New N Scale Coupler Announced! NZT

[Brakie]

Obviously, there should be an adapter that provides for use in the standard pilot box most locomotive manufacturers are using.

Lee

I agree Lee..That should be a must.

-----------------------
David,I have zero interest in your  Z Scale coupler( to small/fat finger syndrome) but,I am highly interested in your  N coupler and look forward to its release.

[Ian MacMillan]

So I'll do 10 different couplers and do the average?   

I dont want no foobie "average"! I want real northeast rust!

[TiVoPrince]

Having  
a MT 1015 and 2004 compatible box would make loco conversions a natural.  When its easy to convert locos the rest of the fleet is a no-brainer...

[tom mann]

As a fan of weathering fetishes I prefer oily, wet, and dirty rust.

[haasmarc]

David,

You said the knuckle parts are designed.  I sure hope you designed and offset, MT 2004, like version in the Z scale coupler.  I have been wanting that for a long time.  Some cars cannot be lowered to where they should be and still have an MT 905 line up height-wise.

Marc

[DKS]

David,

You said the knuckle parts are designed.  I sure hope you designed and offset, MT 2004, like version in the Z scale coupler.  I have been wanting that for a long time.  Some cars cannot be lowered to where they should be and still have an MT 905 line up height-wise.

Marc

Actually, I said the functional guts are a done deal (and the reason for the patent). Everything else is wide open territory.

As for color, one of my first decisions was to not do anything in black (or fluorescent orange, for that matter). I actually like the color Atlas uses for their plastic wheelsets, a kind of warm grey. But that's a ways off. For now, I'm looking at what people want in the way of shank lengths, offsets, mounting boxes, etc., etc. Lots of work to do!

[Kiasutha]

David:
I'd really like to see some designed to use on steam loco pilots.
Jim R.

[ai5629]

David,

I have been reading along and appreciating everyone's thoughts on your coupler.  I would like three different shank options.  One centered (MT 1015/Accumate 23015), one offset (MT2004) and one in between those two.  I have body mounted quite a few cars, and there have been lots of situations where an MT1015 or Accumate 23015 is too low and an MT2004 is too high.  So I try to lower the MT2004 box which makes the screw hit the axil or I use the MT2004 box with the MT1015 or Accumate 23015 coupler and it is a little bit low (but acceptable).  I have wanted Atlas to release their offset shank coupler for years (used on Evans gondolas), since it seems to be in the middle of the 1015 and 2004 shank/height wise.  No such luck however.  Thank you for the opportunity to offer input. 

Jeff

[DKS]

I have been reading along and appreciating everyone's thoughts on your coupler.  I would like three different shank options.  One centered (MT 1015/Accumate 23015), one offset (MT2004) and one in between those two.  I have body mounted quite a few cars, and there have been lots of situations where an MT1015 or Accumate 23015 is too low and an MT2004 is too high.  So I try to lower the MT2004 box which makes the screw hit the axil or I use the MT2004 box with the MT1015 or Accumate 23015 coupler and it is a little bit low (but acceptable).  I have wanted Atlas to release their offset shank coupler for years (used on Evans gondolas), since it seems to be in the middle of the 1015 and 2004 shank/height wise.  No such luck however.  Thank you for the opportunity to offer input. 

David, thank you for your feedback. It will be taken into serious consideration as I collate all of the other suggestions. If it doesn't happen, or happen right away, it's not because I'm ignoring you or anyone else.  I must very carefully weigh all options, as this is a costly proposition (which is an understatement).

Thanks again,
David

[up1950s]

Will the draft boxes snap together ?

[DKS]

Will the draft boxes snap together ?

Yes, they will.

[Iain]

Could you provide dims on the boxes so that we could design the boxes into rolling stock?  Integrated coupler boxes in some instances can vastly ease design.

[DKS]

Could you provide dims on the boxes so that we could design the boxes into rolling stock?  Integrated coupler boxes in some instances can vastly ease design.

These will come in time. First is the tooling and stress testing of the mechanism itself.

[DKS]

"An N scale knuckle different in size from existing knuckles could create interoperability problems."
Or maybe not, if it's designed right.  I use MT Z/Nn3 on my Atlas ore cars, and they couple fine with the MT N couplers on other cars.  Installation is a little fussier, as everything has to line up right, but they couple and run fine.  I haven't tried magnetic uncoupling as I've never used use it.

The problem is this: a smaller knuckle in a standard N scale environment will require the modeler to ensure that coupler height is almost perfectly consistent. The larger knuckle affords a bit of wiggle room in coupler height. Granted, switching to the Z scale coupler will impose the need for greater accuracy, but for modelers not wishing to go to these lengths, the larger "standard" knuckle will assure good performance without having to get the height of every coupler perfect.

[Brakie]

David,Here's food for thought..

The smaller KD #58 HO scale coupler is far less forgiving when it comes to less then smooth track work.There just isn't enough coupler face to compensate rough track or sudden inclines.