MTL True-Scale Couplers - Recommended Height?

[C855B]

I looked but cannot find consensus on the mounting height for True-Scale couplers. I have been struggling with mismatches all evening that don't make sense to me.

1) Straight substitute mounting on Atlas locos with original Accumates which normally take a 1015 with no shim or other mods resulted in the coupler being about 0.015" too low compared to the stock MTL conversion car as reference.

2) Comparing True-Scale to 1015 on the same locos, the tops of the couplers align. I would have expected the centers to align.

3) I replaced the stock coupler on an MT-1055 height gauge with a True-Scale. It matched the factory conversion car. Kicker is the True-Scale box is ~0.025" thicker than the box of the stock coupler, which I think is a 1025. If we're supposed to matching centers, then the gauge will be 0.0125" high done this way.

I think I'm looking for the correct answer to #2 - centers, or tops? I.e., what is the expected rail-to-center distance?

Based on what I'm finding here there is going to be hell to pay in carving-up locos to raise the effective coupler height if the factory conversion car is the accurate reference. Or, call the factory car "wrong" and create my own standard based on least-effort conversions.

Also, I'm getting the impression that the "1015-compatible" box isn't quite. Compatible, that is. It appears to be 0.005-0.010" wider than a 1015. (Caliper is not handy at the moment.) I found this the hard way trying to install True-Scales in an Atlas S-2, which normally would be a drop-in for a 1015. The True-Scales would not fit without carving on something.

Joe? Anybody?

[Chris333]

Center it with a regular coupler just like you would do with Z scale couplers.

[C855B]

That was my expectation. It may be nothing more than a "factory oops" with the conversion car, and all I have to do is use a thin shim from a 1015. Substituting a True-Scale into the height gauge may be a red herring, which I s'pose Joe will have to answer.

[Chris333]

I don't have these couplers yet, but was hoping in some way they can attach to regular couplers.

When I use the center mold line to line up couplers I can then use cars with Z couplers right along with regular couplers.

Also if they really do drop into a 1015's spot that should theave it centered the same way.

[wcfn100]

You got too much going on there.  I'd only be comparing the True Scale loco installed coupler with the height gauge standard coupler where they should be on the same vertical center.

Whatever you do, leave the conversion car out of it.

Jason

[nscaleSPF2]

I don't have these couplers yet, but was hoping in some way they can attach to regular couplers.

You can forget that idea.  I was hoping, too, but this is just not physically possible.

[C855B]

I don't have these couplers yet, but was hoping in some way they can attach to regular couplers. ...

I think this was mentioned in the original thread if you want to go digging, that there was no compatibility with anything. Joe ( @Shipsure ) did say that they can be forced to mate with the Z-scale 903/905, but only by lift-over.

Playing with these is quite interesting. One thing that I'm sure is going to give some folks heartburn is very little lateral swing. Don't try body mounting to a 26' ore car and expect it to behave next to an 86' auto rack.

Anyway, I need Joe to chime-in and verify (or not) the "oops" with the conversion car. In the meanwhile, I'll grab my dial caliper and a handful of 1015s and re-check what was done last night, and go forward assuming centering the knuckles old vs. new is the reference. Oh... and undo the mod to the height gauge.

[learmoia]

Playing with these is quite interesting. One thing that I'm sure is going to give some folks heartburn is very little lateral swing. Don't try body mounting to a 26' ore car and expect it to behave next to an 86' auto rack.

As per Prototype... That's a BIG NO-NO..   Anything over 70' can NOT be coupled to anything shorter than 45'.. (Rules may fluctuate road by road.)

It's frustrating when your building trains with Centerbeam cars and Sand hoppers..

You can have have a 69'11" car coupled to a 45' 1" car..
but a 70'2" car coupled to a 44' 10" car... 

   But Rules is Rules..

~Ian

[jmlaboda]

As per Prototype... That's a BIG NO-NO..   Anything over 70' can NOT be coupled to anything shorter than 45'.. (Rules may fluctuate road by road.)

WHAT???  You mean to tell me that I can't couple my 40' baggage - mail to a 80' long coach???  Well, that's simply a crock of BULL!!!

