Re: Bachmann innovations.

Can you suggest a steam era (pre BR) wagon model that has an NEM height coupler pocket?

In article , Gregory Procter wrote: models)

(Phil Wrote:)

Phil wrote again: I already have 8-) - see above from Digital Starter Set

Aww Noooooo! are we going to start the DCC vs DC discussion again????

I just want ONE wagon, honest! Actually, one UK coupler to fit in one of my NEM pockets would be enough.

Regards. Greg.P.

All three pre-BR wagons in my digital freight starter set have NEM couplings and all are available separately but not necessarilly with the same markings. They are the five plank, seven plank and tank wagons. All are part of the Blue Ribband range. The BR ventilated van is also fitted with NEM couplings but not the 20ton brake van which probably needs them more than any of the others!

(kim)

I bought a three plank from the same range to make into a coupler conversion wagon. The NEM coupling I put in the pocket was too high and the Triang bed-head coupler from the wagon in a European wagon coupler pocket was down at rail level!

In message , Gregory Procter writes

If you look at the Bachmann NEM coupler pocket, you will see it is in two pieces which fit into one-another with a keystone-like fitting. Separate them (one piece is screwed to the chassis, the other is free to move) and stick a tiny piece of 40 thou plastikard on top of the removed piece. Replace it in the other part, insert the coupler into it, and you should find it is much nearer the correct height.

If you only stick the extra bit of plastic to one thing (the coupler pocket itself, or you could fix it to the underside of the chassis) the couple pocket is still free to swivel as it was originally.

If the two parts, after amendment this way, have a tendency to come apart, thenput a little bit of glue on the joint between them: this should stop them coming apart, but still allow the coupler to swivel.

I hope this is clear.

No, as you know, there were a few 'Ferry Wagons' which had brakemans cabins, I've no idea if the Lima was close to any of them.

Near enough to the correct 18.83mm I use, but coupler height is independent of gauge. Remarkably one of the NEM socket heights used by Bachmann puts an NEM shanked KD at the NMRA 00 height. This then couples nicely with their models of modern buckeye fitted stock which have the couplers at the prototypical height (they would look awful if it was altered). The pundits doing the reviews praise the modern wagons but pan the ones with NEM sockets as 'wrong' because they are not at the H0 standard.

In reality with no defined standard for 00 other than the nmra one, there is no right or wrong, just personal preference. Keith

Make friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.

Send me your mail address, I'll post you out a selection, since my first action with any new vehicle is to remove the UK couplings there are plenty in my junk box. Keith email snipped-for-privacy@dsl.pipex.com

Make friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.

Should be 10.5mm if installed correctly to the nmra H0 standard, 12mm to the nmra 00 standard (US prototype sets the couplers at 3ft.)

So why does 'switching country' require the stock of different countries and scales to couple together? But as I said before, no right or wrong just preferences.

Indeed but those are at the scale height, not the H0 height.

There is no MAY about it, the NEM sockets are at different heights on different models.

Exactly but you don't get two heights of KD NEM shank couplers so you have to ditch the NEM sockets on whichever is your non-preferred height.

That one fits the Mk1 coaches nicely and gives 12mm height.

Keith

Make friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.

For me it was at the height I want to start with, its the low ones, as on the BR 20t brake van that I need to raise, your method does not work for that. As I have mentioned elsewhere its this reference to 'correct height' I find irritating, for you perhaps but not for me and as there is no standard height specified for an NEM coupler pocket for 00 there is no such thing as correct, just personal preference. Keith

Make friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.

Same planet!

you work to two decimal points of a millimeter and then call 19mm near enough. ;-)

There really isn't a prototypical height for European buckeye couplers, with the exceptions of BR coaches and Russian railway stock. One thing that put me off Kadees for my European stock was having to cut into the buffer beam to mount the couplers - bye bye resale value! (pre NEM shanked Kadees)

I guess Bachmann is right to mount the pockets proportionately higher for 00, even in H0 they are something of an eyesore on many models. I was just hoping that they would be at H0 height because their advertising gave the impression that's how they would be.

A defined standard is needed! Both the NEM and NMRA have a habit of accepting proprietry practices as standards.

Regards, Greg.P.

Surely the British buckeye was mounted higher than that? AFAIK the center height was mid-height on the buffer beam 42" (14mm in 00 and 12.25mm in H0)

Phil: Ideally yes, it would seem best to mount them as oversize original buckeyes - BUT I don't run scale radii curves - I run a practical layout with 2FT min radii on mainlines, and some settrack radii in sidings to differentiate them. Neither do I have retractable buffers (although I retracted them on the Dapol/Hornby 6 wheel restaurant car!!!)

