Trix

The concept with model railroading isn't to model a railroad with Trix cars and locos ro some other manufacturer's equipment but rather to model a railroad witht the models that are available. With the exception of some euroopean makers of toy trains, most of the equipment is designed to work together through the demands of the NMRA's specs on various parts of the model. As such, the various makers equipment should all run together, especially if you modify the wheels and couplers to a standard that you set.

-- Why do penguins walk so far to get to their nesting grounds?

Hi Bob,

I don't believe that you can alter the coupler assembly. The Trix cars use [require] an elevated Kadee coupler assembly to match the NMRA height requirement. It works perfectly, but it certainly looks odd and obvious. It is not a straight shank.

I am wondering how people feel about that unusual coupler *look*. Do others feel that the modified Kadee coupler assembly used by Trix is much too different from anything used on the prototype.

Thanks! Matt

Cut and file off the Trix coupler mess, glue a plastic pad of the right thickness in place, and mount a standard KD or McHenry coupler. Terry Thomosn showed how in a Step-bystep article in MR about a year ago. (He didn't like the differences between the Trix caboose and the BYC prototype.)

It's a pity Marklin didn't design a correct (NMRA standard and RP) coupler mounting, but I suppose they thought they were improving on the standard designs. Marklin has habit of assuming they know better than other people. :-)

HTH

That was Jim Hediger in the Feb '05 MR. He used a #44 coupler and coupler box, with the underset shank.

Hi Bob,

Did it look like a simple Kadee #5 attached to a Kadee boxcar, or did it still look odd? I don't have the issue. I haven't seen a Trix car in person to see excatly what is involved underneath nor how Jim's end result would look.

Thanks!

Sorry, my error - I have a lousy memory for names.

KD numbers their couplers according to shank length, mounting method, and position of the coupler head. A #44 has a 1/4" underset shank - that is, the shank is below the centreline of the knuckle. That's because without futher surgery, the mounting surface for the coupler box is too low. Otherwise, it looks just like #5.

If you want a centered knuckle, you can cut and file the body, so that the box is mounted higher. This will maintain the correct height above rail for the carbody. Or you can add a washer to the bolster, so the car rides higher on the truck, which may upset you if you want correct height above rail. KD sells two thicknesses of washer to make the latter option easier.

HTH

Nope, Wolf's right. It was Terry. He *DOES* occaisionally do something at the magazine.

"HO NYC wood caboose captures its prototype Model Railroader, February 2005 page 104 Trix Trains ( CABOOSE, NYC, REVIEW, "THOMPSON, TERRY", TRIX, HO, MR )

Eric

Um, Eric, thanks for defending me, but the review wasn't what I had in mind. There was a two-pager on modifying the Trix caboose to bring it up to near-nitpicking standards. Nice work, actually.

HTH

And the two-pager "Easy upgrades improve a Trix NYC caboose" was written by Terry thompson and printed in Jim Hediger's "Workshop" column on pages 28 and 30 of the same issue. So--Everybody can be right.