Truck vs Body Mounted

[inkaneer]

I have heard that body mounts are better than truck mounts for backing cars.  I am not too sure about that as I have seen Ntrak clubs back an entire train of 40-60 cars equipped with truck mounted couplers into a siding.  Other things come into play here such as rolling characteristics of the cars and how sharp the turnouts or curves are.  Body mounts are not a cure all even on the prototype as experiments on the PRR with an electric engine nicknamed "Big Liz" showed. 

Truck mounted couplers were more of an issue in HO with the old X2f truck mounted coupler.   It did not exist to any degree in N Scale with the Rapido coupler.  It has resurfaced in N scale due to the design of the MTL coupler.  Whether the McHenry coupler will be an improvement remains to be seen.  On the plus side, one advantage of the truck mounted coupler is that all couplers are the same height.  Its automatic assuming the wheel diameter is all the same [probably why MTL does not make a 36" wheelset].  With body mounting the coupler height will vary requiring the use of spacers.

I guess the big question to ask oneself is how many cars do I expect to back at any given time.   Trains on most layouts don't pull more than 25 cars.  How many of them are you going to push into a siding at one time.  How many people have sidings capable of handling 25 cars? 

[bbussey]

Body mounts are better than truck mounts for pushing a train.  This doesn't mean it's impossible to push a truck-mounted-coupler-equipped consist - it just means it's better and easier to do with body-mounted couplers.

Whether the issue was as prevalent or not with Rapido couplers is irrelevant.  People running long consists today are not operating with Rapido couplers.

Disadvantages of truck-mounted couplers (aside from pushing consists) include equipment standing ridiculously high over the rails as well as compromised detail on the ends of the car to allow for unprototypical coupler swing.  It also prevents the use of different diameter wheels that would be more prototypical for the model.  And, Micro-Trains is introducing a 36" wheel this coming month on the heavyweight car.

The big question is not how many cars you can back up ... it is, do you want your models to look like the prototype or look like toys?  I like my flatcars low to the ground where they belong, not riding as if they are on stilts.

[inkaneer]

Body mounts are better than truck mounts for pushing a train.  This doesn't mean it's impossible to push a truck-mounted-coupler-equipped consist - it just means it's better and easier to do with body-mounted couplers.

Whether the issue was as prevalent or not with Rapido couplers is irrelevant.  People running long consists today are not operating with Rapido couplers.

Disadvantages of truck-mounted couplers (aside from pushing consists) include equipment standing ridiculously high over the rails as well as compromised detail on the ends of the car to allow for unprototypical coupler swing.  It also prevents the use of different diameter wheels that would be more prototypical for the model.  And, Micro-Trains is introducing a 36" wheel this coming month on the heavyweight car.

The big question is not how many cars you can back up ... it is, do you want your models to look like the prototype or look like toys?  I like my flatcars low to the ground where they belong, not riding as if they are on stilts.

What's with the antagonism???  If you want to body mount then fine but like I said I have seen Ntrakkers back entire trains into sidings with truck mounted couplers.  You say its better and easier with body mounts but someone else may say it takes more skill with truck mounted ones.  I say Model Railroad Rule # 1 applies here.

[oakcreekco]

And this is where the "Pizza Cutters" can make a difference, and why a lot of folks and clubs still use them.................even with so called "good" trackwork.

They're just little trains getting shoved back and forth, and we want them to stay on the tracks ;D

Gotta run and duck now

[Mark5]

What we need are magnetic wheelsets and steel rails, yeah!

(Lionel was a pioneer in this!)

[bbussey]

What's with the antagonism???  If you want to body mount then fine but like I said I have seen Ntrakkers back entire trains into sidings with truck mounted couplers.  You say its better and easier with body mounts but someone else may say it takes more skill with truck mounted ones.  I say Model Railroad Rule # 1 applies here.

What antagonism?  Just providing the rebuttal to your somewhat absolute statement. 

[inkaneer]

What's with the antagonism???  If you want to body mount then fine but like I said I have seen Ntrakkers back entire trains into sidings with truck mounted couplers.  You say its better and easier with body mounts but someone else may say it takes more skill with truck mounted ones.  I say Model Railroad Rule # 1 applies here.

What antagonism?  Just providing the rebuttal to your somewhat absolute statement. 

"...somewhat absolute...", is that an oxymoron? 

[wm3798]

No, but making declarations about what "most people" do on a forum that pretty regularly challenges manufacturers to do better, and espouses taking one's modeling efforts to the next level is a bit of a nonsequiter.  Not trying to sound all rivet county or snobular, but there are different motivations and dare I say outcomes with the audience here.

Also, Bryan is a manufacturer who is pretty clear in what his objectives are, based on the models he produces.  This isn't the same as some ivory tower type that lobs grenades then never shows his own work.

