Murphy Models Class 201

[JeremiahBunyan]

Hey everyone,

 

I just wanted to know how I can remove the coupling mount from a Murphy Models Class 201? The actual tension lock coupling came out with no issues, but I can't seem to get the coupling mount off. As I intend to add all the details to both ends I'd like to fit the blanking plate which requires the coupling mount to be removed.

 

Thank you in advance!

Regards,
Jeremiah.

[irishthump]

Do you actually need to remove the coupler mount to fit the plate? I think the blanking plate just clips in front of the mount.

[Broithe]

1 hour ago, irishthump said:

Do you actually need to remove the coupler mount to fit the plate? I think the blanking plate just clips in front of the mount.

On two out of the eight 141/181s that I've been associated with, we needed to shave a tiny bit off to ensure clearance when the plate was fitted, the other six were OK*.

 

 

* or might just not have had the plates fitted...

[JasonB]

It can be removed but there shouldn't be an issue with it when left in place on the 201, there should be enough clearance.  It's a different story when it comes to the 141/181, all of mine had to be altered to stop the plate obstructing the bogies.  

[irishthump]

44 minutes ago, jason brady said:

It can be removed but there shouldn't be an issue with it when left in place on the 201, there should be enough clearance.  It's a different story when it comes to the 141/181, all of mine had to be altered to stop the plate obstructing the bogies.  

Well I recently fitted all my 141's/071's/201's with body mounted couplers so I removed all of the coupler mounts.  On the 201 I ended up just snipping off the coupler pocket as I didn't the time or patience to disassemble the loco to remove it!

The whole gory tale is here.

[Noel]

1 hour ago, jason brady said:

It can be removed but there shouldn't be an issue with it when left in place on the 201, there should be enough clearance.  It's a different story when it comes to the 141/181, all of mine had to be altered to stop the plate obstructing the bogies.  

I had to pare off about 1/2mm off just the corners of the NEM pocket and then the bogie could pivot freely behind the apron on 141/181 locos

[Noel]

44 minutes ago, irishthump said:

Well I recently fitted all my 141's/071's/201's with body mounted couplers so I removed all of the coupler mounts.  On the 201 I ended up just snipping off the coupler pocket as I didn't the time or patience to disassemble the loco to remove it!

The whole gory tale is here.

Hi Graham, apologies to OP for deviation, how do the body mounted Kayee's perform uncoupling and especially delayed uncoupling using track magnets? Also interested in how they performed pushing stock over points and around curves (bogie stock and 2 axle wagons).  Reason I ask is I was considering doing something similar to some of my MM GMs using draft gearbox Kayee's like you, rather than NEM pockets in the apron as done by Anthony.

[JasonB]

2 hours ago, Noel said:

I had to pare off about 1/2mm off just the corners of the NEM pocket and then the bogie could pivot freely behind the apron on 141/181 locos

Maybe it's me, but is that not what I said?  

[irishthump]

3 hours ago, Noel said:

Hi Graham, apologies to OP for deviation, how do the body mounted Kayee's perform uncoupling and especially delayed uncoupling using track magnets? Also interested in how they performed pushing stock over points and around curves (bogie stock and 2 axle wagons).  Reason I ask is I was considering doing something similar to some of my MM GMs using draft gearbox Kayee's like you, rather than NEM pockets in the apron as done by Anthony.

I had some intial problems with long stock,    mainly combos of 201’s / Mk3’s and 42ft flats. The coupler on the 201 swings wide and I would get buffer lock on the 3rd radius curves on my layout when propelling stock around the curve. The lighter 42ft flats were also prone to derailing even while being pulled but I think this was mainly due to their light weight. (They’re converted Hornby freightliners.)

I took the decision to widen the curves to about 28” which cured the problem and to be honest I’ll never be propelling stock through those curves.

By the way my 141s and 071s have no problems at all even on tighter curves and 4 whell stock is also fine.

I’ve had no problems propelling over points and crossovers. All points are peco streamline small radius.

Uncoupling  is fine with the standard kadee magnets between the tracks. But coupling needs to be done on fairly straight sections or the couplers won’t line up. Again this gets much easier with smaller locos and 4 wheel stock.

[NIRCLASS80]

There used to be a excellent tutorial on fitting chassis mounted Kadees, has it been removed??

[irishthump]

I think that was Anthony’s one which used the nem mount. Don’t know where that one went!

