Preview of upcoming MTL True-Scale Coupler system

[johnb]

Is that a Model Power/Lima or Atlas/Rivarossi caboose?

yes it is, with MTL details

[jmlaboda]

If anyone is looking for an excuse to put a pair of these couplers on a single FT-A, check out Georgia Northern 14 and GAS&C 16 here:

http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?locomotive=EMD%20FT(A)

Yah, that's the later paint scheme applied by the GNRR.  The earlier scheme followed the Southern's imitation aluminum up on the nose.  Oddly enough, when they painted over the aluminum paint they simply sprayed over it, with traces of the old paint still visible under the maroon paint.

Those were some interesting shortlines... too bad they are now run by Georgia & Florida Railnet... never anything so exotic as what the earlier roads had...

[cjm413]

yes it is, with MTL details

I presume the Model Power/Lima would be the easier of the two to convert since it wouldn't have a coupler pocket to remove...

As far as details go, either one would need some modifications to build either one of these:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/rsPicture.aspx?id=927290

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3946513

[cjm413]

Yah, that's the later paint scheme applied by the GNRR.  The earlier scheme followed the Southern's imitation aluminum up on the nose.  Oddly enough, when they painted over the aluminum paint they simply sprayed over it, with traces of the old paint still visible under the maroon paint.

Those were some interesting shortlines... too bad they are now run by Georgia & Florida Railnet... never anything so exotic as what the earlier roads had...

In fairness to the current operator, how is it possible to get more exotic than a St. Louis Car Company railcar with a FM prime mover?

http://southern.railfan.net/images/archive/southern/other_lines/gano/gano.html

http://southern.railfan.net/images/archive/southern/other_lines/gano/gano2moultriega457.html

[robert3985]

Um Bob, that is a Z scale MTL coupler (not N)!    There are lots of N scale modelers out there who actually use N scale MTL couplers. 

Peter, I thought you'd probably say that.    I don't run Z-scale couplers on my layout...I run regular old oversized MTL N-gauge couplers, but, over the years I have been converting everything that I could to the MTL Nn3 couplers...which until these new couplers are introduced, are the closest to an N-SCALE coupler that's available...even if they're also run on Z scale engines and cars.

It's easier for me to type "Z" than "Nn3" so in my laziness, I call them "Z" scale couplers when according to their packaging, they're Nn3. 

Here's proof.  Note, the instruction sheet clearly calls these "Nn3" and additionally "Scale 1:160"


About 3/4 of my fleet of cars and engines have been converted to the MTL Nn3 couplers...so all of those will couple up to the new MTL scale-sized coupler I am assuming.

Yup...all those N-gauge modelers out there who have been happy with MTL N-gauge huge-o couplers all these years will not be able to couple up to the new, scale-sized MTL couplers.  However, I can...and several other N-scale modelers I am aware of will be able to also because we chose, years ago...to use the best-looking, best operating, most scale-sized N-scale coupler available...the MTL Nn3 coupler.  Guess we're just lucky!   

MTL is simply doing what they have done in the past with these new couplers with compatibility being low on their priority list, just like their N-gauge couplers were incompatible with Rapidos. 

Sometimes, if ya want to improve something, ya gotta take the bull by the horns and go with it!  I congratulate MTL on their willingness to do so with these new, scale sized couplers...even though I wish they'd done this years ago!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
 

[johnb]

Um...Nn3 and Z Scale MTL couplers are one and the zame
https://www.micro-trains.com/index.php?route=product/product&search=Nn3&description=true&product_id=378

[JoeD]

Here is the True-Scale next to our Z.  You can force them to hook together but I don't think that will yield a good situation. 

Cheers

Joe

[Maletrain]

"Here is the True-Scale next to our Z.  You can force them to hook together but I don't think that will yield a good situation."

Can you explain a little more about what is not good with the situation where a True Scale and a Z scale coupler are hooked together?  Do they not stay coupled when running?  Backing?  through turnouts?  Do they jam and damage the z coupler? 

[JoeD]

you have to force the two together and because of conflicting angles the couplers do not line up when joined, one forcing the other to one side a bit.  I have been suggesting folks make up a car or two that have both couplers on either side of the car so they can use them as transition then pull them. 

[sirenwerks]

Even if you have a lot of switching these could still be used for creating blocks of cars where industries call for them. At earns new Tank Train leaps immediately to mind.

That works for those who model contemporary operations well enough, where it's unit trains galore out there.  But for those who model pre-contemporary or who like to operate road freights, where shifting individual cars is king, we're still stuck with 55 gallon drums at the ends of our cars and locos.  I'm will to compromise, I will gladly give up the expectation of magnetic coupling for a properly (reasonably) scaled coupler that can be sticked apart without derailing the attached units, so I'll continue to hope someone is still trying to change the functional/aesthetic paradigm.

