if you were designing a new N scale freight car ....

[jagged ben]

Personally I prefer the 1015 coupler box molded into the model, and would advocate that MT and other scale coupler offerings tool appropriate adapters).  BUT with regard to the original question and deference to other comments made, I would advocate either a standard box, if it looks good, or a part that can be removed and/or replaced to accommodate conversion to a 1015, or ideally also a 1023/25, according to modeler's preference.

Something else to consider with standard 1015 boxes is they don't lend themselves well to modeling extended draft gear.  So it just depends on the model.

[daniel_leavitt2000]

1015 box because it accepts Accumates, McHenry and Bachmann couplers. It's as close to a universal standard as there is. MTL trucks with FVM wheels as long as the ride height is correct.

[bbussey]

Maybe for standard MTL ("Magnematics") and other things like the McHenry and clones where the bare shanks will fit the box, but otherwise it's not a moot point. The TSC does not work in the 1015 box. Compatibility there is external box dimensions only.

I design models that will work with the majority of existing equipment available and of what most modelers use in order to maximize demand. So yeah, pretty moot.

[bbussey]

Except that the 1015 design collapses to the side when shoving, which inspires derailments.  Personally I pretty much never see the slinky effect in my operations.  YMMV.  But it's still a matter of preference.

I haven’t experienced that, as I use body-mounted equipment. So any 1015 side-collapsing does not transfer the load through the trucks and force them askew.

[Dave V]

I'd be all about this obscure but appealing prototype:

[johnb]

I found the perfect prototype for this group....and my model railroad, the Pacific Electric

[cjm413]

1015 box because it accepts Accumates, McHenry and Bachmann couplers. It's as close to a universal standard as there is. MTL trucks with FVM wheels as long as the ride height is correct.

+1 for MTL trucks because they are readily available
-1 for MTL trucks because of the offset kingpins

[garethashenden]

Body-mount couplers? Use "standard" MTL 1015 boxes, please. The general adoption of body-mounts is finally an industry reality, but I'm finding myself stymied in adoption of the advanced MTL True Scale Couplers by manufacturers whose solution to body-mounts has been to cast their own box into the model based on their choice of coupler. This is infuriating - it was much, much easier to change a truck-mounted design to body-mounts than to convert from one body-mount system to another.

I completely agree. A separate 1015 is the best option given current circumstances.

I design models that will work with the majority of existing equipment available and of what most modelers use in order to maximize demand. So yeah, pretty moot.

And I chop your couplers off to fit better ones. I wish I didn't have to but it's the only choice if you insist on only using 1015 innards rather than whole 1015s. FVM cars are very easy to convert because they use whole 1015s.

[Mark5]

I'd rather not see the coupler box molded into the frame (model). This causes problems on some models (example: Athearn's latest (old MDC shells) 50' PS-1 Box Cars - some of the 50' prototypes had "extended draft gear" "cushioned underframe" so with the new molded in box on the latest releases you must grind it off).

Mark

[cjm413]

I completely agree. A separate 1015 is the best option given current circumstances.


And I chop your couplers off to fit better ones. I wish I didn't have to but it's the only choice if you insist on only using 1015 innards rather than whole 1015s. FVM cars are very easy to convert because they use whole 1015s.

"Better couplers" are only as good as the coupler boxes they are in.

If those coupler boxes are oversized and/or inaccurate, installing "better couplers" is nothing more than a fool's errand.

Case in point.   Fox Valley Models makes a FMC 5283 that rides like a monster truck, and in most cases, lacks a proper Hydra-Cushion underframe.  ESM makes a Hydra-Cushion underframe that both addresses the ride height and provides an accurate underframe....assuming they are available to purchase, of course 

If the point of True Scale Couplers is "realism", I fail to see how a model with the wrong underftame, rides like a monster truck, has oversized and inaccurate draft gear, but has True Scale Couplers comes out ahead over a car with an accurate ESM underframe and draft gear, but with MTL 1015's...

[cjm413]

I'd rather not see the coupler box molded into the frame (model). This causes problems on some models (example: Athearn's latest (old MDC shells) 50' PS-1 Box Cars - some of the 50' prototypes had "extended draft gear" "cushioned underframe" so with the new molded in box on the latest releases you must grind it off).

Mark

I just swap them with an older MDC or Athearn underframe that doesn't have the coupler box molded in place