N Scale freight cars jerking, how to fix?

[peteski]

Yes, the industry migrated from Rapido couplets to MTL-compatible couplers. But it took 30 years for that to happen. The Magne-Matic coupler was patented in 1969. The industry in general didn’t follow suit until Atlas abandoned Rapido couplers in the 1990s. Once Atlas migrated to AccuMate couplers, the remaining manufacturers moved to knuckle couplers that would operate with MTL knuckles.

But that length of time (30 years) was due to the patent on knuckle coupler design, not because modelers were resistant to accept a drastic change. Once the patent expired, the migration happened fairly fast.

[peteski]

Back in the day, it was not uncommon to find cars with a Rapido coupler on one end and an MT on the other - a "conversion" car.  I had a couple such cars while I was converting my fleet to all-MT, all-body-mounts in 1995.  Compatibility would be great, but I don't think it would be necessary as long as the new coupler was (1) significantly better looking; (2) operationally excellent (this is the problem with the MT True-scale - it's not really meant for operational coupling/uncoupling) and (3) could be mounted like a 1015 or use a compatible draft gear box.  I'd be fine with an MT 905-type that would be at the proper height when mounted to an underbody built for a 1015 or could be put in a 1015-compatible draft gear box (like the Atlas Master PS-2 box).  Some folks have already adopted the 905 as their standard coupler, but the problem is mounting it on an engine or car underbody designed for a 1015-like coupler.  For rolling stock, you can use shims, but adapting engine pilots is much more difficult. 

There was a time when no locomotives had DCC - you had to mill and hard wire.  Yet some folks did it.  Then manufacturers shifted to DCC-compatible frames with "drop-in" boards.  THEN, some crazy modelers started putting sound in their N scale diesels and a few years later, lo and behold, we have factory-sound-equipped locos.  If the hobby is going to move forward, someone's got to start the process.  Sometimes the process takes decades, sometimes it is significantly faster. 

John C.

Of course there were adapter or converter cars with different couplers on each end.  I had some and some of the members of my NTRAK club still have and use them too.  While ok for running trains (like on NTRAK layout), this method is not very handy for serious switching during ops sessions.

I guess the only way we can find out how quickly a new (better) knuckle coupler can be adapted is to have some company come up with one.  Unfortunately few most recently developed knuckle couplers (Bachmann EZMate, and now Scale Trains). Are even worse than MTL (both in looks and operation).      I figured that Scale Trains (with them touting realism and scale accuracy) would have came up with a winning coupler design, but they failed me.

[bbussey]

But that length of time (30 years) was due to the patent on knuckle coupler design, not because modelers were resistant to accept a drastic change. Once the patent expired, the migration happened fairly fast.

No.  The MTL clones that are now in use are a result of the expired patent.  But the AccuMate and Kato knuckles were introduced prior to that.

[peteski]

No.  The MTL clones that are now in use are a result of the expired patent.  But the AccuMate and Kato knuckles were introduced prior to that.

Hmm, ok. Not sure about AccuMates, but you are right about Kato. However the reliability of the original Kato coupler was horrible (and the current one is not much better).  And nobody is clamoring to convert their fleet to Kato couplers either.  Very  few "staunch anti slinkers" convert to AccuMates. But even those 2 are fairly recent development (nowhere near 30-year-old).  Didn't Atlas, for a while, included both Rapido and AccuMates with their locomotive models?  As I see it, MTL is still the gorilla of knuckle couplers.

It would be really interesting if someone did some research and came up with a definitive timeline of the changeover of US-protptype N scale models from Rapido to knuckle.

[nickelplate759]

Back in the day, it was not uncommon to find cars with a Rapido coupler on one end and an MT on the other - a "conversion" car. ...
John C.

I still have a pair of "conversion" SD9 locos.  Micro-trains on one end of each loco, Rapido on the other.  Perfect for N-Track shows when you don't know what you might be pulling.

[Maletrain]

Well, MTL does seem to be trying, with their recent True Scale couplers.  But, those seem to have put the top priority on ease of manufacture, rather than functionality.  I am still thinking that a scale coupler could be made to couple and uncouple easily if it used a variety of materials (eg, metal springs separate from plastic parts).  But, assembly would be either expensive at the factory or a bitch in out workshops, unless MTL also comes up with some jigs to make the job go easily and fast for the hobbyist to assemble out own. I'm currently playing with 905s to see if I really want to standardize on them.

[Chris333]

If you think "bobbleheading" looks bad in N-Scale, it is truly dreadful in HOn30.

