Preview of upcoming MTL True-Scale Coupler system

[tappertrainman]

So would these eliminate the "slinky" effect?  They look awesome!

James

[ednadolski]

Other than the size alone, what would be a good reason for me to migrate to this coupler?

How about no in-line springs?  And no trip pins?

WRT detail:  a scale coupler is after all pretty tiny.   Running on a layout and given typical indoor lighting, I don't think most folks would be able to see the extra detailing.  Macro closeups in full sunlight might be a different story, but better to get rid of molded-on grabirons first   

Ed

Edit:  +1 each for double shelfs, bulk purchases, and sufficient production quantities.

[Missaberoad]

Pete, now this is simply judging from the photos so I could be way off but...

While the Arnold coupler has more detail, the MT coupler appears much more true to the shape of an AAR coupler. The Knuckle on the Arnold coupler looks nothing like a prototypical knuckle, and the drawbar end (the non knuckle section of the coupler) is oversized and the wrong shape. (It should be more rounded and not stick out nearly as far) and there is that giant pin sticking out of the top...

I did mention earlier in the thread that I would like this new coupler to have the recess detail on the drawbar half, and Joe answered that it was a production issue. Obviously not impossible but who knows how many rejects the Chinese factory that makes the Arnold couplers goes through

To my eye between the two the MT coupler looks more realistic, I think accuracy in shape and dimension trumps detail... 
are they perfect? no but after I roughen and paint them the same way I do 903 couplers I think they will look right.

As for why? I can't tell you why you should do anything, But my thoughts personally is that these couplers will be easily obtainable, cheap (hopefully in line with other Mt couplers) and kept in production... not sure I can say that about any other option at this point.

Macro closeups in full sunlight might be a different story, but better to get rid of molded-on grabirons first   

 

[wcfn100]

I like that fact the springs push against the inside post and not the coupler box.  This will be nice to design around as long as it doesn't go too deep towards the truck pin.

The test for me will be how they look with the LEZ couplers.  But from what I see, as long as they are compatible with the LEZ couplers, this is a big winner in my book.

Jason

[ryan_wilkerson]

They will be available in bulk, not sure of the quantities at the moment but will find out.

20, 50, 100 or the "I'M-ALL-IN" 1000 pack!

What about molding them in a slightly brown/rust color that's still dark? Is it hard to get plastic in a color like that?

[jereising]

This could very well be the product of the year.

Wonder how they will do with a 108 car train up 2%?

One way to find out. 

[Cajonpassfan]

Depends.  well, nothing is going to join like a MTL coupler given the parts pretty much float.  In testing and running, backing into a car wasn't a problem but it does take a little more force.

Joe

This is potentially GREAT news! Thank you Joe!
I've given up on automatic uncoupling a long time ago, clip the dangles, and use an uncoupling tool for switching. Works for me; I prefer it that way, and a number of friends in my circle do too.

But, coupling cars needs to be hands free and at somewhat realistic speed. So the question I will have is whether or not these new couplers can become a standard replacement for all my cars and locomotives, OR whether they will not couple with ease, and will become the coupler to use only for fixed consists, between locomotives or blocks of cars, passenger sets etc. Big difference in how many I need....
Otto K.

[GaryHinshaw]

This could very well be the product of the year.

My thought exactly.  And this has already been a very rich year as far as I'm concerned.  What a pleasant surprise!

I agree with Pete that they could look better (of course) but they could look a whole lot worse.

One suggestion: most new rolling stock releases are (finally) coming with body-mount couplers.  It would be incredibly helpful to have an option that allowed these couplers to be used in existing body-mount draft gear boxes, perhaps an insert of some kind.  It's daunting enough to convert 500 cars from truck-mounts to body-mounts.  Even worse if we have to file off existing draft gear.

What is the diameter of the pivot hole, and the interior height/width of the draft gear box?

Ed

[Alwyn Cutmore]

Very nice and innovative Joe. Another hats off to MTL.

[peteski]

[wazzou]

Appearance aside, which I think is more than adequate under normal operating circumstances...how well they couple in operation is much more important to me and the ultimate tipping point or deal breaker.

[mu26aeh]

Just a quick read thru the posts, looks great for those who do train shows/module layout setups, but not the operations crowd ?   

[learmoia]

Hey guys, I’ve attached a few posed shots of our new N Scale, True-Scale Coupler system we are getting ready to introduce soon.  These are designed to be alternative used by modelers looking for a more prototypical looking coupler with scale distances between cars.  Easy to assemble and install they are great for modelers running consists at shows, MU-ing locomotives together without having to use unrealistic drawbars and for those who are not using magnetic uncoupling.  They are scale size and consist of a draft gear box, lid, knuckle and lip shank and a separate plug in air hose and no springs.

These are designed as an accessory and stand alone coupler system.  They will not couple with existing N scale couplers because of their prototypical size and construction.  They are uncoupled manually using a sharp toothpick or a needle and can be joined by simply pushing the cars together.  These are body mount couplers using a box that is the same dimensions as our 1015 so any application that uses 1015’s will work.  I’ve successfully attached these to Atlas and Kato Locomotives with no problems.  We will be offering them in both standard length and an extended shank and draft gear box for longer cars.    These are scheduled to be available in package form this October.  Pricing will be available then.

Cheers   

Joe
MTL

Well ain't that somethin!!.. Cool...

Couple of Questions.. or suggestions for down the road.

Maybe I missed it.. but are the boxes snap fit?

Does the coupler 'fit' in a 1015 Box?.. For those companies who are integrating a 1015 box into their under frame.. or the Trainworx drop in conversion for hoppers.

Suggestion 1:  Version that fits into a 1015 box (if this doens't)
Suggestion 2: Extended Draft gear boxes..  (but maybe the Brass Box-Tube method will work.)

Cool product though.. I'm glad the survey yielded results.!!..

~Ian

[GaryHinshaw]

That is my point exactly: when tooling up a brand new and scale-size non-automatic coupler, why not make it look as close to the real coupler as possible (even if that involves a complex mold)?

It would require a far more complicated multi slide mold and given the size, would be a tough one to pull off and get clean parts out of.   

Joe

It was a business decision.  If demand is high, perhaps they will consider higher fidelity options.

I hope these will be offered in brown.

[reinhardtjh]

Just a quick read thru the posts, looks great for those who do train shows/module layout setups, but not the operations crowd ?   

Depends on your mode of operations.  On the two main N-scale layouts I operate on, the deepest parts are no more than 12 or 15" and it is easy to do your switching with manual uncoupling by using a sharpened bamboo skewer or Rix pick.  Neither layout has magnets for automatic uncoupling.  If you designed your layout deeper with the expectation that magnetic uncoupling would be used in spots you can't reach, then that would be a major point to consider in deciding about using these new couplers.