and use the dummy coupling hook to attach his modified magnetic coupling to. This allows Peter to pull and propel his rakes around his 2nd radius curves without buffer lock.

[Mountain]

Cannot for the life of me fathom why the dreaded tension lock has held sway in the UK for so long. I absolutely hate them. You get a hunting type movement with a rake of rolling stock as one or two bash into whatever is in front of them and they are a b*tch to separate.

The old Hornby Dublo couplings were far better, akin to a kaydee.

Thankfully, the newer magnetic couplings are starting to appear in the accessories bag and give both a better look plus stopping the hunting you can get with the tension locks. No coupling is perfect and if you're into shunting and uncoupling without the hand of god, even magnetics wont be your solution.

As far as home made solutions go, I prefer Peter Dixon's of Torridon Road YT channel. He uses magnetics and has crafted one that means he can fully detail the buffer beam of all his locos and use the dummy coupling hook to attach his modified magnetic coupling to. This allows Peter to pull and propel his rakes around his 2nd radius curves without buffer lock.

Hand uncoupling actually adds a sense of realism to those who worked on the railways, though by nature it becomes harder in the smaller scales.

I used to have success with tension loco couplings as a child when every coupling I had was the large metal Triang-Hornby type that were held on by a screw underneath.
It was when I got older and learned that other makes could run on 00 where the issues began.
BUT I could live with those issues until.NEM pockets and close coupling systems came along as then reliability went out of the window, and this is my last real effort in 00, as though I bought a few things beyond that, it wasn't till.later that a few things happened where I decided on 7mm NG instead.

Coupling-wize, there is no real standard in 7mmNG (0-16.5), so it is up to the individual to decide, and this in itself was the best thing for me because narrow gauge often uses cental buffers which make it easier to come up with ones own design.

I think the main difficulty in 00 of converting to another design of coupler are the costs involved, the time taken and the difficulty one may have if one comes to sell any item.
Is different in 7mmNG as because there are no standards, secondhand prices are not effected. In 00, because tension lock are the given standard, anyone buying secondhand will think along the lines that ones stock will need converting so offer a lower price. (Consider the exact same wagon... One having tension lock, and the other having another type of coupling... 00 modellers will normally only pay a good price if they use the different design of coupling. Otherwize they reduce the offer to account for converting the coupling.
7mm narrow gauge almost everyone will convert tbe couplings so they don't think about it! They may wait until they have a small collection of removed couplings and find someone that uses them and pass them their way, but pricewize, they are generally uneffected...

[aleopardstail]

for me I think the advantage tension lock have is that its a doddle to make a sprung uncoupling ramp that works. they look hideous but they work and mechanically are as simple as it gets.

I like the idea of magnetic couplings, some look amazing, how do you automatically uncouple them?

KayDee are fun, more expensive than the rolling stock though

[Mountain]

I tried Sprat & Winkle in the past and found them really easy to set up on wagons... Bogie vehicles such as coaches required a little more thought as one had to fold the counter balance weight, but were do-able.
They actually worked well! I just didn't fancy the job of changing my entire fleet at the time as I had a lot of other things going on in those days. (Think I was in college or working and also involved in racing and was part sponsored).

I have a few kadees but not tried magnets on them. They are on a few narrow gauge vehicles I have bought secondhand and I have not changed them yet. May as well try them? (But not adopting them due to their cost. S&W 's were reasonably priced when owned by S&W. No idea prices since then! Model Sigal Engineering bought them up, and I was told Wizard Models bought them... But one can make ones own version as they are simple in design.

I was also considering the Peco couplings (Also fitted to Hornby Dublo) but despite them being simple, they are costly for what they are! Why I didn't go for them! Was considering making my own version, but that is where I had other easier to make coupling ideas, which ended up with the drop loop coupling design. (I have plans to develop this design further!)

[Bigmet]

Cannot for the life of me fathom why the dreaded tension lock has held sway in the UK for so long. I absolutely hate them. You get a hunting type movement with a rake of rolling stock as one or two bash into whatever is in front of them and they are a b*tch to separate...

This is economic inertia, the established customer base has them on their layouts, and wants them despite the manifest limitations.

