Bud, you're absolutely right... better accuracy extends from one coupler to the other coupler and from the roofwalks to the trackwork. However, who, calling themselves a scale modeler, would intentionally build sub-standard track work in the first place just because he could get away with it? I'm sure you're not suggesting that oversized couplers are good for excuses to build lousy trackwork, so here we have another very good reason "FOR" better couplers since the very nature of them would challenge us all to improve our skills. Why? Because if inaccuracy excuses poor quality and justifies the status-quo, then accuracy should do the reverse and encourage improvement.
:) John Degnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bud Rindfleisch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 6:35 PM Subject: {S-Scale List} "scale"size couplers my last 2 cents > Hi gang, > I got to wondering, (scary sometimes!) if all those HO'ers that > switched to the "scale #58 Kadees have found out that using the smaller > couplers required them to re-evaluate their current trackwork? The track > quality cannot be substandard and must be near flawless. Any dips and > sudden elevation changes and the trains become instantly shorter. This > can be a cause for concern in S with the Kadee 5's, but then again, much > care should be exercised when laying track anyway. > Thats it.....ya won't hear from me again on the couplers. (I hope?) > Bud Rindfleisch ------------------------------------ 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/
