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.<

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

Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.