That said, the current miniature versions are superior to the monsters of the past, and exclusive use of a single brand's version works reliably. As a realist - I have cough 800 four wheel wagons - I only use Bachmann's version, lightly modified by adjusting the mounting, because their wagons are 80%+ of the stock. Now, the 65% of the stock that are unfitted and thus loose coupled make use of the realistic hunting type movement this coupler offers; which means the trains of up to 60 wagons have to be driven realistically, relatively slowly with lengthy acceleration and braking. Of the 35% of the fleet that are fitted wagons, more anon.

...The old Hornby Dublo couplings were far better, akin to a Kadee...

Not in my experience, unreliable: would not autocouple, apt to let go, and not to uncouple on the maker's ramps, and yet worse when the plastic version came in, not really compatible with the metal version. (A childhood friend had a large family H-D layout.) Whether we lay this at Peco or H-D's door matters not: neither properly developed it in the direction that Kadee went so successfully and it's a dead duck now.

... the newer magnetic couplings are starting to appear...

Hurrah! These are my solution for the fitted freight stock, which should run close coupled without slack in the train. Especially when combined with sprung buffers a good representation is possible.

...As far as home made solutions go...

I tried kit/DIY couplers when restarting in model railway over 20 years ago, but none were robust enough, and most were a pain to mount and maintain. My operation has to be based on RTR product because of the number of vehicles on the layout, so I adapt as required. With the carriage stock added, I now use five different couplers, all RTR, and almost always fiddled with in the way they are mounted, for a result that satisfies me.

Making the best of an unsatisfactory situation in short, to best satisfy my requirements. Each modeller has to find 'their way'.

[aleopardstail]

have seen a few recommendations that can work depending on how you operate the layout - fixed couplings within a rake, can be as simple as a length of wire and a few holes - then whatever at points the rake needs to break.

for me the killer is the cost, especially for the likes of KD, then combined with the time to convert non-NEM pocket stock. I have as a result decided to just like with tension lock, its ugly, but its also easy - and for some stock (e.g. the "teak" hornby railroad corridor coaches) essentially invisible - even if for others its adding a huge gap between vehicles.

I may gradually start to change stuff, but it will be a rake at a time, probably starting with freight stock I want to be able to shunt where KD really come into their own

one of the benefits hornby had with the launch of TT:120 was the chance to change the coupler, trouble is the one they have while it works is also pig ugly and huge

[Screwdriver]

I'm looking to replace the tension lock couplings on my mostly freight 00 gauge rolling stock. I still have a few wagons with the huge early Triang tension lock couplers but most are the smaller type. I would like to have a closer distance between the wagons but without buffer lock problems though. The Kadee's seem to be too expensive so I'm looking for something that would be fairly easy to automatically decouple / couple. It seems there is no perfect solution for this.

[aleopardstail]

I'm looking to replace the tension lock couplings on my mostly freight 00 gauge rolling stock. I still have a few wagons with the huge early Triang tension lock couplers but most are the smaller type. I would like to have a closer distance between the wagons but without buffer lock problems though. The Kadee's seem to be too expensive so I'm looking for something that would be fairly easy to automatically decouple / couple. It seems there is no perfect solution for this.

the Alex Jackson couplings used by the P4 community, and I have seen on a couple of OO layouts are in theory damn near perfect.

- its a bent bit of wire so its cheap
- its damn near invisible when fitted
- inter vehicle distance can easily be set to be whatever you want
- locomotives can have a fully static "short" version while stock gets the flexible one
- supports remote uncoupling, and shunting when uncoupled

however

- has to be seriously accurately made (there are jigs but even then its small and fiddly)
- equally accurately positioned on the model
- its metal wire, fixing to plastic wagons is a pain (solder to metal, then glue that usually)
- coupling on a curve except a very shallow on appears to be out
- its a bit of wire, a hard impact and its bent out of shape

in the end I'm likely sticking with tension lock, none of the rest of the layout is "photo real" so I can live with it, I likely will experiment with KD though

[Screwdriver]

the Alex Jackson couplings used by the P4 community, and I have seen on a couple of OO layouts are in theory damn near perfect.

I will give them a try on a couple of the old wagons.

I likely will experiment with KD though

I will get a couple and give them a try to see how I get on. It's knowing what size to go for too with these though.