Rule One is certainly fine, but I dare say that with many of the participants here, Job One is making things better when you can, and striving for improvement both in the skills of the modelers, and quality of the products.

I think I speak for more than a few of the regulars here when I say that "good enough" isn't good enough when there are simple (or in the case of David K Smith, damn near superhuman) things you can do to build and operate better looking, better running scale railroad models.

Lee

[inkaneer]

No, but making declarations about what "most people" do on a forum that pretty regularly challenges manufacturers to do better, and espouses taking one's modeling efforts to the next level is a bit of a nonsequiter.  Not trying to sound all rivet county or snobular, but there are different motivations and dare I say outcomes with the audience here.

Also, Bryan is a manufacturer who is pretty clear in what his objectives are, based on the models he produces.  This isn't the same as some ivory tower type that lobs grenades then never shows his own work.

Rule One is certainly fine, but I dare say that with many of the participants here, Job One is making things better when you can, and striving for improvement both in the skills of the modelers, and quality of the products.

I think I speak for more than a few of the regulars here when I say that "good enough" isn't good enough when there are simple (or in the case of David K Smith, damn near superhuman) things you can do to build and operate better looking, better running scale railroad models.

Lee

Pardon me if I intruded on your mutual admiration society.  But who are you, or anyone else for that matter, to say what job one is on anything but your own model railroad?  You may control your own efforts but you are not the N scale police.  It is the height of snobbery to tell others that the level at which they participate in this hobby is not good enough, that they have to "strive for improvement".  Suppose someone wants to run hi profile flanges and Rapidos on C80 track and control everything with a DC power pack and could care less about body mounted couplers.  Are you going to tell them they need to "strive for provement" to your supposedly lofty level?  Like I said before, Model Railroad Rule #1 applies.

[Sokramiketes]

Pardon me if I intruded on your mutual admiration society.  But who are you, or anyone else for that matter, to say what job one is on anything but your own model railroad?  You may control your own efforts but you are not the N scale police.  It is the height of snobbery to tell others that the level at which they participate in this hobby is not good enough, that they have to "strive for improvement".  Suppose someone wants to run hi profile flanges and Rapidos on C80 track and control everything with a DC power pack and could care less about body mounted couplers.  Are you going to tell them they need to "strive for provement" to your supposedly lofty level?  Like I said before, Model Railroad Rule #1 applies.

I think someone wrote an interesting Observations column in this month's NSR addressing this, something like some people like the good stress of pushing themselves in this hobby, and some people just use the hobby to defeat bad stress from the rest of their lives.  Nowhere did Lee say, "drink the kool-aid".  Rather, he was pointing out that this particular group (Railwire) tends to lean away from the end of the spectrum (Cd 80 pizza cutter) that you're talking about. If that's your thing, no body here will likely hold it against you.

Complaining about the group here striving for improvement when others are happy with truck mounted couplers is a little like being a White Sox fan and going to Wrigley Field and wondering why you can't find anyone else to talk about how good the Sox are...  There are other forums out there for finding like-minded modelers if that's your thing.

[Sokramiketes]

I have heard that body mounts are better than truck mounts for backing cars.  I am not too sure about that as I have seen Ntrak clubs back an entire train of 40-60 cars equipped with truck mounted couplers into a siding.  Other things come into play here such as rolling characteristics of the cars and how sharp the turnouts or curves are.  Body mounts are not a cure all even on the prototype as experiments on the PRR with an electric engine nicknamed "Big Liz" showed. 

All your standards need to work together.  One proven formula is Cd 80 track, Pizza cutters, and truck mounted MTL's.  This works great on light cars, and has been proven on plenty an Ntrak layout.  I've run long trains on Ntrak in the past with this formula, and haven't even noticed till halfway through the weekend that some connecting track rails arn't even in the rail joiners!

There is another formula that can be just as effective with great running characteristics but have improved appearance as well.  Body mounted couplers, Cd 55 track, handlaid turnouts, and NMRA weighted cars.  Unfortunantly, if you leave out one of those features, or start mixing and matching, then things can get ugly.

Look at what Lee had to do on the heavier Atlas hoppers, truck mounted stopped working because something changed... the weight.  Some people report problems when they start mixing truck mounted couplers with body mounts... things change.  The key to success is to pick a "Standard" and roll with it.

[Dave V]

At this stage in the game it just seems like purely financial reasons as to why we don't see the big manufacturers body-mounting couplers.  Too many MicroTrains and Atlas trucks have been tooled up with couplers attached.  It is a crying shame that the manufacturing standard is still truck-mounted in 2009.  For every 9 3/4" table top guy there has to be at least one or two that take advantage of N scale's ability to support much broader curves in an HO space.

