Teaser video from KatoUSA

[randgust]

Not bad, but given that it's a manual fight to mate Kato couplers with MT's that's a negative.   On cars that rarely get uncoupled (like the passenger trains) all I have had to do is change out a lead ooupler to something.   If you were running these in unit-train lengths maybe not an issue either.   
I'll look forward to the first person to convert to body mounts on these, also to check the weights, as they are advertising 'light weight' (?).  At least they don't glue stuff together like IM.

But I've been around N long enough to remember when the only way you could get a 'normal' length modern tank car was to splice and glue up Atlas shorty tanks, then Roundhouse modern tank cars.
So quit griping, me thinks:  https://trovestardata.com/images/Collections/4/items/134/134016_19.png

[peteski]

Not bad, but given that it's a manual fight to mate Kato couplers with MT's that's a negative.   On cars that rarely get uncoupled (like the passenger trains) all I have had to do is change out a lead ooupler to something.   If you were running these in unit-train lengths maybe not an issue either.   

Don't give Kato's couplers *THAT* much credit.  While coupling to other types of knuckle couplers can sometimes be problematic, even Kato-to-Kato coupling is also very unreliable (lots of unscheduled uncoupling) in passenger cars.  Those couplers stink (and I could have used even a stronger 4-letter word). 

[Scottl]

Yadda yadda.  Modern oil tanks for $20, Kato quality.

 Hope to see Trinity and others in future runs.

[Sokramiketes]

Setting aside the inevitable change in trucks and couplers, and hoping the ride height can be addressed easily at the same time... The annoying tooling choice they made was to mold the brake gear into the bottom of the tank.  I would have prefered it be left off, as it gives the weird appearance of a frame underneath.  That's a lot of carving on a curved tank to change. 

[nscaler711]

Maybe I'm the odd one out, I have never ran into uncoupling issues with Kato to Kato couplers or even Accumate.
I know I have ran trains for longer than most do for shows. I think track work has a lot to do with random uncoupling events since there isn't a lot of up and down play, nor do I run trip pins so there's nothing to grab them.
No I am not saying my track is perfect. but I've had way more MTLs fail than Kato's.
Thats just in the Maxi Is and IVs and all sorts of passenger equipment. All my Kato Locos have kept their original or have been updated to the last generation couplers.

Again, I am the odd one out as per usual so... maybe take more than a grain of salt...

[peteski]

Maybe I'm the odd one out, I have never ran into uncoupling issues with Kato to Kato couplers or even Accumate.
I know I have ran trains for longer than most do for shows. I think track work has a lot to do with random uncoupling events since there isn't a lot of up and down play, nor do I run trip pins so there's nothing to grab them.

I should have mentioned that most of those uncouplings occur when the cars are under slack and on certain curves (the trackwork is pretty much perfect). Under slack, if the couplers shift laterally (like a gentle s-curve), then they come apart very easily.

[Englewood]

I've never had Kato couplers come apart. Maybe it's my 24" minimum radius?

[peteski]

I've never had Kato couplers come apart. Maybe it's my 24" minimum radius?

As I mentioned, the uncoupling happen under specific conditions as I described earlier. It is not related to the radius.  It is related to instances where the couplers shift laterally under slack.  MTL couplers never uncouple under those conditions.

[Olivani]

Yadda yadda.  Modern oil tanks for $20, Kato quality.

What he said, 100% agree !

[Sokramiketes]

As I mentioned, the uncoupling happen under specific conditions as I described earlier. It is not related to the radius.  It is related to instances where the couplers shift laterally under slack.  MTL couplers never uncouple under those conditions.

Draft-buff-draft events.  MTL are better than Kato, but still splay to the side and put horizontal forces into the car.  While they may stay coupled, it increases the opportunity for derailment or picking turnouts. 

In you watch MTL couplers closely, they also impart side forces when pulling straight on straight track! 

[peteski]

Draft-buff-draft events.  MTL are better than Kato, but still splay to the side and put horizontal forces into the car.  While they may stay coupled, it increases the opportunity for derailment or picking turnouts. 

In you watch MTL couplers closely, they also impart side forces when pulling straight on straight track!

I *NEVER* have that problem in the same troublesome spots where Katos uncouple. Also, no mater how splayed or displaced MTL are, in my experience they will stay coupled (as the centering spring will realign them keeping them coupled when they go back to center).  I can only offer my experiences. Obviously YMMV.  But if you look around the Interwebs, there are many others not happy with Kato couplers. 

My choice is MTL (and Katos, because there are no retrofit couplers for the passenger cars). No, I will not body mount.

And we are (as usual) really getting afield of the subject in the thread.

[turbowhiz]

Kato couplers are differently configured depending on which specific model you’re looking at. You can’t really generalize them all together since they vary a fair bit mechanically. 

Depending on a host of factors including the specific model design in question, your track geometry, and train dynamics your experience may vary wildly. They’re among the better looking overscale couplers, and in many ways superior to MTL. But they don’t play so well with others, and there are problematic applications.

On these tanks, being truck mounted on light cars, expect trouble with buff forces. If you’re running only forward on level track, all good. Anything more than that is going to be trouble… It seems that Kato is maybe the last manufacturer still producing new tool models with truck mounted couplers, an odd design choice in 2026.

These tank cars have very unfortunate molded in brake detail. I would have much preferred no detail to molded in detail on a model where it’s highly visible like a frameless tank car; nothing would still look better for those who don’t care, and one could readily add the detail if you care to. The molded in choice is the worst of both worlds, it’s really hard to remove nicely on a model like this, and it looks terrible from a track level view, it looks like the tank has a frame. There are lots of times where underframe detail is irrelevant, but this is definitely not one of them.




It does look like there is structure to the platform ends, so one should be able to chop off the truck mounted coupler, mill the bolster/truck down, and mount a body mount coupler of your preference to the factory platform.  Re-trucking with BLMA type trucks might be another good option here too.

[Olivani]

I am very pleased to see the trucks are screwed on 

[basementcalling]

Yadda yadda.  Modern oil tanks for $20, Kato quality.

 Hope to see Trinity and others in future runs.

I'll be very curious to put one of the Kato cars next to an Atlas tanker and see the differences. Looks like a couple vendors are advertising sets at about $13-16 a car for the 8 pack. For that price, upgrading a few components is acceptable. At $30+ a car, not so much.

I hope this means Kato might make a couple other ventures into the N. American rolling stock market, remembering that 90%+ of their business is targeted at the domestic Japanese train market. Their offering of new tooling in N scale for a freight car is a big deal.

[dem34]

They are probably realizing with how the market is, there is suddenly a space for lighter detail middle of a long train type cars. Wouldn't be surprised if this was followed up a similar release of modern Gondolas, Autoracks, more Hoppers, Etc.