Ed, Aren't characteristics 1 and 9 mutually exclusive? If you want the darn thing assembled, then what difference does it make that it fits the #802 or #5 box?
Oh I get it now: This is an example of how you get 12 opinions out of 10 different S scalers! :-) Rhett Graves --- In [email protected], "ed_loizeaux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Run a 2 > > or 3 option 1 week long survey for the group (head/shank style or > combo) > > that the top winner to Kadee. > > Bill Lane > > > Now there's an idea: A coupler designed by a committee working from > survey results. Reminds me of the infamous NMRA X2f coupler. It > served a purpose, to be sure, but was of little interest to the more > scale-oriented modelers of the hobby. > > If someone were to ask me (which they have not) about the > characteristics of the "optimum" S scale coupler, my answer would > include the following: > > 1. Able to fit both the Kadee #5 and Kadee #802 mounting holes and > draft gear boxes. This sort of implies at least two different shank > styles, but maybe not if enough creativity is applied. > > 2. Correct scale dimensions and shape to the maximum extent possible > WITHOUT sacrificing one bit of operational performance. This sort of > implies something like a Kadee HO coupler that is pregnant -- by > about 15% approx. > > 3. Able to center itself automatically for remote coupling beyond an > arm's length away. > > 4. Able to perform "delayed" uncoupling as well as "normal" > uncoupling over already-installed Kadee-type magnets -- both the > permanent and electro types -- from distances greater than an arm's > length away. > > 5. Be about the same price as the Kadee products -- within 15% or > so -- and available at online discount outlets in bulk packaging. > > 6. Rust color. > > 7. No longitudinal slack action of the shank at all. Desired slack > action, if any, will come from knuckle-to-knuckle slack only. > > 8. Flawless operation without the need to file off flash and > lubricate. > > 9. Fully assembled and ready to use. > > 10. For the technically advanced, how about this: uncouple via DCC. > This feature would be an extra cost option. Mechanism for doing so > is totally enclosed within the draft gear box. > > Given the above list of druthers and considering the available > products already on the market, can anyone seriously suggest that a > profitmaking company proceed to tool up for a brand new S coupler? > Food for thought anyway. Makes no sense to me, but then again I am > an S guy and nothing about this scale makes any logical sense. But I > love it because of that. > > Now about those rail sizes......... > > Cheers....Ed L. > ------------------------------------ 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/
