Jump to content
  • 0

kadee's and Hornby couplers

Rate this question


Dave1701
 Share

Question

Hi All,

 

I just wanted to check with the experts, about what couplers people used on there stock, I am changing my couplers on my 141's, 071, cravens, and mk2d, It is a pet hate of mine seeing the big gaps between coaches and engine, I bought kadees no 17, I think too short, I also bought Hornby r8220 they work fine on the mk2's but look awful on the front of the engine's, I think the kadee's look the best but there is all different type???? of numbers so which leaves me asking which no kadee's is best for the above stock and work well on your layouts too!

 

Thanks in advance for your help too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Indeed! The Kadee 5 includes a little gearbox, and the kadee height gauge is a critical bit of kit needed in general (many NEM sockets even need a little fettling)

 

Here is a 20 - which works well in Cravens

 

Number-20S.jpg

 

And a 5 with gearbox (can be screwed or glued into place)

 

No-5s.jpg

 

And the height gauge

$T2eC16FHJHYFFkTtYygUBRwpy,CTyg~~_32-450x450-0-0.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

To keep costs down its better to fit them just to one wagon/coach in a rake - then detail the other end with brake pipes/tail lamps.

 

If you have sharp curves/uneven track they are less reliable than the old tension locks though. Certainly not the be all and end all solution!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
If you have sharp curves/uneven track they are less reliable than the old tension locks though. Certainly not the be all and end all solution!

 

I don't know about that! Uneven track and sharp curves will cause just as much trouble with tension locks, especially if you're mixing Bachmann/Hornby/Lima etc. with each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

In answer to the OP, yes 17's are a bit short unless you have large radius curves and points. I find the biggest problem with Kadees and Irish/UK stock is avoiding buffer lock. With US outline there are no buffers so the coupling distance can be very small and the Kadees are free to pivot without anything getting in their way. As soon as you add in buffers you have to be sure leave enough distance to stop the buffers from catching in each other. So to be honest Kadees are not the best option for really close coupling. Even with sprung buffers on both items of stock it can still go wrong on sharp curves.

 

Have a look at this site - http://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/index.php?autocom=custom&page=Kadee-Resources

 

It gives an excellent rule of thumb when fitting Kadees which is to have the face of the knuckle about level with the face of the buffers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Hi All,

 

First up Happy New Year, And thanks for your help with the Kadee's info... But if I could another question? Is it possible to start a new topic and list which Kadee's fits into each of the Irish lima, Bachmann and Murphy's own Brand stock? maybe even some pictures of how to do it for the novice like me!

 

So far with your help I put Kadee no20 in the Cravens and works very well. I was getting a little buffer lock, but I took the spring out of the buffers and works very well and there is no daylight between coaches..

 

So my Question is on the Murphy models mk2's, I use the Hornby close coupling and find it works great noR8220 if any body wants them. but all my locos are fitted with Kadee's no 18 or 19 depends on the rolling stock. So at each end of my mk2 rake I fitted kadee's but the height difference is very big they will not even connect to the loco's. So has anybody come up with a quick fix, as they are fitted with Nem pockets? Is there a different type of Kadee to fit which is lower?

 

Thanks a mill......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

The issue isn't really the kadee, but the fact that NEM isn't adhered to 100%. So some manufacturers coupling sockets are higher of lower than others. For the cravens, I got away with bending the kadee slightly, or slipping some thin platiccard under the coupler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Yes you guys are right I saw somewhere that the nem pockets are suppose to be a pacific height from rail to pockets for every manufacture..And whats the chances of them actually doing it!

 

And the kadee under shank and over shank is only when your fitting boxes under the body or too the bogie and do not have a nem plug ending(if said right) . I think, but if I am wrong please tell me as it would fix everything...... Thanks guys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I fitted all my Murphy Locos class141's 071's and 201's with the #19 Kadee with the 201's requiring a small piece of plastic card inserted in the pocket below the coupling to tighten it up. The end coupling of the Murphy Mk2's is a Kadee #20 with a 2mm screw fitted, this means that it is easy to revert back to the original couplings if desired. As I run in fixed rakes I then found that I could fit #19's to one coach and then #20's the next alternating throughout the rake and just using the coupling pockets without any mods. This gives me a rake that I can use on 24" curves minimum with no derailments and the minimum gap between coaches. They can also be reversed slowly and the loco can be uncoupled with under track magnets. Some pictures in flickr of the mod and the results.

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nirailfan/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I was wondering how you got 19 kadees on the Mk2s until I saw yous pics. They are far too short if you try to fit them into the NEM pockets. I nearly wrecked a Mk2 trying to remove the standard t lock coupler out of the NEM, ended up having to cut the coupler in half, just would not pull out using tweezers, ended up pulling the bogie off and I never got the NEM to go back on right, it's mounting keeps falling down on the bogie after a while. After that I decided not to try and change any more rolling stock. Can't use that Mk2 anymore, too much force need to change the couplers out and the models are far too delicate. Don't know how you guys change them. TOo me about 2 hours just to remove one and wrecked a coach in the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

The nem coupler is a specific design - you need to squeeze the end of the coupler that's sticking out behind the nem socket, the entire coupler then should slide out with next to no force required.

 

You can see from this image, how the coupler fits into the socket, then the two 'prongs' open out to hold it in place. Squeezing the prongs together should release the coupler.

 

l.aspx?k=2176843

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
The nem coupler is a specific design - you need to squeeze the end of the coupler that's sticking out behind the nem socket, the entire coupler then should slide out with next to no force required.

 

You can see from this image, how the coupler fits into the socket, then the two 'prongs' open out to hold it in place. Squeezing the prongs together should release the coupler.

 

l.aspx?k=2176843

 

Oh I know how to get them out but this wasn't budging. I had a squeeze to release tweezers clamped on the prongs and another pulling it out but this wasn't going anywhere. I ended up having to cut the prongs off and push them out of the pocket. The Kadee slid in like a dream and came out no problem when I saw it was too short to clear the body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
I had to cut the original ones out as well. The coaches in the middle of the rack have #19's in the original pocket but as I say the next coach has #20's fitted and so on throughout the rack.

 

How did you fit 19s in the pocket on the MK2s?? The coupler is under the coach as the 19 is far too short, it can't even sit level and is mashed under the gangway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Here is an image of the #19 fitted. As I say the coach that it attached to must be fitted with #20's. I have a video made of the stock running but it would take too long to upload tonight.

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nirailfan/11826068686/

 

A big thank you NIRCLASS80. It's an old thread but new and will be invaluable for me as I convert my stock. Many thanks also to 'Kirley' for the link here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

It's a long time since anything was posted on this subject, but I have a question.

Tom Brady (IFM) fits his wagon bodies on Dapol chassis and I tried Kadee No18's on two brake vans last night. They fitted beautifully but, in addition to being too long, they were also too low and risked fouling the track. Is this common with Dapol and is the answer to cut off the NEM sockets and just attach No5's to the underside of the chassis?

 

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Body mounting is the best way to go but I wouldn't use no.5's on a Dapol chassis as they are too short. You end up having to mount the coupler box proud of the edge of the chassis which looks a bit strange.

I used Kadee 146's (long shank couplers) on some Dapol tanker wagon kits and when fitted directly to the chassis they are at the perfect height. Also, because the 146's have a longer shank than the no. 5's they handle curves better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use