N-Possible Coupler Announcement (Nashville 2022)

[ednadolski]

@turbowhiz you're making it hard for us  's to keep up our patience 

Ed

[garethashenden]

I just literally draw on them with a soft pencil... Even a HB pencil works well, but I recently switched to using a 10H and I get better results with less effort. Useful in general for lubricating all of the sliding surfaces. Strictly speaking not necessary, but it does make the kiss coupling work that little bit better. It also looks decent when you've weathered things too.

10H is a hard pencil, or a super hard pencil. The soft ones are B, ie 2B, 6B.

[robert3985]

@turbowhiz - I'm gonna need a big batch of 'em too. 

Although I like body mounting all of my couplers, it takes time and I have a large portion of my car inventory that still has truck mounted MT's.  However, although I'm certain that N-P's plugged into the truck mounted boxes would look significantly better, and get rid of the dreaded slinky effect, after mulling over the possibilities, I'm going to go with the scalebox coupler box version in mostly short length couplers, with some medium length couplers thrown in.  The effort to gut the stock MT boxes and drop in the N-P's seems counter-productive when with just a bit more effort, I can snip off the MT's and body mount N-P's in the scalebox version and have brake hoses to boot!

However, I feel like I'm shooting in the dark a bit here as to my mounting choices.  I think all of us would appreciate a clear photo showing a direct comparison between the different types of coupler boxes along with a direct comparison of coupler lengths in order to make more informed decisions on what to purchase for our various cars and engines.

Also, I am highly pleased that the N-P's are fully compatible with MT T-S's since I've converted quite a few cars and engines to that coupler already, however modified and in custom printed coupler boxes for the most part.

If you can create and post the comparison photo, that would solidify exactly what I will be ordering...which will be a minimum of at least 100 unassembled pairs...and I don't give a whit about packaging.  But, an included instruction sheet would be nice, with advisories and recommended practices such as your burnishing trick with a soft-lead pencil.

PRETTY EXCITING!!!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[turbowhiz]

10H is a hard pencil, or a super hard pencil. The soft ones are B, ie 2B, 6B.

Doh! Right you are!

I meant 10B ... You want a soft one.

[jwaldo]

Darn these look amazing. Probably an obscure question, but would it be possible to make a retrofit coupler box for them that replaces a Micro-Trains 905 Z-scale coupler box? That's been my go-to 'closer to scale' option for years, and I've got plenty of locos whose pilots have been modified accordingly. But I'd drop 905s in a heartbeat for these!

[ednadolski]

... would it be possible to make a retrofit coupler box for them that replaces a Micro-Trains 905 Z-scale coupler box? ...

Or, could the scale coupler box fit in place of the 905 box?   (Asking 'cuz I have an eye on using these for Z scale too -- AZLs and FTs are too stiff for switching, and MT 905s have the same slinky problem) (arguably worse since Z cars are lighter).  (Plus, Z cars have the same high-rider problem as N did since mebbee 20 or so years ago.)

Ed

[Mark5]

Macro Shot of Airline installed on Scalebox: (see post on previous page)

Awesome "rusting" of the hardware! 

[Iain]

you could probably sell out right this moment to trw folks without waiting on packaging.

[Kentuckian]

Really looking forward to these!

[turbowhiz]

@turbowhiz - I'm gonna need a big batch of 'em too. 

Although I like body mounting all of my couplers, it takes time and I have a large portion of my car inventory that still has truck mounted MT's.  However, although I'm certain that N-P's plugged into the truck mounted boxes would look significantly better, and get rid of the dreaded slinky effect, after mulling over the possibilities, I'm going to go with the scalebox coupler box version in mostly short length couplers, with some medium length couplers thrown in.  The effort to gut the stock MT boxes and drop in the N-P's seems counter-productive when with just a bit more effort, I can snip off the MT's and body mount N-P's in the scalebox version and have brake hoses to boot!

However, I feel like I'm shooting in the dark a bit here as to my mounting choices.  I think all of us would appreciate a clear photo showing a direct comparison between the different types of coupler boxes along with a direct comparison of coupler lengths in order to make more informed decisions on what to purchase for our various cars and engines.

Also, I am highly pleased that the N-P's are fully compatible with MT T-S's since I've converted quite a few cars and engines to that coupler already, however modified and in custom printed coupler boxes for the most part.

If you can create and post the comparison photo, that would solidify exactly what I will be ordering...which will be a minimum of at least 100 unassembled pairs...and I don't give a whit about packaging.  But, an included instruction sheet would be nice, with advisories and recommended practices such as your burnishing trick with a soft-lead pencil.

