MTL coupler conversion for Bachmann NW2?

[peteski]

Friend of mine asked what is the best (easiest?)  way to convert the "boxing glove" Bachmann coupler to a Micro-Trains coupler.  I don't own that loco so I  have no first-hand experience.

The photos of this model in Spookshow's review don't give me a view good enough to give an educated guess on how to convert it.



In that photo I can't really tell if the coupler assembly (including the coupler pocket) is separate from the shell, or if the top part of the coupler pocket is molded with the shell (like it was done on the 44-tonner).  If the top part is molded with the shell then one possible way to convert it to MTL would be using the method I described in my 44-tonner thread:  https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=32605.0 .
But that conversion is a bit fiddly (since the MTL coupler pocket's post has to be accurately removed, and it is not easy to reassemble everything).

I searched the forum but didn't find any info on a conversion. Hopefully someone has done one of these conversions, and their method is simpler than what I used on the 44-tonner.

[milw12]

Pete, it just so happened that I had one sitting near my desk 

It looks similar to what you describe for the 44-tonner (which I do not own):



I can't help with the second part, I have no need for a coupler conversion because the mech is due to be donated to a SW unit, but I hope this is helpful.

-Lucas

[craigolio1]

Looks like maybe you could use a 1015/16 coupler in the mounded box.

Craig

[peteski]

Looks like maybe you could use a 1015/16 coupler in the mounded box.

Craig

But the Bachmann box doesn't have the slot/opening for the post in the MTL coupler' shank which is used for centering the coupler.  That is why I modified the MTL coupler box to fit in the opening when I did the install in my 44-tonner.  I was hoping that someone who actually converted this model to MTL would chime in here.

 The 44-tonner had very little clearance between the back of the coupler box and the truck frame, so I had to keep that in mind when I converted it to MTL.  But the NW2 seems to have more clearance there,. I wonder if just removing the Bachmann bits, cutting off the Bachmann post, drilling deeper hole for the screw, and installing a 1023/1025 coupler would work? That would be fairly simple conversion.

[daniel_leavitt2000]

This is one of the few cases where Accumate couplers work best. They are a drop in fit for Bachmann's integrated coupler pocket.

The other option would be to drill a shallow hole where the MTL cutouts would go.

[peteski]

This is one of the few cases where Accumate couplers work best. They are a drop in fit for Bachmann's integrated coupler pocket.

The other option would be to drill a shallow hole where the MTL cutouts would go.

Yes, due to the Bachmann's coupler design I expect Accumate and McHenry couplers to be pretty much a drop-in fit, but the request is specifically for converting it to MTL coupler and as easy as possible.

[SP-Wolf]

But the Bachmann box doesn't have the slot/opening for the post in the MTL coupler' shank which is used for centering the coupler.  That is why I modified the MTL coupler box to fit in the opening when I did the install in my 44-tonner.  I was hoping that someone who actually converted this model to MTL would chime in here.

 The 44-tonner had very little clearance between the back of the coupler box and the truck frame, so I had to keep that in mind when I converted it to MTL.  But the NW2 seems to have more clearance there,. I wonder if just removing the Bachmann bits, cutting off the Bachmann post, drilling deeper hole for the screw, and installing a 1023/1025 coupler would work? That would be fairly simple conversion.

I think you have pretty much answered your own question. As you know, this not an "easy" drop in conversion. But, it's not difficult either. You have to remove the post and clearance the sides of the pocket. You can use either the 1015 or 1025 (I used the 1015's).

So -- rock on.

Wolf

[peteski]

I think you have pretty much answered your own question. As you know, this not an "easy" drop in conversion. But, it's not difficult either. You have to remove the post and clearance the sides of the pocket. You can use either the 1015 or 1025 (I used the 1015's).

So -- rock on.

Wolf

What worries me is the couple height.  In my 44-tonner conversion I had to use an offset-shank coupler to have the coupler at the proper height.

[SP-Wolf]

What worries me is the couple height.  In my 44-tonner conversion I had to use an offset-shank coupler to have the coupler at the proper height.

