Date
1 - 15 of 15
Couplers and wheels (was: Top Ten)
|
Andy Miller <asmiller@...>
Clark,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I have found that the easiest solution to Kadees with low "gladhands" is to bend the shank slightly up or down. Many people bend the gladhand itself and Kadee even sells a tool for this, but I have found that if the gladhand is low (or high) then the head probably is also; and bending the gladhand will leave the head still in the wrong position. I don't bend the shank much. If the error is too great, I use one of the offset head couplers. I always use 40s, they are metal. High couplers are almost as bad as low ones. If too high, the coupler will work apart from its mate when pulling long trains up hills. The proper height for the gladhand is easily discernable with an NMRA gauge. The thickness of the gauge is the required clearance between railhead and gladhand. Just put the gauge flat on the track and roll the car over it. It should "just" clear. I have become enamored with the "code 88" wheelsets which have come on the market in the last few years. I use Reboxx, IM, and now Branchline. They all have the thin wheel tread which looks soooo much better (especially under hoppers where the wheel can be seen), and they also have the small diameter needlepoint bearing, which seems to account for their phenomenal rollability. Reboxx comes in a wide variety of lengths which further helps. You don't have to ream out journals to make the point-to-point distance fit the wheel set. Unfortunately the dozen or so different lengths for each of three wheel diameters and two insulation types makes stocking the Reboxx line a retailer's nightmare. So they are hard to find. My local dealer doesn't carry them. I have gotten them from M.B.Klein in Baltimore and TrainQuest in Moreno Valley CA. The IM, and the new Branchline, appear to be different in axle length, so there are now two sizes I can get locally. I have to put a mike on them, but they look to be 1.015 (IM) and about 1.025 (BL). regards, Andy Miller BTW You are lucky man. My wife's whip works in the direction of painting the house and fixing the plumbing ;-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Clark Propst [mailto:cepropst@...] Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 1:47 PM To: STMFC@... Subject: [STMFC] Re: Top Ten Jack, Mike, I should have clarified my statement on resin kits better. I had plastic cars that derailed also. My Bowser PRR flat car would derail on straight track! I should make a top ten list of 'don'ts' or better 'I should know betters'. First, I use Kadee #5s, they're sturdy and inexpensive. But, you have to adjust them. I just screwed the couple box to the car and sat it on the shelve. When I tried running them, the uncoupling hose thingy would catch on turnouts. I have 'operations' friends that cut them off and use a skewer to uncouple cars. I need to check into this. Second, I have JB, Kadee, IM and P2K steel wheel sets. These do not all free wheel in all trucks. I had to replace wheel sets and ream out trucks to make the cars roll better. Notice I didn't say correctly, I still have to work on several car's trucks. My point was suppose to be that even if you don't have a layout, test run your freight cars before displaying them or putting them back in their boxes. My wife has the whip to my back to make progress on the layout while I'm off on vacation and she's working so I better get some chain link fence made and the 12th St NE overpass built. I went out this morning to measure the perimeter fence that is around the acreage that was the Decker Plant and measure the overpass just south of the plant. My truck said it was 30 degrees out, not bad, but my digit camera wouldn't work and I took a pen instead of a pencil and had a difficult time writing down measures. Four more months till my pen will write outside... Clark Propst Mason City Iowa ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> $4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Q7_YsB/neXJAA/yQLSAA/9MtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links
|
|
|
|
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
Andy Miller wrote:
"I have found that the easiest solution to Kadees with low "gladhands" is to bend the shank slightly up or down. Many people bend the gladhand itself and Kadee even sells a tool for this, but I have found that if the gladhand is low (or high) then the head probably is also; and bending the gladhand will leave the head still in the wrong position." Why not do the job right and correct the head height first, then adjust the uncoupling pin as necessary? Bending the shank seems to invite more problems. Ben Hom
|
|
|
|
Rich C <richchrysler@...>
I have been using Kadee #58's in their own Kadee boxes as much as possible for years now (since 58's came out) and have been doing the slight upward bend of the shank as a standard practice. I find this greatly helps the excess vertical slop allowed in the Kadee box. I also slightly burnish top and bottom shank surface to eliminate rough cast spots on the stock shank.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I must stress that the burnishing and the upward bending of the shank is only VERY slight. Also, (though I haven't been following every posting of this thread so forgive me if this has already been mentioned) on most resin kits, there is often a slight and sometimes not so slight difference between the indicated centre of the bolster and the end of the casting, or sometimes the sides of the casting. In other words, before drilling out the bolster screw hole, make sure both ends and sides are identical distances from the screw hole. Rich Chrysler
----- Original Message -----
From: "benjaminfrank_hom" <b.hom@...> To: <STMFC@...> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 8:57 AM Subject: [STMFC] Re: Couplers and wheels (was: Top Ten)
|
|
|
|
Doug Brown <brown194@...>
