Bachmann Hudson - Front Coupler Upgrade?

[Brian M]

I've been working on a handful of upgrades to a Bachmann Hudson, and one area that has me stumped at the moment is what to do with the giant front coupler.  They included a dummy one in the "stowed" orientation, but their rendition of it leaves a lot to be desired.  <Side note; how can they produce such a good-looking locomotive, yet fail so badly on the couplers?  As is well documented, I think their knuckle couplers are closer to scale HO.  Plus, they have taken unique approaches to mounting the couplers such that nothing is a drop-in replacement.  Quite annoying when a company strays so far away from the defacto standard. End Rant> 

Back to my question, has anyone else swapped out the front coupler with something different?  Even non-operational, but just better looking?  An MT TCS coupler box is too big to fit the space without removing more material behind the pilot than I'm comfortable doing, and the peg for the Bachmann coupler is too large to fit a TCS without its box.

Thanks,
Brian.

Reference photos:




Just for the fun of it, side by side of a MT TCS coupler and the Bachmann:

[chessie system fan]

If it doesn't need to couple, I'd go with the long shank TSC without the coupler box and use the Bachmann mounting plate and screw with it instead.  If it does need to couple, an Intermountain coupler that they used in their freight car kits has the whisker springs on either side like the Bachmann does.  Or, I wonder if an Accumate coupler without the coupler box would work.

[Jimbo]

@turbowhiz  - your time has come!!  Please release your N-Possible couplers so we can have truly good-looking locomotives!!

PS:  I have successfully replaced a Bachmann EZ Mate coupler with an Accumate coupler on a Bachmann steam locomotive in the past.  Way better in appearance, but still not ideal.  A scale-size coupler would be even better.

Jim

[turbowhiz]

Yes, my coupler is absolutely perfect for this scenario, even if you’re not looking to fully adopt them. Based on the pictures you posted, you’ll be able to perfectly drop my UGS series couplers into the Bachmann Hudson with full functionality, no modifications needed at all.

Here it is installed on a Bachmann consolidation, which is definitely not exactly drop in, but ultimately looks great since you don’t have a massive pilot hole either. Considerable improvement over the stock dummy thing the consolidations come with. Not the same model of course but indicative of what to expect.





I want these on the market ASAP too, believe me. I need to start earning back at least something to fill the massive black hole of costs I’ve accumulated so far in this venture. Never been closer, more (good!) news to come soon. 

[Brian M]

It goes without saying that there are a lot of us eagerly awaiting the release of your coupler!  And yeah, it looks great on the front of a steam engine.

Jim, thanks for the Accumate suggestion, that's what I decided to go with for the time being.  I wasn't necessarily going for an operating coupler, just wanted something that looks half way better.  I have such an aversion to Accumates due to having them fall apart on me, that I don't usually think of using them.  But for this application, the Accumate is just fine.