True -- I did sand the top of the 1015's to get them to the proper height. Again - not a big deal.
(Just to clarify -- I did this on my Bachmann S-4's). It does look like there is more room on the NW-2's. For my 44 tonners, I used the couplers from MT streamlined passenger trucks. I cut the mounting tab off and used UV adhesive.

The S-4s:


The 44 tonners - sorry for the dark phot - however, you can see how close they couple.


Wolf

[peteski]

Thanks Wolf.  Looks like there is no plug-and-play solution for these models - some modifications are required.
The passenger truck coupler you used on the 44-tonner, is that the one with very shallow coupler box and a split T-shank coupler?

This all makes me wish that MTL came out with a new coupler which would use same type of shank design as Accumate.  That one could be easily retrofitted into Accumate, McHenry, and Bachmann coupler boxes. Plug-and-play baby!  And no slinky effect!  That would make many modelers happy.

[thomasjmdavis]

This all makes me wish that MTL came out with a new coupler which would use same type of shank design as Accumate.  That one could be easily retrofitted into Accumate, McHenry, and Bachmann coupler boxes. Plug-and-play baby!  And no slinky effect!  That would make many modelers happy.

But... can they do that AND make it uncouple via magnet?  If it does not, would it be any different than an Accumate?

[SP-Wolf]

Thanks Wolf.  Looks like there is no plug-and-play solution for these models - some modifications are required.
The passenger truck coupler you used on the 44-tonner, is that the one with very shallow coupler box and a split T-shank coupler?

This all makes me wish that MTL came out with a new coupler which would use same type of shank design as Accumate.  That one could be easily retrofitted into Accumate, McHenry, and Bachmann coupler boxes. Plug-and-play baby!  And no slinky effect!  That would make many modelers happy.

You are very welcome!!

"The passenger truck coupler you used on the 44-tonner, is that the one with very shallow coupler box and a split T-shank coupler?" - Yeah - that's the one.

On your other sentiment - I agree - that would be outstanding.

Wolf

[peteski]

But... can they do that AND make it uncouple via magnet?  If it does not, would it be any different than an Accumate?

Accumate is supposed to be capable of magnetic uncoupling, but in my experience its plastic centering whiskers are a bit too stiff.  If MTL could come up with a way to mold thinner and more flexible plastic whiskers, it would reliable uncouple over a magnet.  If they made it the size of their Z scale couplers, that would be even better.  And then there is the visual appearance of Accumates - to me it looks really weird.  Sort of robotic, where the MTL coupler at least has a faint resemblance to the actual AAR knuckle couplers. 

[daniel_leavitt2000]

This all makes me wish that MTL came out with a new coupler which would use same type of shank design as Accumate.  That one could be easily retrofitted into Accumate, McHenry, and Bachmann coupler boxes. Plug-and-play baby!  And no slinky effect!  That would make many modelers happy.

Intermountain makes MTL-like couplers without the need for metal springs. These come with their 100T truck equipped Trinity hoppers. The trucks look like they have an integrated 1015 box (complete with cut outs for MTL shanks) but the coupler itself has an MTL knuckle and Accumate spring-less shank. They work well from my experience. I have been trying to order more.

[peteski]

Intermountain makes MTL-like couplers without the need for metal springs. These come with their 100T truck equipped Trinity hoppers. The trucks look like they have an integrated 1015 box (complete with cut outs for MTL shanks) but the coupler itself has an MTL knuckle and Accumate spring-less shank. They work well from my experience. I have been trying to order more.

Good to know - thanks. Do they use split-shank (like Accumates)?  When you say that they work well, does that also include hands-free uncoupling over a magnet?
 I'm not  planning on buying any of those cars - would it be possible for you to post few photos of them (both assembled and disassembled?

IM has in the past made clones of the MTL coupler (and used them in their Cab Forward models, while stating that they are the genuine MTL couplers).  So I guess it's natural for them to produce another variation of the coupler.

The point is that if MTL produced this type of a coupler (and it worked well), they would be easy to obtain, since after all, MTL is in the business of making and selling couplers (and fantasy paint scheme cars).