Use Accumates in that genre, the only reason am building in HOn30.

There are finally couplers that work for HOn30 even though I will burn in Hell for not using MicroTrains.

Harold

These are HOn30 all with 1015 couplers:

[ednadolski]

If you think "bobbleheading" looks bad in N-Scale, it is truly dreadful in HOn30.

All this slinky/pogo talk, I can't help thinking of this:

Ed

[bbussey]

Hmm, ok. Not sure about AccuMates, but you are right about Kato. However the reliability of the original Kato coupler was horrible (and the current one is not much better).  And nobody is clamoring to convert their fleet to Kato couplers either.  Very  few "staunch anti slinkers" convert to AccuMates. But even those 2 are fairly recent development (nowhere near 30-year-old).  Didn't Atlas, for a while, included both Rapido and AccuMates with their locomotive models?  As I see it, MTL is still the gorilla of knuckle couplers.

It would be really interesting if someone did some research and came up with a definitive timeline of the changeover of US-protptype N scale models from Rapido to knuckle.

The N scale AccuMates are based on the HO version of the same name and in no way are similar in design or operation to the MTL coupler.  In abandoning the Rapido coupler, the manufacturers turned to options that would mate with the MTL coupler (as opposed to producing knock-offs) in order to increase desirability of their products.  Many of the non-MTL knuckles may not work well magnetically coupling and uncoupling, but they will mate with MTL couplers manually and stay coupled.  Most people don't take advantage of the magnetic capabilities, so problems in that area aren't a deterrent for them.

I use MTL or MTL-clones on my freight equipment and the motive power couplers that interact with freight and passenger equipment.  On passenger equipment, I use MTL on the car that connects to motive power because I have power changes in New Haven, but the rest are a mix.  I use MTL True Scale between power units that always MU together, such as FA/FB/FA latch-ups and DL109/DL109 and PA/PA pairings.

InterMountain was the first to introduce the MTL clone coupler from China after the MTL patents expired.  Paul @PGBowler2 may be able to provide the debut date for the AccuMate.  The first Kato knuckle that actually mated with other knuckles was before the first California Zephyr release but after the six-car smoothside passenger sets.  The Bachmann knuckles were after the McHenry was introduced.  BLI's clone is a hybrid of the MTL 1015 knuckle and the AccuMate innards, which is why it doesn't oscillate.

[nkalanaga]

The switch from Rapido to knuckle couplers was also helped by the fact that the Rapidos looked nothing like an American coupler.  The knuckles looked better, and if you were into operations, were easier to uncouple, manually or remotely.

Going from the now-standard oversized knuckle couplers to a scale-sized one wouldn't make that much difference, visually, to many modelers.  Worse, operations may suffer, especially if one has loose track tolerances, as the "gathering range" of the smaller couplers is less, requiring that everything be better aligned.  So, there isn't as much incentive to make the change. 

Those who want better appearance would likely be eager for the new couplers, while operators, and casual modelers, may not be so quick to adopt them.  HO has had scale magnetic couplers for several years, but they still seem to be a niche market.

[EmdFan]

The closeup photo of the Atlas ALP45 in the February issue of MR appears to show a coupler that is neither Accumate or 1015 style. Perhaps a new coupler is on the horizon from Atlas? I hope so, I'm in the "anti-slinky" camp and primarily use Accumates.

[basementcalling]

How to stop freight car jerking? Quit watching train porn.

[djconway]

One thing i did was to replace the spring with a piece of rubber band. Cut a piece of rubber band (square cross section about 1/32") to a little shorter than the spring, and assemble the coupler. 
The one major draw back - it totally kills magnetic uncoupling, not a big problem but....
Another problem - I'm not sure how long the rubber band will last, before crumbling. Some of my first experimental cars are now 6+ years old and still show no signs of crumbling, others dried out in a matter of months.  Too bad I didn't keep  track of the brands of rubber bands.

[Sparky]

All this slinky/pogo talk, I can't help thinking of this:

Ed

Lol, that's about it..

[Maletrain]

What is really needed to kill the slinky effect in MTL couplers is some sort of shock absorber.  I wonder if a small cylinder of foam material inserted inside the spring would work well enough.  I may try it when I get the chance - unless somebody else beats me to it.  Some sort of open-cell synthetic foam seems like a better idea than latex material,  because it will last longer.

On the other hand, if this does work, and the foam wears out after several years, how many of us are going to be willing to go through the chore of replacing tiny pieces of foam in the MTL couplers at both ends of our whole rolling stock inventory?