An N-Possible journal

[robert3985]

Hmmm…. I took another look at my E8s and am wondering if I should just glue the rear coupler on?

For me, drilling and tapping would require a fixture to ensure that I get straight holes.  (And complete disassembly of the mechanism to ensure I don’t end up with metal dust in unwanted places…)

Jim

Right off the bat, I don't think fabricating a fixture is going to be necessary because a "perfectly" vertical hole isn't necessary.

Of course, if the hole is REALLY off vertical, that could be problematic, but, a careful model builder shouldn't have a problem with a slightly off-perfectly vertical tapped hole since when the coupler box is tightened against the engine's metal chassis, or a spacer cut from a Styrene sheet, the flat surfaces will mate up since there's a bit of slop in the coupler's mounting hole and the resin is slightly flexible.

I don't think gluing would be a problem if done carefully provided a gluing spot the metal on the chassis is scuffed/scratched to provide added "tooth" for the glue to adhere to.  If a spacer is required to bring the coupler to its correct height, and it's thick enough, I'd consider gluing the spacer to the metal chassis with a permanent glue...5 minute epoxy being my preference, then drilling and tapping the mounting hole in the spacer...or just drilling and letting a metal screw self-tap in the soft Styrene.

Kato E8/E9 B-Units are similar on one end, but have a plastic adapter on the other because the metal chassis is an A-Unit piece, with the adapter built to fit the B-Unit body.  Still gonna need a spacer, but with the adapter, attachment is going to be different.  Haven't studied it sufficiently yet to come to any concrete conclusion on the best way to put a body mounted N-Possible on it yet.

I'll find out later today, as I'll be body mounting my first N-Possibles on Kato E8/E9 rears and B's this evening.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[Jimbo]

Right off the bat, I don't think fabricating a fixture is going to be necessary because a "perfectly" vertical hole isn't necessary.

Of course, if the hole is REALLY off vertical, that could be problematic, but, a careful model builder shouldn't have a problem with a slightly off-perfectly vertical tapped hole since when the coupler box is tightened against the engine's metal chassis, or a spacer cut from a Styrene sheet, the flat surfaces will mate up since there's a bit of slop in the coupler's mounting hole and the resin is slightly flexible.

I don't think gluing would be a problem if done carefully provided a gluing spot the metal on the chassis is scuffed/scratched to provide added "tooth" for the glue to adhere to.  If a spacer is required to bring the coupler to its correct height, and it's thick enough, I'd consider gluing the spacer to the metal chassis with a permanent glue...5 minute epoxy being my preference, then drilling and tapping the mounting hole in the spacer...or just drilling and letting a metal screw self-tap in the soft Styrene.

Kato E8/E9 B-Units are similar on one end, but have a plastic adapter on the other because the metal chassis is an A-Unit piece, with the adapter built to fit the B-Unit body.  Still gonna need a spacer, but with the adapter, attachment is going to be different.  Haven't studied it sufficiently yet to come to any concrete conclusion on the best way to put a body mounted N-Possible on it yet.

I'll find out later today, as I'll be body mounting my first N-Possibles on Kato E8/E9 rears and B's this evening.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

Awesome, Bob!  Thanks for the advice!  I’m eager to hear how it ultimately goes.

Jim

[PanAmShay]

Hi there.  I'm getting ready to install my first n-possible couplers.  If successful, these will be going on a variety of 4 passenger cars and a pair of FP9 locos.  I do not have access to a micro trains coupler height gauge and none in stock anywhere so I am planning to 3d print something (which will also allow testing without turning off track power).  Looking at the n-possible instructions, it looks like the bottom of the SBX box should be 4.45mm (.175")  from the top of the rails (7.1mm -2.65mm from their website link below).  Does 4.45mm (.175") match the distance from the bottom of the pocket to the top of the rails in the Microtrains 1055 coupler height gauge?  Any other considerations to be aware of?

https://www.n-possible.com/resources/sbx-assembly-instructions?lightbox=dataItem-mcxrjhnz

I didn't see an existing 3d file in a web search for a coupler height gauge with a pocket for a coupler.

I wasn't sure if this should be a separate topic or contained within this informative thread.

Thanks, Andrew

[samusi01]

I used 4.45mm for the one I did.



It seems to have been an acceptable height:





I did ask Andrew if he would mind if I uploaded it for modelers to download and print, but I've not yet gotten a response back.

[PanAmShay]

Sam,

Thank you for confirming the dims.  I modeled one up and have it printing now...

-Andrew

[James Costello]

With the plethora weathered Railboxes they've released lately, I was kinda surprised we haven't seen one of these before now.

This is a MTL 025-00 series boxcar (50' rib side boxcar, single door) that from memory has the redesigned underframe, and came equipped with body-mounted 1015s (pin-mounted, not screwed).

After tapping the existing hole, here's a SBX Medium Shank with top hat and supplied MTL trucks and wheels.



The box sits a hair inside the underframe and I'll wait and see how the pending* (any updates @turbowhiz ???) box variations look before doing anymore. I'm down to my last 4 pair of SBXs so I'll use them wisely until the wider range is available. I'd probably prefer the coupler box to be a bit more visible and it'll have to do a few laps around a layout to see if it would be better with a longer shank.

[PanAmShay]

Has anyone tried adding N-P to logging disconnects?  Running a string of 20 empty micro trains disconnects is a complete slinky!

[thumpernickle]

Are any of the new boxes available yet? I checked the N-Possible website and Pioneer Trains website, but all I see are the SBX and the UBX. Specifically, I am waiting for the KBX no lid and some other variations.

[jpwisc]

While I wait for the LBXs to arrive I figured I’d get a few of the recent additions to the layout set up correctly. I decided to do this as a two-for!
FVM FMC 5347 and the FVM PS5344.

They are very similar. I had to shave down the bolsters on both car to get the ride height right. I shaved .03” off the 5347 and .035” off the 5344. I did have to shave .15” off the bottom of the shell end on the 5347. After that, it was pretty straight forward. I used a SBX-201 with the top tip sanded off the box, screwed into the outer factory hole.
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[James Costello]

While I wait for the LBXs to arrive I figured I’d get a few of the recent additions to the layout set up correctly. I decided to do this as a two-for!
FVM FMC 5347 and the FVM PS5344.

Looking good @jpwisc - what's your truck / wheelset combo here Karl?