PRETTY EXCITING!!!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

I’m working on getting a proper website, which should hopefully help with respect to what fits where.

But as a preview/to get some forum feedback here is some general guidance.

Coupler Lengths:

There are 3. Labeled as “Short/Medium/Long”.  They are 1mm in length different, so there is a 3 2mm spread between a short and long shank coupler.

The NP Short is equivalent to a short TSC, with respect to the mounting screw to coupler position. The NP Long is equivalent to a long TSC in the same respect. The medium splits the difference, and is super handy when a short is too short but a long is too long. This is particularly the case when manufacturers set back a traditional coupler to improve the coupled distance, a not uncommon approach.

The mounting screw to coupler relationship works out to 1015/1025 = Short and 1016 = Long, in installed in a like-to-like fashion. The coupler head starting point is effectively the same, but of course the coupled distance will be dramatically shorter with the scale coupler.

Measurements from the railhead to car floor with the hat is the same as MTL 1015 at 7.1mm/.279”. Without the hat is .4mm/.16” less, so the floor height is 6.7mm/.263” from the railhead without the hat. From the box hole center to the front of the box its 3.3mm/.130”, to the coupled joint centerline is is 5.7mm/6.7mm/7.7mm (short/medium/long). The box is nominally 3mm wide, the hat blocks it to 5.15 mm wide, at the top.

Short shanks are the most generally used. Medium shanks are super helpful in specific scenarios. Long shanks are ideal for modeling modern prototypes with end of car cushioning devices, or in times when you want a direct 1016 replacement.

Boxes:

At launch, there are two options for coupler boxes, one of which isn’t a supplied box at all.

Option 1 is the is the universal retrofit shim (UGS part numbers). It’s a super thin brass formed part that is glued into an existing factory coupler box to provide a way to convert almost any “box” configuration to my couplers. You can retrofit separate boxes too, it technically doesn’t need to be an integrated box. If the model has a factory integrated box, this is probably the option you want. This works in all sorts of boxes. Boxes without sides too.... No pin holes, so Athearn and others are easily converted. Basically everything and anything, with the caveat that you sometimes need to mill space behind the post. I recommend using a Dremel with a small burr for that task.

Option 2 is the scalebox (SBX part numbers). A general freight outline box, but flexible to be used in all sorts of circumstances. It is comprised of 4 parts. Box top, bottom, hat, and the airline.
This part was designed to be highly universal, in an attempt to cover as wide a range of installation scenarios as possible with a “single” part. With my production approach change, there will ultimately be more bespoke options available in the future too. This is principally for truck to body mount conversions, or when the model is factory equipped with a completely separate box, rather then it being integrated into the model.

The hat doesn’t need to be used, depending on the installation scenario. The purpose of the hat is to block the box top to match a 1015 box outline, in terms of width and box top thickness. It fits on the top of the box top with an interference fit pin. You can omit the hat, and directly mount the box to the floor. Or, sometimes, omit the entire box top too, in more creative installations.

Scalebox parts: Left to Right, airline, hat, top, bottom



Scalebox Parts: Hat installed on the box top. Its best to install the hat before assembling the box.



Assembled Scalebox Side Profile Without Hat:



Assembled Scalebox Side Profile WITH Hat. Note that the forward box edge is purely cosmetic. You can file it off if its more appropriate for your prototype, or the installation needs it to tuck under the floor.



Scalebox installed on recent production MTL boxcar, using a short shank coupler and a re-drilled forward mounting hole. This is using the HAT, which blocks the box to the correct height, and locks the box from rotation into the factory molded outline in the floor:



Another view with the body removed. The gap between the hat and the end of the box is by design; It improves the look, and it allows for the body to fit without any tricks in this application. Note that the stirrup "screw length cutout" is no longer aligned. Old production has the screw hole cutout on the forward end; New production is to the back.



These newer production MTL cars are factory equipped with 1016 couplers. Scalebox installed on recent production MTL boxcar, using a long shank coupler and the original factory mounting hole. This is using the HAT as well. The effective coupler length is the same as the previous scenario, although this installation doesn’t look quite as good, its technically easier since no drilling is required. I used the original MTL box pin too rather then a screw.



You can trim the “ears” off the hat, so you have a blocked but narrow profile installation where it makes sense (MTL 2 bay hopper)




You can install the box without a hat straight to the floor of course, and this is frequently desirable installation scenario:






Generally, scalebox equipped cars will manage corners just fine, but if you have super tight corners with S bends and long cars, there is a mechanical limit to the lateral coupler travel that will cause issues. The limitation is the box width, not the mechanical design of the coupler itself.  Even scalebox equipped, there is a massive difference with respect to corner compliance vs stock TSC’s. Since the box is considerably narrow, truck swing is no longer a limitation. But there is nothing stopping you from removing the sides of the box to allow for more coupler swing, like I did to make this MTL heavyweight still go around 9 3/4 corners....



