MT 905 zscale couplers in bulk

[Doug G.]

The first N scale coupler from Kadee was the MT-5 (which became 1025) and were unassembled, and the MT-3 (1023) were assembled, so future models should have been numbered similarly but evidently weren't/aren't.

Doug

[glakedylan]

depending on price i would be definitely interested in enough for 100 cars
thx for thinking of this and making it known here

sincerely
Gary

[Jbub]

I guess my concern is whether the 905s will dependably hold a 50 car N scale freight train together.  Or 15 passenger cars with a couple heavy brass or custom built cars in the mix...  What kind of experience have others had?  And will a 905 couple with a True Scale coupler (with or without help from an 0-5-0) and stay coupled?

I'm wondering the same thing. Although I know that TSC couplers do NOT work with any other coupler.

[nkalanaga]

I know the 905s will work on a 30-car train of Atlas ore cars, with no unwanted uncouplings, because I have a train of them.  For longer trains you're on your own, but they will work for most layouts.

I've also run 30-car narrow gauge trains with 905s, and they work fine there as well, which isn't surprising.  The cars are lighter!  On the other hand, they don't roll as well, so that might even things out.

For those who want 1025 boxes only, I've also ordered them.  My second, and last, order was for 500 pair of boxes and lids, and I probably have a lifetime supply.  The idea was to body mount all of my truck mounted KD/MT cars, reusing the couplers.  As Doug said, ask them, and they'll probably sell you as many as you need.  Mine came as single castings with one each box and lid.

[JoeD]

I ran it up the flag pole here and management is chewing on it  LOL.  Good idea BTW.

Joe

[Doug G.]

Thanks Joe!

Doug

[haasmarc]

Hey Joe,

While you're running things up the flag pole...

1) How about a Z scale offset coupler for lowered cars and cabeese.
2) How about a snap together Z scale coupler box.

[Jbub]

And and, dare I say... if you're going to do new tooling change the centering spring location to be in front of the pin like the 1015 to stop the slinkyeffect when moving foward 

[Chris333]

That is a large flag pole!

[Jbub]

That is a large flag pole!

Do I expect it to happen, not really. But it doesn't hurt to ask.

[nkalanaga]

Don't move the spring for me.  The existing 905s work fine as-is.

[GhengisKong]

I am bumping this back for interest and to see if this ever got any traction @Shipsure

[peteski]

And and, dare I say... if you're going to do new tooling change the centering spring location to be in front of the pin like the 1015 to stop the slinkyeffect when moving foward 

Unless you can prove it otherwise. the location of that spring has  no bearing on the "slinkiness", since the oscillation occur when there is a slack between cars.

[Jbub]

Unless you can prove it otherwise. the location of that spring has  no bearing on the "slinkiness", since the oscillation occur when there is a slack between cars.

It depends on if the car is being pulled or pushed. If the spring is in front of the post, all the draw force is put on the post without going through the spring but when you push it it will slink since the force goes through the spring first. Slinking during switching moves and yard work doesn't bother me as much as mainline ops. The slinking action happens when the spring is compressed and then the energy is released because there is not enough drag to keep the spring compressed.

[peteski]

It depends on if the car is being pulled or pushed. If the spring is in front of the post, all the draw force is put on the post without going through the spring but when you push it it will slink since the force goes through the spring first. Slinking during switching moves and yard work doesn't bother me as much as mainline ops. The slinking action happens when the spring is compressed and then the energy is released because there is not enough drag to keep the spring compressed.

Cars have momentum (because they have mass).  On uneven track (because nobody has perfect track) the momentum will cause some to lurch forward or pull back. They will slink regardless of the spring location. Then, adding to the equation, the coupled coupler heads have lots of slack. I'm sure @GaryHinshaw could give you the exact mathematical explanation. 
But nothing beats a real experiment. If you have enough cars with each style couplers, run a train around your layout with just one type of car and observe how they behave.  They will all slink.

If the forward-mounted spring couplers did not exhibit slinking when running rains on mainline, people would be raving about it and MTL would have already converted all their couplers to that type.