Exactrail has a new Draft Box coming

[wazzou]

Isn't the use of the spring really only to return the coupler face to center?

[inkaneer]

I think you have to eliminate the energy storage/transfer.   Anything with a spring will always resonate under the right loading/friction conditions.

Ed

The old MT solution was to add a spring on one axle to create enough drag to cancel the oscillation.   Hard part was trying to determnine which car had the axle spring.   Easy enough if you ran cabooses but for modern stuff with no caboose, not so easy.  However, there was a guy at the Bedford, PA show in August who had a patent pending on a F.R.E.D. or E.O.T. device, whichever you prefer, that was self contained in the truck.  It operated off of track power and due to the necessary electrical contacts with the wheels placed enough drag on the truck to cancel  the oscillation.  I got two myself before he sold out his stock.   

[up1950s]

Make the couplers out of steel and a magnet or more in the box to center the two halves of the coupler . This way the hole is no longer needed to be oblong . Side benefit is natural rust , and a side disaster is natural rust .

[ednadolski]

The old MT solution was to add a spring on one axle to create enough drag to cancel the oscillation.

It's a limited solution at best.  For moving long trains up stiff grades, more drag is the last thing I want.   And with DPUs, you'd need more than one rigged car.  Not to mention that adding drag is counterproductive to the whole idea of high-quality, free rolling wheelsets. 

Ed

[lock4244]

I think you have to eliminate the energy storage/transfer.   Anything with a spring will always resonate under the right loading/friction conditions.

Ed

I was being tongue and cheek... I meant an actual miniature hydraulic cushioning, fluid and all 

How much do we covet the delayed action feature of the MT coupler?

[inkaneer]

It's a limited solution at best.  For moving long trains up stiff grades, more drag is the last thing I want.   And with DPUs, you'd need more than one rigged car.  Not to mention that adding drag is counterproductive to the whole idea of high-quality, free rolling wheelsets. 

Ed

Sure it's a limited solution but is there a better one available?  Accumates don't have the oscillation but are beset with their own problems  McHenry's [remember them?] seem to have dropped off the edge of the earth.  As for the Concor, MDC,  Bachmann and whatever else there is in the way of couplers the less said about them the better.   As for the 'drag' it is not that much  but for the average layout  it does do the job quite nicely.   By the way how many cars are you pulling to require DPU's? 

[Robbman]

A miniature hydraulic cushioning device will solve the slinky effect.

The BLMA cars do have the hydraulic cushioning cylinder molded in the underframe... it doesn't work though (but hey... it's there!).

[GaryHinshaw]

I can't remember what ER has announced lately - did they switch to MT couplers now?  In any case, I can't get too excited about a new box without a new coupler to go with it.  When are we going to see BOTH in one new package? 

The Full Throttle Z scale coupler really does have everything many of us crave.  If something like it were made with a quasi-universal draft gear box and marketed to N scalers it would be awesome.

-gfh

P.S. Note to Ed N. - I know I'm holding up our own draft gear project.... 

[Brakie]

Sure it's a limited solution but is there a better one available?  Accumates don't have the oscillation but are beset with their own problems  McHenry's [remember them?] seem to have dropped off the edge of the earth.  As for the Concor, MDC,  Bachmann and whatever else there is in the way of couplers the less said about them the better.   As for the 'drag' it is not that much  but for the average layout  it does do the job quite nicely.   By the way how many cars are you pulling to require DPU's?

I use the Atlas Accumate and that helps end the slinky effect..

I prefer the Accumate over the MT because of the slinky action of the MT-nothing kills realism like the last car or two slinking along their way at slow switching speeds.

Then I haven't changed out the Athearn McHenry coupler with the knuckle spring either.

MT needs to improve their coupler design..

[lock4244]

I have always hated the slinky, yet found that the MT couplers are by far the most reliable in terms of operation... too many random uncouplings from the Accumates (no operational experience with McH couplers).

[bbussey]

MT needs to improve their coupler design..

It's true that a non-oscillating design would be welcome.  One thing to remember though - after 40 years of the current design, which has become the de-facto standard, it will be very expensive for most people to upgrade their existing fleet of equipment.

I run in eras that had cabooses, so I've added two axle springs diagonally opposite to each caboose and throw another engine on the point if necessary.  Nearly all of my passenger equipment has ALM diaphragms, which keep the springs honest.  And motive power that is always MU'd have second-generation Accu-Mate or Kato couplers, or drawbars, between the units.

[bbussey]

There also seems to be less oscillation on cars that have metal wheels and axles, which roll better with less friction than plastic ones.

[inkaneer]

I use the Atlas Accumate and that helps end the slinky effect..

I prefer the Accumate over the MT because of the slinky action of the MT-nothing kills realism like the last car or two slinking along their way at slow switching speeds.

Then I haven't changed out the Athearn McHenry coupler with the knuckle spring either.

MT needs to improve their coupler design..

In addition to losing trip pins the Accumates simply will not hold together in a long train.   Then there is the 10 foot coupling distance.   20 -25 cars is the usual limit for Accumates.   Meanwhile I have seen as many as 143 cars with Mt's.   So while the oscillation does occur there are simple solutions to it.  And that is the key.   Mt's problem can be easily solved.  Accumates problems can't.  No, your cars will not yoyo back and forth they will just stay 10 feet apart.   

[MichaelWinicki]

I don't think it's the Accumate couplers themselves that are the issue, but the coupler box.

I remember someone smarter than I saying the best combination was the Accumate coupler in a MT box.

[MichaelWinicki]

In addition to losing trip pins the Accumates simply will not hold together in a long train.   Then there is the 10 foot coupling distance.   20 -25 cars is the usual limit for Accumates.   Meanwhile I have seen as many as 143 cars with Mt's.   So while the oscillation does occur there are simple solutions to it.  And that is the key.   Mt's problem can be easily solved.  Accumates problems can't.  No, your cars will not yoyo back and forth they will just stay 10 feet apart.

I do 25-30 car freights all the time with Accumates, there's even a slight grade involved and I don't have any issues.  You maybe correct on freights longer than that.  Probably just a small portion that run freights longer than 30 cars.

The McHenry's... My experience hasn't been good.  That darned little spring along the knuckle of the couple will come off without much provocation it seems.