I have been shimming the coupler boxes to correct drooping couplers. I
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
usually use .010 styrene sheet stock. I use the Kadee coupler gauge. Doug Brown
-----Original Message-----
From: benjaminfrank_hom [mailto:b.hom@...] Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 7:57 AM To: STMFC@... Subject: [STMFC] Re: Couplers and wheels (was: Top Ten) Andy Miller wrote: "I have found that the easiest solution to Kadees with low "gladhands" is to bend the shank slightly up or down. Many people bend the gladhand itself and Kadee even sells a tool for this, but I have found that if the gladhand is low (or high) then the head probably is also; and bending the gladhand will leave the head still in the wrong position." Why not do the job right and correct the head height first, then adjust the uncoupling pin as necessary? Bending the shank seems to invite more problems. Ben Hom Yahoo! Groups Links
|
|
|
|
Andy Miller <asmiller@...>
Ben,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Bending the shank does adjust the head height - together with the gladhand height. I don't like propping cars up on washers if the body is already at the right height. That's why I bend the shank to adjust the head height without changing the body height. It's necessarily a subtle change. Too much and the head will be at a noticeable angle. And I can use a 40 something instead. regards, Andy Miller
-----Original Message-----
From: benjaminfrank_hom [mailto:b.hom@...] Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 8:57 AM To: STMFC@... Subject: [STMFC] Re: Couplers and wheels (was: Top Ten) Andy Miller wrote: "I have found that the easiest solution to Kadees with low "gladhands" is to bend the shank slightly up or down. Many people bend the gladhand itself and Kadee even sells a tool for this, but I have found that if the gladhand is low (or high) then the head probably is also; and bending the gladhand will leave the head still in the wrong position." Why not do the job right and correct the head height first, then adjust the uncoupling pin as necessary? Bending the shank seems to invite more problems. Ben Hom ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/9MtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links
|
|
|
|
Bill Darnaby
I should have mentioned in my first post that the outboard end of the
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
coupler mounting pads and even floor ends of resin kits tend to be thicker than the rest of the casting. If this is not attended to the coupler box will tilt down towards the track accentuating any height/glad hand problems. Before installing the floor check for this condition by laying the floor on a flat surface, bottom up, and placing a straight edge along the centerline of the coupler pad. If the straight edge tilts up away from the flat surface you need to file, sand or shave down the end of the coupler pad until the straight edge is truely horizontal to the surface. Bill Darnaby
|
|
|
|
Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
Excellent thread. "Been there, done that!", (repeatedly, it must be admitted).
The good advice offered by Bill Darnaby and "Jerry in Florida" about ensuring that the body bolster and coupler surfaces are level (especially crosswise); and ensuring that the drilled hole through the bolster for the truck screw is an accurate 90º cannot be overemphasized. These are universally-encountered problems that if not perceived and corrected, come right back to bite you (especially a cocked or off center truck screw- just try to fix that!). I too drill all of my bolsters with a drill press, just for the reasons stated. I have become so enamored of the profound visual advantages of the .088" wheels, not to mention the truly dramatic decrease in rolling resistance that can and does occur when trucks are custom fitted with custom axle lengths, that I now carry in inventory a major selection of Reboxx wheelsets. It is one of my better modeling investments. I also invested in a roll tester so that I have some means of objectively measuring differing degrees of rolling resistance (I keep a notebook of results). I have had to deal with too many fine cars with inaccessible loose weights. In this respect, I will gently disagree with Ted Culotta about the use of GE Silicone caulk for weights. Silicone caulks are inherently and naturally poor adhesives, while yet being wonderful caulks. In this respect, where permanent adhesion of the weight is so important in a closed space most probably "forever" inaccessible, I instead elect to use either GOO or Barge contact cements, two true adhesives with proven excellent long term reliability. A disadvantage of using larger steel nuts as weights is that the resulting center of gravity can at times be higher than desired or predicted, and in the same respect, the slightest off-center positioning can then have some pretty undesirable accentuated effects on stability. Denny -- Denny S. Anspach, MD Sacramento
|
|
|
|
Schuyler Larrabee
Andy Miller wrote: Ben Hom rejoined:I agree that it seems like that's asking for problems. The head will then not be vertical, and when under load, this will encourage the coupler heads to slide past each other and disengage. Often the problem is that the coupler pocket allows too much vertical play, and it results in the coupler drooping down. In a normal No 5 box I usually put a strip of scale 1x styrene across the bottom lip of the box, positioned so that the shank of the coupler will be riding on it. I also rub this with a Really Soft Pencil for some graphite 'lubrication.' This reduces or eliminates the droop, reduces the bearing area of the coupler (what it's rubbing on to begin with), generally clears up the gladhand problem, and makes the coupler look more correct. Of course, until the Reboxx coupler hits the streets (Please, someday soon?) the coupler can't look Real Correct. There is still a minor amount of vertical play. SGL
