0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
...Seems that people have been most concerned about the slack, or lack thereof, so I’ll address that first:According to this railway age article (https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/freight-cars/mechanical-couplers) new type E couplers have 25/32” worth of slack. They would wear from there, but let’s take this at face value. That’s about 0.00488” or .125mm of slack per coupling in N scale! The N-Possible prototypes have about that much slack; Don’t underestimate just how much better model trains operate with a lower slack coupler! Yes, prototype couplers have slack. No, they don’t have coupler slack even in the same universe as traditional MRR coupler designs. Don’t confuse coupler slack with draft gear movement....Note that slack; Its not in the coupler head, its in the draft gear.
Only the traditional N/Z scale “MTL” coupler has draft gear slack, in all of the MRR coupler designs I’m aware of. ...
The critical operational benefit of the low slack type head design is that the couplers STAY ALIGNED under buff (compression) conditions. The prototype does this, but MRR couplers of Kadee (or compatible designs) lineage DO NOT. They are unable to mechanically stay aligned at the head level (because of the massive slack), and consequently will tend to shift to their lateral travel limit, especially when a corner is encountered. The ability of couplers to stay aligned under buff allows for much more prototypical train handling characteristics, even with your models. You can effectively push any train you can pull; You can much more reliably operate DPU’s and helpers. Push-pull commuter trains work. Lightweight rolling stock is more reliable. I’d say it’s the equivalent improvement of moving from truck mounted to body mounted couplers in terms of buff reliablity. Under buff conditions: Truck mount<Body Mount<Aligned head design (body mount of course).I respect people’s concern with respect to “reading slack” in helper/dpu type scenarios. But honestly, with couplers that stay aligned under buff, you will be shocked with just how much more “force tolerance” you have. Its massive. Operations with helpers/DPU’s are so much more reliable that you will never want to go back. I’ve operated test trains in extremes absolutely impossible to operate with traditional couplers that don’t stay aligned under buff.
I’m sure the number one question everyone is asking is “When will these be available!?” At this point, I’m actively exploring multiple avenues with respect to bringing these to market. I’m keeping all options on the table at this point. I respect that for something as crucial as a coupler, a long-term reliable supply is imperative. I can assure you - these will be coming to market! Andrew
I find it amusing that after decades of complaining about too much slack and slinky effect, now people are not happy with a lack of slack.I have not really been paying much attention, but do the other "slinkless" couplers (like McHenry, Accumate, etc.) have slack? And where is the slack? At the coupler shank's pivot point, or the slack is in the coupler head itself (or in both places)?
The couplers do look great. But in modeling motive power changes in New Haven, I absolutely must have magnetic uncoupling.
I'll take no slack, even though it means changing the couplers on 400+ freight cars.The MT slack is a frustration when doing slow speed switching moves. I've learned to ignore it, but it really is bothersome. A great-looking, great-operating, no-slack coupler would be absolutely great from my perspective.John C.
The only downside I see is from the side view there is a gap between the two coupler shafts.
Here is a quick pic of what they look like. The MTL coupler from an MTL TBOX is on the left, and the N-Possible coupler (with its coupler box) is on the right. The size difference is dramatic, and the air hose on the NPC box is really nicely done <snip> If you look really closely, you can see just a small bit of slack, so it is not a truly zero-slack condition. (To some degree, I think that any expectations regarding slack are a function of what we have all become used to seeing, after many years of using traditional/legacy couplers.)
Edit: after reviewing the video, I notice that YouTube has a tendency to impart a slight jitter on some of the car movements. But that is a YouTube thing, it is not in the video as i originally shot it on my phone camera. Just mentioning it, so that folks don't get the mistaken impression that is how the cars were actually moving.
Author
Topic: N-Possible Coupler Announcement (Nashville 2022) (Read 31732 times)
