Preview of upcoming MTL True-Scale Coupler system

[peteski]

As I see it, these couplers are not designed to swing. The spring is way too stiff for that.  As I see it, the spring is simply there to allow the coupler to open for coupling and then snap shut after the couplers are closed.  The longer shank seems to swing because the shank acts as a longer fulcrum against the spring.  IIRC, the spring in the long-shank coupler also has a notch in its base, making it more flexible.  To me it would have made more sense to put that notch on the short-shank version.

[learmoia]

A lack of coupler 'swing' is more or less prototypical in most applications.. (Except for locomotives and long cars..)

The cause is the 'block' behind the mounting hole that the whiskers rest against to provide closing force. 

If the 'block' was mobile, or if the wiskers had tabs that rested against each other for spring, you would have a bit more swing.
.. the trade off here is you would loose 'self centering'

However there is alot of play in the knukle itself that allows the couplers to pivot at the coupling point.

.. to Otto's comment.. I haven't tested S-Curves yet..
Min-Radius isn't a concern to me since my minimum is large too.. but that doesn't mean everyone willw ork.

I have a large group from MikeC coming today and I'm going to apply to a bunch of MT Cars and see if I can get some run time on a T-Track layout this weekend at a train show..

Note to self.. Install on cheap cars in case they get thrown across room...   

~Ian


 ~Ian

[Sokramiketes]

Is anyone else experiencing problems with the couplers remaining open? Like the two halves aren't recentering and the gather remains open?  This would be on the long shanks, haven't opened the short ones yet to see what those do.

[sizemore]

Finally got these (short-shank) in ACME Labs today, they're pretty cool. I put them on some FA's and wow they make a big difference in appearance. Next is some Intermountain F units and some freight cars. My only constructive criticism is that the centering arms are to stiff as others have mentioned. Will have to try thinning them out and maybe some other experiments.

The S.

[jagged ben]

A lack of coupler 'swing' is more or less prototypical in most applications.. (Except for locomotives and long cars..)

...

However there is alot of play in the knukle itself that allows the couplers to pivot at the coupling point.

...
 ~Ian

Proto couplers aren't designed to pivot at the coupling point, are they?

[Missaberoad]

Proto couplers aren't designed to pivot at the coupling point, are they?

Not really, there is a certain amount of slop, that may allow limited pivoting... most movement is in the drawbar swing tho, and it is a decent amount, likely 15-30 degrees from center...

[johnb]

Is anyone else experiencing problems with the couplers remaining open? Like the two halves aren't recentering and the gather remains open?  This would be on the long shanks, haven't opened the short ones yet to see what those do.

only on one coupler...thought it was a fluke. I bent the wisker and it was fine

[sswjim]

I have been playing around with these new couplers and this what I have discovered. First I wanted them to work with MT 905's, so I used a small file and removed some material from the rear of the coupler. Looking from the top you don't even notice that it has been modified. Next I wanted more swing so I fused the to coupler halves together and removed a short section of the whiskers, now I have more side swing and it also stays some what centered. Fusing the two pieces together does not affect the coupling, now it  works just fine with 905's. It will also couple up to a normal MT N scale coupler. I also did one like the HO sergents couplers by removing all of the whiskers, now you have full side to side motion. I have ran then on my small layout here at the house with no problems.

Jim

[ednadolski]

... so I fused the to coupler halves together ...

Could you please describe what you did to fuse them?

Thanks,
Ed

[learmoia]

Is anyone else experiencing problems with the couplers remaining open? Like the two halves aren't recentering and the gather remains open?  This would be on the long shanks, haven't opened the short ones yet to see what those do.

Now that you say it.. Yes but not much.. but I thinned the wiskers maybe thats a nono for the long shanks.

Proto couplers aren't designed to pivot at the coupling point, are they?

No not really.. but Curves aren't 12" Radius either.. Min Curve on Prototype is 12 degrees with translates to about 40" radius in N scale.
A 12" radius translates to 36.4 degree which is Subway type stuff..

Even having some slop in the pivot would help..

I would say 12" Radius is minimum for these on 50' cars

Somebody talked about S-Curves..
Using Kato Unitrak I did a 12"R 15deg S-Curve and that was a no go.. then I did a 13"R 30deg S-Curve and it sorta worked..

Not really sure how to uncouple these things other than lifting the car.

~Ian
 

[C855B]

... Not really sure how to uncouple these things other than lifting the car. ...

The skewer method, although I use a round toothpick. Works great.

[peteski]

Fusing the two pieces together does not affect the coupling, now it  works just fine with 905's. It will also couple up to a normal MT N scale coupler.

Does it just barely couple to the regular MTL N scale coupler by forcing them hard together at an awkward angle, or will that combination of couplers be able to operate on a layout?  Do you have a photo of the coupled pair?

[sswjim]

Could you please describe what you did to fuse them?

I used a 12 watt solder iron and fuse the two pieces between the whiskers

Does it just barely couple to the regular MTL N scale coupler by forcing them hard together at an awkward angle, or will that combination of couplers be able to operate on a layout?  Do you have a photo of the coupled pair?

Yes you have to push them together hard, but once they are together there is no pushing to the side like the Kato coupler. I have photo's but how do I get them on here?

Jim

[peteski]

Yes you have to push them together hard, but once they are together there is no pushing to the side like the Kato coupler. I have photo's but how do I get them on here?

Jim

I just tried and after some serious coupler-bashing of the standard and scale MTL couplers together, the connection was even more skewed than when using a Kato coupler. 

Easiest way to post photos is to attach them to the post (when you are replying or composing new post).

Hit the + sign for "Attachments and other options" under the text input window. That expands and lets you browse ans select the photo on your computer. Then make sure to pull down the menu to the right of the file you selected and choose "Inline full-size image".

[Maletrain]

I would say 12" Radius is minimum for these on 50' cars

Somebody talked about S-Curves..
Using Kato Unitrak I did a 12"R 15deg S-Curve and that was a no go.. then I did a 13"R 30deg S-Curve and it sorta worked..

~Ian

May I suggest a "standard" for testing with S-curves?  How about a Kato Unitrack double cross-over, or equivalent with #6 turnouts and the same track separation?  That is pretty much an unavoidable S curve, with a straight section that is fixed by the parameters of frog number and track separation.  For the more free-form S-curves on our layouts, which we know can cause trouble without long-enough straight sections in the middle and easments for the curves, there are just too many variables for us to compare notes from one post to another.