Therefore I have to accept, that as with the couplings they are replacing

- whether Peco/Hornby Dublo or Triang or Fleischmann or Roco etc that they require width to swing and this is best provided beneath the buffer beam - it still looks much better than the triang coupling!

I have used a mixture of Kadee 30 and 40 series 'draft gear boxes' - the

40 series (rectangular) also suits use of the Bachmann range of EZ couplings with integrated centreing springs (aided by the thin spacer from Kadee to remove slack).

Depending on wagon type, I use chassis or bogie mounting, and Under, centre, or Overshank as required. (sometimes also requiring spacers) The smaller draft gear box, even with the 'long' coupling unfortunately still comes into contact with the bottom of a buffer beam - especially when a gradient change is being allowed for (my layout is not a straight end to end static exhibition layout 8-) ) AND requires the screw through it for strength - making it heigher than the 40 series rectangular box.

This is where using the Kadee 20 is so useful - with a screw through it to replace a triang type (screw mounted) coupling. The correct / a workable height is achieved without any buffer beam loss.. if only I'd done more that way 8-)

As I said before, the Bachman NEM adapter is available (Apparently) in 2 heights, but I have only ever seen 1 height for it. (the other couplers are available in over.centre and under shank offsets)

However, it cannot be used as a direct replacement for the triang coupling because it has a 'fixed head' which, without the NEM pocket pivot, would cause problems on curves.

I will recheck my coupling heights - visavi the Bachmann Mk1s etc v the coupler height gauge - but think they are in tolerable limits (especially when that attempt at derailing - metal dropper is raised slightly - it works well even at greater clearances than Kadee say, and is less risky!

So I have accepted either thinning the buffer beam (as done on many original models, or when body-mounting, can cut a small section in the lower-centre area, below the 'hook'.

The result isn't 'scale', but is a working alternative, which offers operational benefits.

Another 108 couplings are in the post to me at the moment .. should be the last batch to achieve complete conversion (except preformed units)

My height results might vary slightly from som eothers because I have rewheeled ALL my Hornby /triang / Dapol / Lima stock with Hornby or Bachmann replacement wheel packs (which also allowed some wagons to be dropped to a better buffer beam height too)

No, the spreadsheet does that when you feed in 1435/76.2, I work to a track gauge that somebody made as accurately as they could, and there are tolerances, one of which is gauge widening which puts G max above

19mm. Mind you the nmra 00 flangeways will not be acceptable.

The modern buckeye fitted stock I referred to above are UK freight stock, most of the new construction now has buckeyes, as have many of the class 66 and 67 locos, largely from the Wisconsin Central Influence on EWS. And there are other pockets of buckeye use in Europe, Belgian EMUs for instance.

Hm, I don't recollect ever getting that impression from their ads, but its certainly what many people seem to want. And I agree with you that they are usually unsightly even on H0 stock. The problem comes IMHO from the European penchant for those corners so that the couplers have to be free to swing through a wide arc without fouling anything.

Oh, I dunno, if 00 had standards half the fun would go out of it. Keith Make friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.

Certainly was, that's another whole can of worms and why I did not mention the UK prototype above.

No the buckeyes were a couple of inches below that, as can be seen if you get a good end view, oddly I have yet to find a definitive measurement on any drawing. Buffer centre height was usually just under the 42" mark, most drawings show 3'5 1/4" or 3'5 1/2". I would put the buckeye centre between 3'3" and 3'4"

However when you are fitting KDs under coach gangways its not the centre height that matters its the height of the top of the coupler you have to go by to avoid interference. Magically with the KD being oversize even in 4mm scale you end up back at the nmra's 12mm for the centres. Keith

Make friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.

Agreed.

Anything looks better than the Triang coupling. Well, if we count Lima's plastic version as a "Triang coupler".

The one Bachmann 00 UK wagon I own has the too high NEM coupler box.

Have they gone with the US/Russian height or the BR coaching stock height?

It's better than putting the wide arc on the coupler itself, as with Triang!

LOL!

You could join the move to British H0.

Greg.P.

It's the only buckeye prototype I've been modelling.

I'm working in British H0 - the KDs are so far oversize and I have those sharp curves in my staging yard so it was never going to work. Even that final advantage of coaches being able to be lifted vertically out of a train (don't ask me why I would want to do that, I don't) doesn't exist with the couplers directly under the gangway.

Regards, Greg.P.

"Gregory Procter" <

While it's been since 1977 or so when I was last a volunteer at the Canadian Railway Museum, we could not couple to 60010 Dominion of Canada when switching (shunting) using the knuckle couplers, we always had to use a drawbar.

IIRC, the couplers roughly lined up, the UK one was definitely higher, but the two were incompatible, mainly due the UK knuckle being much smaller than the North American knuckle.

-- Cheers Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway