Athearn MDC tooling body mount couplers

[wcfn100]

At the NSE Convention, I suggested making the underframe available as a seperate part, and the Athearn rep made a note of it.  Thanks.

Next time suggest they make an actual undeframe, not a flat stamped piece of metal. 


Jason

[nkalanaga]

My suggestion, to any company that doesn't want to body-mount their couplers, is to provide a dimple  to mark the hole location for 1015/1025 couplers.  They both go 0.125 inches from the car end, so can use the same location, and it would be MUCH easier to locate the hole once, in the tooling, than for the purchaser to try to do it on every car. 

It wouldn't cost any extra, wouldn't change the appearance of the model, and wouldn't interfere with the truck-mounted couplers.  It wouldn't even have to be at the right height, as long as the floor was AT LEAST high enough.  Shims are easy to cut if the floor is a little too high.

[cjm413]

Next time suggest they make an actual undeframe, not a flat stamped piece of metal. 


Jason

Accurail HO underframes would be nice to have in N:

[C855B]

Accurail HO underframes would be nice to have in N:
...

HOWever... coupler boxes molded into the frame are evil. I'm changing the fleet to MTL TSC, and am starting to bang my head against the recent N offerings that do this, with their assumption that MTL Magne-Matics is what "everybody" uses. Bluford hoppers, for instance. Carving off cast-on boxes and removing enough material to get to proper coupler height is a major chore.

ExactRail did it right, with coupler boxes pinned, screwed and lightly glued to the frame. I pop those off with a #17 X-Acto, and a TSC short-shank box goes right on, at the right height. If I wanted to take the time to drill and tap a slightly offset mounting hole, the long-shank box (my preference) would also work there.

Fortunately it appears Athearn is using what appears to be an MTL 1015-sized box. That's OK, and drop-in for the TSC short-shank. If a long-shank fits with a little extra work, so much the better.

[cjm413]

HOWever... coupler boxes molded into the frame are evil. I'm changing the fleet to MTL TSC, and am starting to bang my head against the recent N offerings that do this, with their assumption that MTL Magne-Matics is what "everybody" uses. Bluford hoppers, for instance. Carving off cast-on boxes and removing enough material to get to proper coupler height is a major chore.

ExactRail did it right, with coupler boxes pinned, screwed and lightly glued to the frame. I pop those off with a #17 X-Acto, and a TSC short-shank box goes right on, at the right height. If I wanted to take the time to drill and tap a slightly offset mounting hole, the long-shank box (my preference) would also work there.

Fortunately it appears Athearn is using what appears to be an MTL 1015-sized box. That's OK, and drop-in for the TSC short-shank. If a long-shank fits with a little extra work, so much the better.

One of the best things about the Accurail underframe isn't apparent from the photo - they can actually be purchased.

http://www.accurail.com/accurail/parts.htm

Leaving off the coupler boxes in favor of a provision to add a separate coupler box would be an improvement, whether for MTL TSC or cars that need extended draft gear.

[peteski]

HOWever... coupler boxes molded into the frame are evil. I'm changing the fleet to MTL TSC, and am starting to bang my head against the recent N offerings that do this, with their assumption that MTL Magne-Matics is what "everybody" uses. Bluford hoppers, for instance.

ExactRail did it right, with coupler boxes pinned, screwed and lightly glued to the frame. I pop those off with a #17 X-Acto, and a TSC short-shank box goes right on, at the right height. If I wanted to take the time to drill and tap a slightly offset mounting hole, the long-shank box (my preference) would also work there.

Well, the MTL N-Scale couplers have been (and are) the de-facto replacement couplers for majority of modelers.  Besides, what other alternatives are out there, available to be purchased in large quantities and varieties of the MTL standard coupler?

In the defense if of those manufacturers who make the coupler boxes you don't care for, those  models were almost certainly designed before TSC was even mentioned, so they couldn't even consider it.  Plus, lets be honest, whatis the precentage of modelers using TSC exclusively as sompared to standard MTL N and Z couplers?

I like what Scale Trains did on the Big Blow models - the coupler box is made in a way which is compatible with their couplers and will also directly accept the MTL N scale couplers.

[C855B]

... In the defense if of those manufacturers who make the coupler boxes you don't care for, those  models were almost certainly designed before TSC was even mentioned, so they couldn't even consider it. ...

That's the obvious, Pete. But they could have easily incorporated 1015s as the default box. My beef amounts to pre-selecting a single option for you, any future (or even current!) alternatives be damned. Cutting off truck-mounted couplers is a piece of cake, carving off molded-on coupler boxes because it was decided for you that if you want body mount, here you go, but it's MTL legacy or nothing, is, well, a load of crap.

Same applies to the Turbines. What it takes to retrofit TSC to their mount is nuts. Maybe Joe is addressing this... I hope. I'll hold these difficult conversions until hearing yea/nay on a wider range of box or mounting options.