> I haven't seen anyone yet mention one thing that could be detrimental to
> using the smaller sized HO Kadee's
> Bud Rindfleisch
Bud....
One downside to the KD#5 is that the mounting holes on recent brass some resin
models are intended for the KD#802. There is an easy fix -- just use the
center hole and only one ear hole. Or, for the fastidious, carve away some
plastic on the draft gear box and then everything fits well.
Another downside is that the new plastic ACE adaptors from Iron Rail(?) are
designed for the KD#802. Thus, I assume they will not fit the smaller KD#5
(assumption).
Another downside to the KD#5 is that the usual between-rails HO magnet is not
strong enough to work properly with the too-high glad hand of the unmodified
KD#5. Thus, it is necessary to either use the much stronger under-the-ties
magnets or else bend the glad hand down closer to the rail head. Not hard to
do, but takes some time.
> or Walther's clones,
While a larger head than the KD#5 is good, the main downside to the Walther's
coupler is somewhat greater slack action between the knuckles when coupled as
compared to the KD#5. Not springy like the KD#802, but just a bit of a loose
fit. The KD#5 is a tighter fit.
It should be noted that Walters also makes a reverse trip pin coupler where the
glad hand bends back beneath the draft gear box. This is nice for cars that
couple directly to diesels with pilots. The reverse trip pin works well with
the usual magnets.
> the fact that the head size being smaller overall would require very good
> trackwork and no sudden grade changes or the possibility exists for "high and
> low" uncoupling.
Normal careful trackwork works just fine. No sudden grade changes are a good
idea no matter what kind of coupler is used. Steamer pilots and diesel pilots
can touch the track on abrupt vertical changes.
A bigger problem on the so-called Mighty NYC is that the springs on brass
passenger cars weaken with age and the coupler height drops down a bit.
Mysterious accidental uncoupling was quite common until I figured out what was
going on.
> The NASG standards adopted were to address that
The revised standards did reduce the side slop between flanges and rails. But
the excessive side slop between axles and sideframes was not affected by the
new standards.
> then the 802's came along.
KD#802's are admittedly more forgiving of bad trackwork. But good trackwork is
not that hard to achieve.
Just some thoughts -- worth what you paid for them.
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:
[email protected]
[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/