As for performing the procedure post-consumer, I'm not about to do it any time soon.  I agree to some extent with what's been said about pushing the envelope and about not being satisfied with a stagnant level of skill, although I don't believe in heaping on the peer pressure to shame others into doing what I do.  BUT, I have a long list of projects on my model railroad, from new signals to replacing all the track with code 55 to replacing the trees with Super Trees which, in my opinion, will have a much more immediate impact on realism than body-mounting the couplers.  When all that is done, then just maybe I will.

[One of One-Sixty]

I think what Lee is talking about is there is a lot if not all of the modelers here strive to take their skills one step further.  Also if we just settle for just okay than the N Scale segment of this hobby will not flourish at all if any.  And the fact that we are pushing ourselves and trying to push the envelope, means that the manufacturesneed to push themselves as well, or somebody else will come in and do what they wont.  

Look at Exact Rail, BLMA and all the other small companies that are doing well producing models that the big guys say they wont for whatever reason (mainly there is no demand or its not great enough).  

Between this forum and a site I found a few months ago, I have been pushed and now am trying to kitbash my own with the intent of eventually scratchbuilding them as well.

The reason why I asked my original question is for three main reasons, one for the past several years (seems like forever) I have been researching several commuter passenger cars with the intent of producing them that nobody else will touch, that I feel there is a market for.  From what i seen there is a mix of both truck and body mounted couplers for freight while the passenger segment of the rolling stock is 99% truck mounted.  And from what I gather is because even though passenger cars look better coupled close together it would limited what could be used for trackage especially in terminal areas where there is many tight switches and turn sometimes.  Please correct me if I am wrong.  Majority of the passenger cars that have body mounted couplers are special trains like the TGVs and Bullet trains.

Second is for my own rolling stock of of both freight and passenger cars, that I am now slowly rebuilding after loosing everything.

Third is for my own knowledge, because as much as I like to watch trains, look at trains and run them, I know basically diddly squat about them.  So in order educate myself and bring my skill sets up as well as the level of realism to my eventual layout and to the trains I run I asked the question.

Now everybody has their own opinion and that is fine, but what i will do is take everything that is being said here, and what everybody should do is weigh it against what they believe, and if it is something that they live with or even make into their own than do it.

Lets be civil and not get out of hand and respect everybody's own opinion and beliefs as we are all here to bask in each others company and learn from one another.  Lets not turn this into another thread that will get out of hand kinda like the one about N-Trak that got lock.  I will say this I did learn a lot from that thread.  So please lets keep it informational and not start criticizing someone because they feel differently then you on this topic or any future topic that will be brought up that can be deem controversial.

[inkaneer]

The aura of snobbery abounds in human endeavors and railroad modelling has its share. One has to be careful of the circular reasoning process that concludes that my way of doing things is the correct way because it is the way I do things.  In our quest to "...strive for improvement..." where do we draw the lines for modeling improvement?   You may have all your cars equipped with body mounted couplers, low profile metal wheels that run on C55 track with correct tie spacing all pulled by sound equipped locomotives controlled by a radio DCC system yet your layout has structures made from kits that you and a gazillion other modellers have.  What of the modeller who has no structure kits on his layout but built every structure from scratch and what's more, every structure modelled was once situated in his home town right down to the house where he lived.  Who is to say that person has to "strive for improvement" because he uses hi profile flanged plastic wheels and truck mounted couplers running DC on C 80 track.  Not me!     

[One of One-Sixty]

The aura of snobbery abounds in human endeavors and railroad modelling has its share. One has to be careful of the circular reasoning process that concludes that my way of doing things is the correct way because it is the way I do things.  In our quest to "...strive for improvement..." where do we draw the lines for modeling improvement?   You may have all your cars equipped with body mounted couplers, low profile metal wheels that run on C55 track with correct tie spacing all pulled by sound equipped locomotives controlled by a radio DCC system yet your layout has structures made from kits that you and a gazillion other modellers have.  What of the modeller who has no structure kits on his layout but built every structure from scratch and what's more, every structure modelled was once situated in his home town right down to the house where he lived.  Who is to say that person has to "strive for improvement" because he uses hi profile flanged plastic wheels and truck mounted couplers running DC on C 80 track.  Not me!     

But that person has strived for improvement, as he/she is pushing their limit and is not just settling for that standard Bachmann Girard Trust Bank (which BTW was based on a real bank in Phila), or Kate's Colonial House.

Everybody's goal is different, and that is what makes everybody's layout unique and stands out, no matter if they are C55 with DCC and the whole 9 yards or they are using Kato Unitrack with nothing but scratchbuilt building.  Hey I am using Unitrack and Tomix Mini Rail for my trolleys and LRVs.