|
|
|
|
Schuyler Larrabee
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-----Original Message----- You don't have to ream out journals to make the point-to-pointOh, but you do, Andy. The point (snicker) of reaming the journals is that the cone of many trucks' journals isn't the optimum angle, and some molded trucks even have flash and dots of plastic crud (technical term) in the conical bearing hole. If you ream them out, you get the right conical angle and also a good clean bearing surface. If you used the reaming tool, you won't increase the length of the axle required. The reamer only cleans up the hole, it doesn't drill it deeper. And since John Burroughs is in our model railroad club and you see him almost weekly, finding a dealer with stock doesn't seem like much of an issue if you want to use Reboxx wheels . . . just ask him for them. SGL
|
|
|
|
Gene Green <lgreen@...>
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-----Original Message-----
Oh, but you do, Andy. The point (snicker) of reaming the journals isFrom: Andy MillerYou don't have to ream out journals to make the point-to-point--- In STMFC@..., "Schuyler Larrabee" wrote: that the cone of many trucks' journals isn't the optimum angle, and some molded trucks even have flash and dots of plastic crud (technical term) in the conical bearing hole. If you ream them out, you get the right conical angle and also a good clean bearing surface. axle required. The reamer only cleans up the hole, it doesn't drill it deeper. <snip> SGLBesides Micro-Mark, who offers such reamers? Are all makes the same cone angle? Is one to be preferred over another for some reason? Has anyone tried the reamer on trucks made of any material other than some sort of plastic? With success? Can really 'klunky' trucks be improved to a sufficient degree? Thanks in advance for any answers. Gene Green
|
|
|
|
Schuyler Larrabee
Gene Green asks:
Besides Micro-Mark, who offers such reamers?Reboxx, maybe others. Are all makes the same cone angle?Yes, afaik. Is one to be preferred over another for some reason? Probably not from a technical point of view, though Reboxx can use the business. Has anyone tried the reamer on trucks made of any material other thanYep. Metal trucks With success? Um . . . ,yeah . . .I think. Can really 'klunky' trucks be improved to a sufficient degree?Oh, yes, definitely. Thanks in advance for any answers. Sure. I also use the Real Soft Pencil I mentioned about couplers here, spinning the end of the pencil lead in the journal. I think it helps. To be specific, I use an Eagle "Draughting" pencil. SGL
|
|
|
|
Ted Culotta <tculotta@...>
On Dec 29, 2004, at 6:48 PM, Gene Green wrote:
Reboxx. I am unsure of difference between the Reboxx and Micro Mark varieties. Regards, Ted Culotta Speedwitch Media 100 14th Avenue, San Mateo, CA 94402 info@... www.speedwitch.com (650) 787-1912
|
|
|
|
Andy Miller <asmiller@...>
Well, it may be asking for trouble, but I rarely get it. (I rarely get what
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I ask for - this time I'm glad). Schuyler knows that at least once a week I run 50 car trains over our 2.5% grades and while I find that I need to adjust a coupler occasionally, it's not because I bent the shank, but rather the second case that he alludes to - the excessive vertical play in the box. I have occasional resorted to his suggestion and glued a shim at the lower box lip. But frequently bending the shank not only puts the coupler head and gladhand at the right height, but also reduces the vertical play! regards, Andy Miller
-----Original Message-----
From: Schuyler Larrabee [mailto:schuyler.larrabee@...] Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 7:06 PM To: STMFC@... Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Couplers and wheels (was: Top Ten) Andy Miller wrote: Ben Hom rejoined:I agree that it seems like that's asking for problems. The head will then not be vertical, and when under load, this will encourage the coupler heads to slide past each other and disengage. Often the problem is that the coupler pocket allows too much vertical play, and it results in the coupler drooping down. In a normal No 5 box I usually put a strip of scale 1x styrene across the bottom lip of the box, positioned so that the shank of the coupler will be riding on it. I also rub this with a Really Soft Pencil for some graphite 'lubrication.' This reduces or eliminates the droop, reduces the bearing area of the coupler (what it's rubbing on to begin with), generally clears up the gladhand problem, and makes the coupler look more correct. Of course, until the Reboxx coupler hits the streets (Please, someday soon?) the coupler can't look Real Correct. There is still a minor amount of vertical play. SGL ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> $4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Q7_YsB/neXJAA/yQLSAA/9MtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links
|
|
|
|
Jerry Dziedzic <jerdz@...>
Well, I'll venture another coupler question to the group. What
experience do folks have with the draft angles on the inner face of the Kadee knuckle? I suspect many have heard JP Barger explain how this imparts a vertical force to mated couplers, forcing one knuckle down and the other up. With enough drawbar pull (train weight), this leads to break-in-two's. I don't run such long trains that I encounter this. For those of you running 30+ cars, do you file the draft angle flat, rely on reducing vertical play in the coupler shaft, or . . . ? Jerry Dziedzic
|
|
|
|
Brian Paul Ehni <behni@...>
With the 161 car train I mentioned in another thread on this list, I had no
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
such issues, even running on a modular layout. Of course, car length may have helped a lot; each car was a 40'box. -- Thanks! Brian Ehni
From: Jerry Dziedzic <jerdz@...>
|
|
|