Hope this provides some ideas... But all, please ask questions/provide feedback here. Much appreciated!

[turbowhiz]

Darn these look amazing. Probably an obscure question, but would it be possible to make a retrofit coupler box for them that replaces a Micro-Trains 905 Z-scale coupler box? That's been my go-to 'closer to scale' option for years, and I've got plenty of locos whose pilots have been modified accordingly. But I'd drop 905s in a heartbeat for these!

I ordered up some 905's, they should be in my hands this week as I found some in Canada. I'll be able to measure them and make some direct comparisons. But my guess is that width wise my scalebox is less wide. Based on spec the mounting hole location is certainly forward of the 1015/1025 location...

Since the 905 is a "pull to slink" design, there is no rear clearance problem. In principle, I should be able to make a dimensionally direct replacement, requiring a "shorter then short" shank base coupler part. My design allows for extremely short overall lengths... Scale distance coupling F units can be readily accommodated, and those are on my to-do. I might see if it makes sense to combine this, I'm trying to keep the propagation of bespoke part designs to a minimum, within reason at least.

I'm not quite sure where this will fit in the priority list of ideas, but if there is demand for a "direct 905" easy swap part it should be doable.

[robert3985]

@turbowhiz - Thanks a million for that update!  I'm totally clear now as to what my order will be.  Can't wait to start converting because these are AWESOME!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[Jimbo]

Great updates, @turbowhiz !!

As others have suggested, you clearly have a well-engineered design.  Further to that, there’s tremendous growth potential.

You mentioned that you are planning to experiment with MT 905 couplers to see if your box can serve as a replacement.  May I suggest that you also experiment to see if the 905 will mate with NP couplers?  This may help open another market for you with our Z scale brethren.

I am terribly eager to get these couplers; if they perform even half as good as they look, I’ll be converting 100% of my operating fleet.  Granted, I’m a bit nervous about what it will entail, given that I have a lot of very old items that remain favorites; any experience you can share with converting (e.g.) Kato E-units and Kato passenger cars would be appreciated.

ALSO - are you planning to include any shims (or otherwise make them available) as part of your packages?

(At the risk of being picky, you mentioned 3 lengths.  This would result in a 2mm spread between short and long, not 3mm.)

Thanks again!!

Jim

[peteski]

Will the production couplers also use the translucent dark resin shown in the recent photos, or will they be made from more opaque dark resin?

[turbowhiz]

Great updates, @turbowhiz !!

As others have suggested, you clearly have a well-engineered design.  Further to that, there’s tremendous growth potential.

You mentioned that you are planning to experiment with MT 905 couplers to see if your box can serve as a replacement.  May I suggest that you also experiment to see if the 905 will mate with NP couplers?  This may help open another market for you with our Z scale brethren.

I am terribly eager to get these couplers; if they perform even half as good as they look, I’ll be converting 100% of my operating fleet.  Granted, I’m a bit nervous about what it will entail, given that I have a lot of very old items that remain favorites; any experience you can share with converting (e.g.) Kato E-units and Kato passenger cars would be appreciated.

ALSO - are you planning to include any shims (or otherwise make them available) as part of your packages?

(At the risk of being picky, you mentioned 3 lengths.  This would result in a 2mm spread between short and long, not 3mm.)

Thanks again!!

Jim

Yeah, right about the distance spread! Dodgy math on my part.

The MTL Z scale couplers are NOT compatible; I've experimented with some MTL Z scale truck mounts I was able to easily source a while back in leu of 905's. As best as I can tell, the coupler itself is identical to the 903/905 coupler. (Even the Z scale couplers DO mate to HO scale Kadee #5's though!). Based on on the published 905 post to box end distance, it matches the truck mounts exactly.

The scalebox effectively does include a shim in the form of the hat. I'm sure there are circumstances that might justify more of shim then that, but in all reality I've yet to find it. If your floor is that high, odds are the whole model is high to the point that lowering the whole car is likely to lead to a better outcome.

I do have some Kato E units and passenger cars in hand for future development. It seems that many people find the Kato factory couplers on passenger equipment to be "ok", so they're probably not the highest priority for many. Not super visible, reliable, and the coupled distance isn't egregious. Kato stuff in general tends to be pretty "special" in the coupler department, so some bespoke product will likely be needed.