Re: Kadee minimum body box widths and #4 couplers

Craig Zeni

To this day I believe that a properly assembled #4 is operationally the best coupler Kadee's ever offered. Centers better than any other, and the spring/metal dowel set up gives a bit of nice slack action. I don't use them much any longer as I much prefer the appearance of the 58/158 et al....

Craig Zeni
When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.

6.1. Re: Kadee minimum body box widths and #4 couplers
Posted by: "Donald B. Valentine" riverman_vt@... riverman_vt
Date: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:24 am ((PST))

I'm not sure everyone is on the same page as to which coupler
it is or not but with regard to the #4 you may be overlooking a
part of its operating characteristics. As Deeny mentioned the #4
had a slot in the coupler shank that was behind the square post
that held the coupler in its pocket and there was a spring that
fit into that slot. BUT, and what has not been stated here, is
that there was also a very small cylindrical piece of metal that
fit INSIDE that spring to provide limits to couper travel. Many
of us used these couplers on assembled Ambroid/Northeastern cars
back in the early years of Kadees. IIRC this shank and spring
were utilized on the early non-magnetic couplers to which Jon
refers and were carried over to the #4's.

Regards, Don Valentine

--- In STMFC@..., "Jon Miller" <atsf@...> wrote:

The #4 has a long slot in the shank just wide enough to fit over a
square post within its own cast metal dedicated coupler box.<

I don't think this is the coupler that Tim is talking about.
It's one
of the pre-magnetic ones I think. It had a slot in the back and a
was attached that applied the springing action. The spring was
behind the
center pivot post. I'm pretty sure this was one of the first
Kadees made.

Jon Miller
For me time has stopped in 1941
Digitrax, Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI user
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS

Join to automatically receive all group messages.