Re: Discontinuance of Kadee #58 Semi-Scale Couplers


Armand Premo
 

As for my personal preference the #4 ,with all its shortcomings,allows the operator to pull up the slack for more prototypical operation.Is there a coupler with a smaller head that allows this action?Armand Premo

----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Zeni
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:10 AM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Discontinuance of Kadee #58 Semi-Scale Couplers



Call me odd, but I liked the tiny screws of the #78...they do look
fine. So Sam, if I understand correctly, the 178 will be the 158 in
a narrower box? Figure out a way to countersink the 2-56 and that's
excellent.

I did stock up on some 78s to use with my wildly off topic modern
Rail Yard Models kits.

> Tim, No I don't believe that we'll include the #262 with the
> normal coupler package.
>
> We changed the hole size because that was one of the complaints
> about the #78 box. I think the bottom of the box has enough
> thickness to "carefully" counter sing a flathead screw.
>
> Sam Clarke
> Kadee Quality Products
>
>
> From: Tim O'Connor
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 11:06 AM
> To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [STMFC] Re: Discontinuance of Kadee #58 Semi-Scale Couplers
>
>
> Nice!! (Drat, I just bought two packages of #242)... Will you be
> including
> the #262 box with your whisker couplers in the future?
>
> I dunno... 2-56 is pretty clunky. I'd prefer an O-80 counterset
> screw so it's much less visible, like the Accurail boxes.
>
> Tim O'Connor






------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3121 - Release Date: 09/08/10 02:07:00

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