[jdcolombo]

That works for those who model contemporary operations well enough, where it's unit trains galore out there.  But for those who model pre-contemporary or who like to operate road freights, where shifting individual cars is king, we're still stuck with 55 gallon drums at the ends of our cars and locos.  I'm will to compromise, I will gladly give up the expectation of magnetic coupling for a properly (reasonably) scaled coupler that can be sticked apart without derailing the attached units, so I'll continue to hope someone is still trying to change the functional/aesthetic paradigm.

Eh?  I don't think I understand your comment.

The new coupler will couple automatically (maybe not with one car, although I think that might vary depending on the weight of the car, wheels, etc. - we'll need more in-field data on this), and can be uncoupled with a Rix-type tool.  This is basically the same kind of operation I've been doing on my layouts for 20 years.  So I don't understand why you think this coupler is limited to unit trains.  Nope.  It's not a Unimate; it's an actual operating coupler.  Should work just fine for the 1957 era of my layout, as long as I convert everything to this coupler.  That's the sticking point - you're not going to be able to convert a few cars at a time and have the converted and unconverted cars work together.  As Joe points out, you could use transition cars, but that's not going to work if you end up switching an industry where you have a "new" coupler trying to couple on to an "old" coupler.

But if everything is converted, these will work for switching duties (pending the "one car" issue, on which the jury is still out).

John C.

[Big Train]

I think it might be a good idea if MT included the new couplers with the new releases during the next few months. It a good PR move and definitely get some non-believers to at least look at them critically. I think once guys get them in their hands they will try different scenarios based on their own personal preferences. Just sayin'

I'm reminded about what comedian Steve Martin said about Audio equipment "The ears get sophisticated fast". Maybe the same thing will happen once these couplers are actually in the hands of N scalers.

While the trend with MT couplers has been to make them larger over the last couple of decades, I don't find that a problem personally. I've got lots of earlier MTs with the original couplers and rib-back wheels and the couplers have grown by comparison since then.

I do have plans for these new ones when they come out.

I can see a future MT release....a 40' single door wood boxcar with a standard MT coupler and the new one at the other end as a, <humour on>...get this "Conversions Car"...(aside) I kill me! </> as a novelty rolling billboard for their couplers.

[Chris333]

I think it might be a good idea if MT included the new couplers with the new releases during the next few months. It a good PR move and definitely get some non-believers to at least look at them critically. I think once guys get them in their hands they will try different scenarios based on their own personal preferences. Just sayin'

I don't really think these are aimed at people who buy monthly releases.

[bbussey]

I don't really think these are aimed at people who buy monthly releases.

Which is exactly what I've stated and what Joe has expressed.

The primary purpose of these couplers is for use in running long consists at shows.  In that context, the product is brilliantly conceived.  An unintended secondary use is to close couple multiple-unit motive power that always or nearly always run together.  They were not designed for standard freight operations on club layouts or home layouts, and there was no intent to have these be the successor to the current magnetic coupler product line.  While this product can be re-purposed for layout operation to some extent, they will not function in the manner people are used to when trying to couple and uncouple equipment.

I've played with them.  They work extremely well for the purpose they were intended for.  They happen to work well for the unintended purpose of close-coupling motive power.  But don't go in thinking they are workable for freight switching operations.  They couple when you manually press two cars together.  I did not find that they coupled when utilizing motive power.  The lead cars are pushed.  After I submitted my eval report to MTL, I installed the loose couplers in MU'd motive power and I re-purposed the ones from the test rolling stock supplied and installed them in MU'd power as well.  They work great there, I'm extremely happy in that regard.

There are N-scalers who only run at shows, or who have equipment specifically designated for show-running.  This product is for them.  It eliminates the coupler oscillation.  It reduces the possibility of derailment.  It's better visually because the coupler is smaller and the coupling distance is much shorter.

[MichaelWinicki]

Which is exactly what I've stated and what Joe has expressed.

The primary purpose of these couplers is for use in running long consists at shows.  In that context, the product is brilliantly conceived.  An unintended secondary use is to close couple multiple-unit motive power that always or nearly always run together.  They were not designed for standard freight operations on club layouts or home layouts, and there was no intent to have these be the successor to the current magnetic coupler product line.  While this product can be re-purposed for layout operation to some extent, they will not function in the manner people are used to when trying to couple and uncouple equipment.

I've played with them.  They work extremely well for the purpose they were intended for.  They happen to work well for the unintended purpose of close-coupling motive power.  But don't go in thinking they are workable for freight switching operations.  They couple when you manually press two cars together.  I did not find that they coupled when utilizing motive power.  The lead cars are pushed.  After I submitted my eval report to MTL, I installed the loose couplers in MU'd motive power and I re-purposed the ones from the test rolling stock supplied and installed them in MU'd power as well.  They work great there, I'm extremely happy in that regard.

There are N-scalers who only run at shows, or who have equipment specifically designated for show-running.  This product is for them.  It eliminates the coupler oscillation.  It reduces the possibility of derailment.  It's better visually because the coupler is smaller and the coupling distance is much shorter.

Clearly stated.

I can see limited use on my layout but if motive-power coupling isn't feasible then converting the entire fleet over isn't going to happen.