[Noel]

24 minutes ago, irishthump said:

I think that was Anthony’s one which used the nem mount. Don’t know where that one went!

I think that thread may have been one of the photobucket casualties. There might be a copy over on the Irish RMweb forum.

[JeremiahBunyan]

Hey everyone!

 

Thanks for your replies. As usual after trying for days and giving up, I posted here and hey presto 2 mins after I posted here I figured it out. The whole coupling mechanism on my Murphy Models Class 201 is made up of 4 parts i.e.
- Main mounting arm (which is connected to the chassis)
- Spring (which connects the main mounting arm to the chassis and allows it to swing)
- Coupling mount (which is like an L shaped piece, that slots in vertically into the main mounting arm)
- Coupling (regular tension lock that slots in horizontally into the coupling mount).

 

It's quite an awkward design with the valance in place. The blanking plate slots in from behind and not from the front.

18 hours ago, irishthump said:

Do you actually need to remove the coupler mount to fit the plate? I think the blanking plate just clips in front of the mount.

On the Murphy Models Class 201 you have to because the coupling mount actually extends beyond the valance.

 

15 hours ago, jason brady said:

It can be removed but there shouldn't be an issue with it when left in place on the 201, there should be enough clearance.  It's a different story when it comes to the 141/181, all of mine had to be altered to stop the plate obstructing the bogies.  

Unfortunately not. Removing it is quite a pain. I shall try and post a diagram of the coupling mount design.

 

Cheers!
Jeremiah.

[JasonB]

6 hours ago, JeremiahBunyan said:

Hey everyone!

 

Thanks for your replies. As usual after trying for days and giving up, I posted here and hey presto 2 mins after I posted here I figured it out. The whole coupling mechanism on my Murphy Models Class 201 is made up of 4 parts i.e.
- Main mounting arm (which is connected to the chassis)
- Spring (which connects the main mounting arm to the chassis and allows it to swing)
- Coupling mount (which is like an L shaped piece, that slots in vertically into the main mounting arm)
- Coupling (regular tension lock that slots in horizontally into the coupling mount).

 

It's quite an awkward design with the valance in place. The blanking plate slots in from behind and not from the front.

On the Murphy Models Class 201 you have to because the coupling mount actually extends beyond the valance.

 

Unfortunately not. Removing it is quite a pain. I shall try and post a diagram of the coupling mount design.

 

Cheers!
Jeremiah.

Hi Jeremiah, 

Apologies in advance if I'm reading your question the wrong way, but is the issue you're having with coupling pocket obstructing the valance? If so there is no need to remove the main mounting arm  as I said previously. All you need to do is turn the loco upside down and pull the coupler towards you. The coupler and mounting block comes out in one piece.

Jason. 

[JeremiahBunyan]

2 minutes ago, jason brady said:

Hi Jeremiah, 

Apologies in advance if I'm reading your question the wrong way, but is the issue you're having with coupling pocket obstructing the valance? If so there is no need to remove the main mounting arm  as I said previously. All you need to do is turn the loco upside down and pull the coupler towards you. The coupler and mounting block comes out in one piece.

Jason. 

Yes that's what I eventually did. The main mounting arm is still attached. Only the coupling is out and a small "L" shaped bracket that slots into the main coupling arm which was the issue. I've managed to pull it out too....

 

 

[JasonB]

2 minutes ago, JeremiahBunyan said:

Yes that's what I eventually did. The main mounting arm is still attached. Only the coupling is out and a small "L" shaped bracket that slots into the main coupling arm which was the issue. I've managed to pull it out too....

 

 

Apologies, I presumed this is what you had done originally but you were still having issues with the main mounting arm. As I said, no need to cut or remove anything once the coupler and block are taken away there should be plenty of space behind the valance. The main arm is independent of the bogies anyway, unlike on the 141/181 and 071 models. 

Cheers

Jason.

[JeremiahBunyan]

5 hours ago, jason brady said:

Apologies, I presumed this is what you had done originally but you were still having issues with the main mounting arm. As I said, no need to cut or remove anything once the coupler and block are taken away there should be plenty of space behind the valance. The main arm is independent of the bogies anyway, unlike on the 141/181 and 071 models. 

Cheers

Jason.

Indeed, I had trouble getting the block out....all resolved now!

 

Cheers!
Jeremiah.