Darrell,
I like the idea of link-and-pins. Whose do you use, or do you make your own? I also guess it's a good thing I model in Sn42 which only a very few of us give a care about! Donald E. Munsey, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] S/Sn42 and Hn42 - Appalachian river logging modeler Virginian Railway and Big Sandy & Cumberland Railroad fan Living in UpperRightCorner of Louisiana CopperSmith & Bonsai enthusiast From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darrell Smith Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 7:05 PM To: [email protected] Subject: {S-Scale List} Re: Scale Couplers for S I guess it is a good thing that I am using link-and-pin couplers on all of my freight equipment! Darrell Smith --- In [email protected] <mailto:S-Scale%40yahoogroups.com> , "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Re: Couplers, Couplers - I'd give my life for a real good S scale co > Posted by: "rhettgraves" [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Wed Sep 3, 2008 12:01 pm (PDT) > > >Sounds to me like we all would like to have the option of a scale-sized Kadee coupler! > > >But rather than argue about an S scale Utopia, why not shoot an email Kadee's way requesting a scale coupler > >for S (that might also be applicable for On30)? > > >Rhett Graves > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Rhett, > I too sent an email to Kadee and here is the response I received. He pretty well sums it up and it's not encouraging at all! > > Gary Chudzinski > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > >Hello again, > > >Thanks for your continued comments. What you've heard about our S scale couplers not being "true to > scale" is true to a certain extent because "all" of the dimensions do not > match the true contour dimensions of a prototypical Type E coupler. This is > because it's designed to function as a Delayed Action Magne-Matic coupler > which is quite different than the locking knuckle of the prototype. Dummy > couplers can follow most of the true contour dimensions but of course are > not functional. > As I mentioned before the pull face height of our #802 coupler is made to > scale. There is simply no way we can make it any more to scale than it is. > We could re-design the actual contour and make it look a bit more like the > prototype but that's about all. > What may have happened in S scale, as with other scales, is that for many > years S scalers had to use our HO #5 coupler on their S scale models then > when we came out with the #802 and the On3 #803 it looked too large since > everyone was use to the smaller HO #5 coupler in appearance. The #5 coupler > is about 20% overscale for HO and 17.5% underscale for S scale. But we are > only talking about .017" to .033" in actual size. > > So at this point we will not make another S scale coupler because our #802 > is as close to scale as we are going to get. Unfortunately, S scale > presently just does not have a big enough market share for us to invest in > another coupler that's the same scale dimensions but only has a better > appearing contour. So the S scale options are to use the #802 or the smaller > >HO #5 couplers. > > >Sam Clarke > >Kadee Quality Products > > [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/
