How to shorten KATO passengers axles ???

[nkalanaga]

I would definitely remove that "stopper" before changing wheels.  If it isn't the problem, it also won't be missed, and it will be a lot cheaper than new wheels.

[peteski]

After seeing more detailed description of the problem I think the body mounted couplers simply be causing the cars to derail on curves. I have doubt that deeper flanges will solve the problem.

Earlier in the thread there was some mention that Kato wheels and half-axles are a single piece of metal.  Here is a proof that they are not.
The half-axle is clearly different color than the wheel. It is also magnetic, but not prone to rusting, so I assume it is stainless steel.  To show that they are separate pieces, I have pressed the half-axle out of the wheel.  This confirms that if needed, the length of the axle protruding from the wheel face (thus the total axle length) can be adjusted.

[trainforfun]

After seeing more detailed description of the problem I think the body mounted couplers simply be causing the cars to derail on curves. I have doubt that deeper flanges will solve the problem.

Earlier in the thread there was some mention that Kato wheels and half-axles are a single piece of metal.  Here is a proof that they are not.
The half-axle is clearly different color than the wheel. It is also magnetic, but not prone to rusting, so I assume it is stainless steel.  To show that they are separate pieces, I have pressed the half-axle out of the wheel.  This confirms that if needed, the length of the axle protruding from the wheel face (thus the total axle length) can be adjusted.

Wow thanks , I have some in stock before I buy more .
Was it difficult to slide out ?
Method ?

My thinking is the couplers are pushing the following cars out since there is not a lot of play in the couplers .
I will try first to remove the stoppers on some cars .
The S curve are definitively the biggest problem.

[Steveruger45]

Louis,
See reply #2 on this thread. I placed a link in it to an easy and cheap way to press adjust the wheel axles within the wheels already.

[trainforfun]

Louis,
See reply #2 on this thread. I placed a link in it to an easy and cheap way to press adjust the wheel axles within the wheels already.

Thanks I missed your post , that's a nice investment !!!

[peteski]

Wow thanks , I have some in stock before I buy more .
Was it difficult to slide out ?
Method ?

My thinking is the couplers are pushing the following cars out since there is not a lot of play in the couplers .
I will try first to remove the stoppers on some cars .
The S curve are definitively the biggest problem.

Earlier on this thread (Reply #16) I posted a link to very detailed discussion about doing this for the Kato Loco wheelsets. I provided a link to the most pertinent part of the discussion. Same method applies here.  I use a small arbor press, but I suppose a drill press should also work well. Or a tiny press that Steve uses.

I still suspect that deeper flanges on the Kato wheels will not resolve your problem.  The car will likely just jump a bit higher over the rail.

[trainforfun]

I still suspect that deeper flanges on the Kato wheels will not resolve your problem.  The car will likely just jump a bit higher over the rail.

I did some test with MT bigger flange wheels and I have to admit that you are right ...
I will now check the trucks that may be too stiff to move upward and downward , will try to enlarge the hole on the front and rear where they are fixed to the bolster , not all around , so the screw will still hold them

[peteski]

I did some test with MT bigger flange wheels and I have to admit that you are right ...
I will now check the trucks that may be too stiff to move upward and downward , will try to enlarge the hole on the front and rear where they are fixed to the bolster , not all around , so the screw will still hold them

Do you think that the problem is with the trucks not having enough swing?  I would recommend that you go after the couplers first.

Take one of the offending cars (by itself) and gently push it through the areas where it derails (when it is coupled to other cars in the train).  If it rolls easily through the area and stays on the track then the trucks have plenty of swing.  In that case the body-mounted couplers are the most likely culprit.

[trainforfun]

Do you think that the problem is with the trucks not having enough swing?  I would recommend that you go after the couplers first.

Take one of the offending cars (by itself) and gently push it through the areas where it derails (when it is coupled to other cars in the train).  If it rolls easily through the area and stays on the track then the trucks have plenty of swing.  In that case the body-mounted couplers are the most likely culprit.

Man these cars are giving me a hardtime .
The cars tend to push the preceding or following cars up , the interior side of the car in the curve is lifting a bit , enough to stop the lighting for a short while . I changed the couplers to MT 1016 ( longer shanks ) and it's 95% better . But in the meantime I lost the close coupling that was so nice ...
Working on all the faulty spot , but will have to stay with MT 1016 ....     