(Yes, some roads, in particular Burlington, Great Northern, Southern Pacific and possibly Union Pacific, all had very short baggage - mail cars for use on branchline trains where mail and express traffic was not very heavy... the "Q" also had a 40' mail - coach added to the mix.  In fairness the dynamics that come into play with 80'-plus freight equipment really does not come into play with passenger cars since the overhang past the outer end of the trucks is no where near as far as on freight equipment.  Man am I looking forward to getting my hands on some of these couplers!!!  10 sets will do all of my N-scale cars and probably at least one RDC and a locomotive...  )

[C855B]

As per Prototype... That's a BIG NO-NO..   Anything over 70' can NOT be coupled to anything shorter than 45'.. (Rules may fluctuate road by road.)
...

Heh heh. Yeah, I know... but anybody wanting to do an "all at once" conversion from truck-mounted Magna-Matics to body-mounted True-Scale is going to be in for a real shock when they suddenly can't randomly mix-and-match cars on their 9-3/4" curves. (Actually, from what I'm seeing so far, given the limited lateral range I have my doubts about reliable operation on radii under 18" on any combination of cars. Open to being proven wrong.)

Adding a 1015 shim (0.015") to the factory conversion car was right on the money.

I spent a few moments measuring boxes. The True-Scale box is in fact the same width as the 1015, a measured 0.205". Where I was having trouble with the Atlas S-2 is the Accumate is 0.199" and a tight fit, and there was no "give" with the metal body. I will have to file the sides of the True-Scale box to get it to fit...

...EXCEPT... there is a box shape difference with the True-Scale:



Accumate, 1015, 1300 (True-Scale). Notice on the first two, there are notches (setbacks?) in the sides of the box "face". The box is 0.150" wide at this point, and the notched portion goes back 0.065". The S-2 pilots are sized to expect this notch. There is a comparable notch on the 1300, but is only 0.040" deep. This especially makes the 1300 not a drop-in in the S-2, although I would still have to file the sides of a 1015 about 0.003". I don't know (yet) if the setback can be deepened 0.025" on the 1300 to make it work without compromising operation. I do know that doing so eliminates the air hose mount on the 1300, which is not an issue on the S-2 since it has its own hose there anyway.

I will continue to play around with these. Something that would be very helpful is a half-thickness box lid - it's always easier to add shims - but the nubs on the box expect the 0.035" thickness of the supplied lid.

[Missaberoad]

As per Prototype... That's a BIG NO-NO..   Anything over 70' can NOT be coupled to anything shorter than 45'.. (Rules may fluctuate road by road.)

It's frustrating when your building trains with Centerbeam cars and Sand hoppers..

You can have have a 69'11" car coupled to a 45' 1" car..
but a 70'2" car coupled to a 44' 10" car... 

   But Rules is Rules..

~Ian

Up here our rules are a little more lenient... We will get Marshaling violations if a <32ft car is next to a >65ft car or if a <41ft car is next to a >80ft car...

Still would never see a 24ft ore car next to a 89ft flat, although in the 1970's when it was pre TRAM systems and pre computers who knows what happened... probably alot of stringlines lol 

[wcfn100]

 I wouldn't sweat any of this until more people get these to play with.  I think you'll see several coupler box solutions that will be better than the current 1015 replacement box.  Maybe as a group we can come up with something Joe can take back to MTL as a more standard solution.

Jason

[ednadolski]

I spent a few moments measuring boxes.

Did you (or would you please) measure the interior height and width of the box? Also the diameter & setback of the pivot pin?

Thanks,
Ed

[u18b]

Since I don't think anyone has said it yet.....

Is there a possibility of establishing a NEW standard?

MT couplers height now is too high.

Are there some out there who might be interested in something more prototypical in height for a more prototypical coupler?

I know the idea is fill with problems, but I just thought I'd throw it out there.

[C855B]

Did you (or would you please) measure the interior height and width of the box? Also the diameter & setback of the pivot pin?

Tomorrow. Everything is at the layout building, 'cept me.