and he notes - Let's see - Kadee should sink 20 or 30 grand for tooling to produce an exact 3/16ths scale coupler with maybe a couple thousand pairs sold in the first year and then a trickle from then on. How many years would it take for a return on investment if they sold for under ten dollars? (Or should I say how many decades?). Producing an HO Gauge coupler with tens of thousands of projected sales makes a whole lot more sense for a manufacturer with limited production capability, not to mention investment capital. No wonder they're not jumping on it!
If a few of their couplers are oversize for HO and within 10% of a 3/16ths scale coupler that amounts to about a 1/64th of an inch in height. Hardly noticeable and given the fact that all manufactured parts are made to a tolerance (and assuming Kadee's HO couplers are 10 -20% oversize) producing a 3/16ths scale coupler would also be either over (or under) by same tolerance. More than likely they'd shoot for the higher tolerance and allow for shrinkage so theoretically a 3/16th scale type H coupler would be a scale inch or more larger than the prototype's 12 3/8ths inch height (or a foot instead of 11" over the pulling face). Given the fact that 3/16ths scale enthusiasts number in the hundreds instead of thousands, we are lucky to have any choices at all. Since my eyes ain't that good anymore a 64th of an inch here or there doesn't even show up on my bifocals! BTW, has anybody checked out the Kadee type "F" coupler? (stock #118) It takes only a small modification to make it a type "H" and it might be close enough to S to be useful. http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/page310.htm Of course the uncoupling rod would have to be replaced for the proper height above the rail (or do what the late Leon Walker did and bend it with a pair of pliers!)... Raleigh in cool but still dry Maine At 08:18 PM 9/3/2008, Ed wrote: >Atta boy John, > >Go get them. All they have are their excuses of why "S" has to use or should >use everybody elses scale couplers. Close only counts in horseshoes. > >Ed Eckert > >-----Original Message----- >From: <mailto:S-Scale%40yahoogroups.com>[email protected] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >John Degnan >Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 3:46 PM >To: <mailto:S-Trains%40yahoogroups.com>[EMAIL PROTECTED]; ><mailto:S-Scale%40yahoogroups.com>[email protected] >Cc: <mailto:S-Trains%40yahoogroups.com>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [S-Trains] Re: {S-Scale List} Brass S Kadee couplers > >I don't care how Kadee looks at it, 10% oversized AND/OR 20% undersized (or >whatever) still means that it is NOT 1/64 scale. If being OVER and/or UNDER >was "ok" and "acceptable," then WHY did Kadee invent the #58, #78, #118 and >#119 "scale head" couplers for HO scalers?!? > >If OVERsized or UNDERsized couplers ain't alright in HO, then it ain't >alright in S either! > >'Nuff said. > >John Degnan >[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:Scaler164%40comcast.net> net > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