[nickelplate759]

This really sounds like it could be related to body-mount couplers and overhang issues.  If so, then trackwork might be part of the solution.

My experience is that this is helped (but not eliminated) by both wider coupler swing and lower resistance to coupler swing - a stiff coupler is worse than one that swings easily. 

Easement curves will help most of all, and if done right can pretty much make the problem go away.

[trainforfun]

This really sounds like it could be related to body-mount couplers and overhang issues.  If so, then trackwork might be part of the solution.

My experience is that this is helped (but not eliminated) by both wider coupler swing and lower resistance to coupler swing - a stiff coupler is worse than one that swings easily. 

Easement curves will help most of all, and if done right can pretty much make the problem go away.

I understand your point , but it's too late to add easement curves ... the layout was built over the last 25 years , I will do some corrections where it's the most problematic , some portion of the layout will be banned for "The Canadian" , at least the main wil be open to the train .

I have put some "slack" on body mounted couplers before but the way these cars are designed the coupler itself is stuck inside and the body end of the cars goes down lower than the coupler , so I can't cheat with a loose coupler body mounted this time .


Will have to correct all the problematic places , one at a time !!!   

[mmagliaro]

You say that switching to 1016's (longer shank) solved 95% of the problem.  In these curves, are you sure the
car edges or diaphragms aren't pushing on each other and making the cars rock up in the corners, causing these derailments?
It sounds like the longer coupler prevented the cars from doing this (almost).

[peteski]

I know I'll get lots of eye-rolling, but is there any possibility to convert those cars to truck-mounted couplers?  For decades we had N scale layouts with tight curves and we had no problems with long passenger cars (with truck-mounted couplers)  running on those curves.

There are still manufacturers (Kato is one) that use truck mounted couplers for passenger cars that have large overhangs.  They sell lots of passenger sets and nobody seems to be complaining about tracking problems.  Not prototypical, but reliable on our "compressed reality" layouts.


Trainforfun: did you try the test I recommend to verify whether the trucks or couplers are the problem?  You answered my post but in a vague roundabout kind of way.

Let me also ask again:  do these have their couplers solidly mounted on the car ends, or are they the "kinematic type" couplers that can swing to the sides?  I suspect that I know the answer, but I just want to confirm.

[Cajonpassfan]

I'm not rolling my eyes, I think Peteski makes a good point. Bodymounts are the way to go on freight cars and perhaps some head end other cars that are switched in and out of consists, but in many passenger trains that tend to be run and stay in coupled trainsets, the visual benefit of body mounted couplers is lost under the diaphragms and talgoes offer an operational advantage, IMHO. For example, my Kato Super Chief may get an occasional extra baggage or a sleeper or two, but the basic trainset is the same; I couldn't care less about the coupler mounts as long as the operation is flawless (and it is).
Just my two cents,
Otto K.

[trainforfun]

I know I'll get lots of eye-rolling, but is there any possibility to convert those cars to truck-mounted couplers?  For decades we had N scale layouts with tight curves and we had no problems with long passenger cars (with truck-mounted couplers)  running on those curves.

There are still manufacturers (Kato is one) that use truck mounted couplers for passenger cars that have large overhangs.  They sell lots of passenger sets and nobody seems to be complaining about tracking problems.  Not prototypical, but reliable on our "compressed reality" layouts.


Trainforfun: did you try the test I recommend to verify whether the trucks or couplers are the problem?  You answered my post but in a vague roundabout kind of way.

Let me also ask again:  do these have their couplers solidly mounted on the car ends, or are they the "kinematic type" couplers that can swing to the sides?  I suspect that I know the answer, but I just want to confirm.

No rolling eyes here , my KATO passengers sets are all done that way , they are coupled pretty close and I never had any problem in curves .... 

Truck mounted couplers would be very tough to install on these cars without cutting the car ends that goes down lower than the coupler on each side like an inverted U , in fact flush with the bottom of the couplers .

The couplers are solidly mounted to the bottom of the cars , like I said before I have cheated in the past mounting the body couplers a bit loose so they can swing a little more than the couplers itself does . On these you can't because of the body ends going lower than the couplers .

They are not kinematic and I suggest it to RAPIDO without a real answer from them ...

The problem is really the short MT 1015 couplers that push adjoining cars out of the curves , MT 1016 solves most of the problem , and I am currently modifying the curves and siding where the cars will run most of the times , some tracks on the layout will not see them close ...