Pieter,

Glad you brought that up... because a while back, I actually held a nearly
week-long talk with Frank Sergent about this very issue.  The ultimate
determination was that with the material he was using at that time to
produce the S coupler, it was impossible, due to a strength issue) to make
the shank any thinner and/or narrower that what the original Sergent S
coupler had.  I have never taken time to compare the shank on the Sergent to
the shank on the Kadee (or similar) couplers, so someone else can take it
from there.  HOWEVER, the new material Sergent is using to make the revised
HO (and the future S) is, I'm sure, stronger... so we'll see what happens
with that.


John Degnan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pieter Roos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} More coupler talk


> It's interesting that the discussion has mostly centered on the coupler
head size, less so on the the SHAPE and I didn't notice anyone at all
mention that the shank size and configuration make the draft gear too wide
(which sometimes makes postitioning of end sill details difficult on models.


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

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/

Reply via email to