Kato Superliner couplers (N scale)

[crrcoal]

Has anyone replaced the couplers on the Kato Superliners? If so what did you use? Has anyone body mounted the couplers? TY!

[NorsemanJack]

Why are you replacing them?

[crrcoal]

Can't get them to couple up to each other. So I was thinking converting to MTL

[GGNInNScale]

Hmmm, I have a 4 car set, and no issues with coupling.  I did replace the rear coupler on the Kato P42 with a long shank MTL to prevent derailing on some of my too-tight curves in the mountains.  Otherwise they work quite well.  Sorry, cannot make a suggestion.

[crrcoal]

No issues with my Amfleets, smoothside cars. These Superliners I think are an older run.

[Nick Lorusso]

CRRCoal,
If you look at your couplers you’ll see a little knub on the side of the coupler. If you trim that you should have no more issues

[Jimbo]

I empathize with @crrcoal - I hate Kato’s couplers.  They don’t play well with other brands, and they hardly play well with each other.

Once they’re coupled, they stay together well, and there’s no slinky.  So I haven’t bothered with passenger trains, since they generally stay together as sets on my layout.  But our club regularly does T-Trak public displays and I like running my passenger trains; it’s a pain to swap out cars with Kato couplers.

I would love to have a better option myself.

Jim

[Lackawannae8]

snip off the little tit with side cutters or an xacto knife. should be ok if not replace with 11-702's

[peteski]

I also hate the Kato couplers, but there isn't really a good option for a replacement. Cleanly done that is.  I'm keeping mine. While getting them to couple is not always smooth, to me the biggest peeve is unscheduled uncouplings when traveling through certain curves and there is a slack on them.

[eja]

snip off the little tit with side cutters or an xacto knife. should be ok if not replace with 11-702's

Would you happen to have a photo of the "little tit" on a Kato coupler that you suggest removing?  Looking at one right now, I don't understand how it would affect coupling.

 I have has similar issues getting them to couple, but once they are, they stay that way in my experience.    My passenger trains seldom swap cars with the occasional addition/removal of the diner.

Thanks ...
ed

[peteski]

I suspect he means the protrusion on the left side of the coupler knuckle (as pictured). The unprototypical looking "thing".
Not sure how that will change the functionality - would have to mess around with one myself to get a better idea.  This is the first time I've heard of this type of modification.

[Jimbo]

I’ve heard of it; the modification is supposed to allow marrying the Kato coupler with (e.g.) MTL couplers.  But I agree with @peteski - I have no idea how this would help Kato coupling to Kato.

[jagged ben]

The protrusion makes the Kato coupler look a little more like the Type H 'Tightlock' coupler  that's common on passenger equipment.   I don't think it has any functionality on the model.

[thomasjmdavis]

No issues with my Amfleets, smoothside cars. These Superliners I think are an older run.

Assuming the ones you have are equipped with the Kato "magnetic knuckle coupler" I have found that generally, what helps with MTL coupling issues also helps with Kato.
* inspect the worst coupling cars, open the coupler cover (if so equipped) and check for dust or debris in the coupler or spring, and clean if needed. If you find dirt, etc, go through all the cars and check.
* burnish the mating surfaces of the couplers with an Xacto - any tiny grit or imperfection can cause problems, and burnishing will smooth those out.
* apply a tiny amount of Kadee/MTL 'grease-um' (which is a graphite powder, NOT grease).

Anyway, that's my 2 cents...

Also...I'm not sure how long Kato has been making Superliners under their own name- are they recent, or do they go back to the early 2000s or 1990s?  Some of my oldest Kato cars (late 90s Budd and smoothside) came equipped with dummy knuckle couplers. And, I think 'back in the day' the Con-cor Superliners were made by Kato, at least for a while- no idea what couplers those might have had.  CC cars I bought in the early 2000s came factory equipped with at least 3 different couplers- a dummy knuckle, MTL trucks/couplers, and a "Con-cor" knuckle that bears a resemblance to the Kato magnetic knuckle.

[peteski]

Kato  always made their own Superliners for a longtime (20+ years). They have full interiors, separate diaphragms, and the appropriate passenger trucks with all-wheel pickup for easy additional of internal illumination.

Con Cor Superliners are nothing like Kato.  They have no interiors, and similar to other Con Cor passenger cars of that period, the floor and sides are single casting, with the painted transparent roof and window "glass" being the other piece of the car.  Diaphragms are  molded with the car ends.  Tricks are the standard passenger car trucks Con Cor uses for all their other cars (wrong type for the Superliners).

As for the Kato couplers, they are all the magnetic type.  Some very early smoothside passenger cars came with some oddball looking knuckle couplers, but those performed so poorly that Kato came out with the current (magnetic) knuckle couplers, and even offered to exchange those early prototype couplers with the revised ones.  I have some early Kato Superliners and AFAIK, all the runs of Superliners used the currently offered (magnetic) couplers.

But the magnetic feature does not quite live to the magnetic uncoupling feature.  The centering spring is too stiff for reliable magnetic uncoupling.