Front Coupler for N-Scale Steam

[hminky]

Have a "What-I-Did" delving into an operating front coupler for the Bachmann N-scale 2-8-0

http://www.chainsawjunction.com/n-scale/locomotives/front_coupler/



Always about what I am doing and not really how to.

Thank you if you visit
Harold

[hminky]

Found a freeware HTML-to-PDF convertor.

Webpage as a PDF:

http://www.chainsawjunction.com/n-scale/locomotives/front_coupler/front_coupler.pdf

Thank you if you download
Harold

[nkalanaga]

Interesting.  I would have recommended the McHenry for your use, but would never have thought of thinning the shank to fit a 905 box.  I would have just screwed the coupler to loco, and done without the centering springs.  But your way does provide centering, so is better.

Unlike other N scale couplers, the McHenry doesn't need centering springs, and can be mounted rigidly in a pilot beam if needed.  If it can be swung manually, like the prototype, it will work just fine.  But the springs do get lost, which is the main reason I don't like the things.

[hminky]

Interesting.  I would have recommended the McHenry for your use, but would never have thought of thinning the shank to fit a 905 box.  I would have just screwed the coupler to loco, and done without the centering springs.  But your way does provide centering, so is better.

Unlike other N scale couplers, the McHenry doesn't need centering springs, and can be mounted rigidly in a pilot beam if needed.  If it can be swung manually, like the prototype, it will work just fine.  But the springs do get lost, which is the main reason I don't like the things.

A semi-rigid coupler would be rather useless in any switching scenario.

Swinging the coupler manually in N-Scale, really.

The Sergent coupler in HO and S fails because of the rigid "prototypical" mounting.

The only time coupler springs will get lost is when the couplers are being massaged on the workbench.

Can't understand the basis of that theory. Kadee's with that spring arrangement have been used for years in three other scales with no reports of spring fleeing.

Harold

[randgust]

I've had reasonably good luck with using Z-scale couplers on pilots of everything, if you don't mind some surgery.

I'm amazed how well they work with regular N MT couplers, including magnetic uncoupling, if you just bend the trip pins down.  The key is if you have the space for the 903 box to fit.

Where I've had absolutely no space at all to mount anything I've wire pinned the shank of a Caboose Hobbies dummy to a pilot, after thinning the entire CH coupler about 40% because they are massively thick.
http://www.randgust.com/HVR5042%20final%205.jpg

Where I've had just a hair of space for a box I've taken the short-shank MT passenger car boxes and worked those in.  This is also where it's more important to have a functioning magnetic coupler.
http://www.randgust.com/shay2827.jpg

[nkalanaga]

Harold:  MT coupler springs are in the shank, in the draft gear box.  You're right, they don't get lost in service.

The McHenry springs are on the coupler itself, to hold the knuckle closed, like the KD HO couplers.  They do get lost, and then the couplers don't work.

As for a rigidly mounted coupler on the pilot beam, it will work, and was done years ago when the only N scale knuckle coupler was the 1025.  Usually only the knuckle portion was used, so that the mating coupler could still be uncoupled.  As long as the McHenry can be line up with the other coupler, it will couple, and uncouple, even if rigidly mounted.

And I often have to manually align N scale couplers on curves, usually because cars have different coupler overhangs.  The same pick used for uncoupling can be used to nudge the couplers into alignment.