What kind of Micro-trains coupler is this

[Southern1970]

Hi all,

I received an atlas boxcar which a previous user has installed body mounted couplers.  I’ve previously installed 1015, 1016 and 2004 micro-trains couplers but haven’t seen these before.  If someone know what kind these are, can you please let me know as I would like to purchase some.



Cheers
Allan

[Chris333]

Looks like 1025.

[nickelplate759]

It's a standard 1025 in brown. Product Code: 001 02 012
https://www.micro-trains.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=63_109&product_id=330

[nkalanaga]

That is the original Kadee N coupler from the late 1960s.  Originally called an MT-5 (or MT-3 preassembled), it was renumbered 1025 after a few years.  They're still my favorite couplers, mostly because they pretty well match the thickness of the center sill on most cars, instead of having a huge lump like the 1015 case.  Many people don't like them because of the way the spring can react when pulled.

It was an offshoot of their HOn3 coupler, which, as far as I know, was the first split-shank coupler made.  Some HOn3 modelers use the N couplers, and they work quite well with the HOn3 versions. 

The coupler itself is identical to the one in MT's truck-mounted couplers.  If you have a lot of those, and want to body mount them, MT will sell just the draft gear cases, in brown or black.  I bought 500 pair several years ago.

[peteski]

That is the original Kadee N coupler from the late 1960s.  Originally called an MT-5 (or MT-3 preassembled), it was renumbered 1025 after a few years.  They're still my favorite couplers, mostly because they pretty well match the thickness of the center sill on most cars, instead of having a huge lump like the 1015 case.  Many people don't like them because of the way the spring can react when pulled.

The funny thing is that regardless of the shank design (whether the spring is ahead or behind of the pivot post in the coupler box), the coupler will be prone to "slinking".

[Southern1970]

Thank you all,

Appreciate the info.

Cheers
Allan

[nkalanaga]

Peteski:  Very true, which is one (minor) reason I stick with the 1025s.  Going to the now-popular 1015s wouldn't make any difference, and I'd need to learn a whole new set of tricks.

I've found that "slink" is lessened by having either free-rolling cars and smooth-running locomotives, so there's no "jerkiness", or having poorly-rolling cars, so there's enough drag that the springs stay stretched.  That may be why the issue wasn't a big problem in the early years - the cars didn't roll well enough!