This is what I sent to Micro Trains, direct to the head man! Well I am now on a coupler quest for shorter shanks. I also have an idea where you can revolutionize the coupler industry. Make N Scale couplers using the Z Scale tooling, only change the material to Titanium. It can be die cast and is strong and non-magnetic. So the current designs for the Z Scale couplers would work fine in N scale with stronger materials. I say this because Kato couplers are getting worse with reliability issues, and I had to convert about 80 locomotives the other day, and all of them look out of place. The replacement coupler for a Kato F3 has a section of the coupler box that protrudes out of the pilot area. Similar issues with the PA and E8/9 locomotives. In addition, the coupling distance is too great between locomotives. I am going to take a photo of an Intermountain F7 AB set with a N Scale car sitting long ways between them. I have had many issues as noted with Kato couplers, Accumate couplers and McHenry couplers. I have never had issues with MT couplers or Unimate couplers. I would just like to not be forced into converting all of my couplers to Unimates. As they said in "The Hunt for Red October", "a little revolution is a good thing from time to time". I think it is time for a coupler revolution. If you can't use the Titanium approach, at least look at shrinking the current line of couplers so that I would have to place the car sideways instead of the long way between the F7 units and the coupler box doesn't extend so far out of the pilot. When he responds, I will place the text in my next post.
When did they figure out a way to die cast Titanium, it's metlting temperature is around 3000 degrees.
There are techniques in Die Casting that do not require molten metal like sand and investment casting. While it is called Die Casting in general, it is actually more of a punch press operation where the tool the punch press uses is actually the tool die. The material only needs to be slightly warmed to about 400 degrees to have the proper plasticity for this type of operation.
I have seen a company make bearing flanges for railroad cars that way, they heat the steel up to around 2100 degrees then press the material out using two presses. It would be interesting to see someone make small parts that way and still be cheap enough for us to purchase!
Actually a new design would have a greater market than just locomotive consisting. With the recent swing to body mounting couplers a newer, less obtrusive, coupler and coupler box design would allow freight and passenger car trucks to swing further and allow a greater allowance for tight curve radii [not that I am a fan of minimum radius curves and #4 turnouts].
The Reply Hi David Thanks for your email from yesterday. It’s interesting to review your idea of a Z scale – sized Magne-Matic coupler to be affixed to N scale rolling stock. While we’ve not made the move yet to formally design and produce a coupler of this type and size, a number of N scale modelers (as you may know) do affix our current, standard Z couplers to their rolling stock. It does work with the following qualifiers: body mount is the easiest screwing into place the entire Z coupler w/ draft gear box. noting the trip pin needs to be adjusted to accommodate the higher distance from the rail and uncoupler; this is done by gently pulling the trip pin closer to the rail and sometimes altering the factory “bend” of the trip pin, so it engages the magnetic force of the uncoupler. noting that while the Z coupler easily mates up with N scale Magne-Matic couplers, uncoupling isn’t near as reliable. We have discussed designing and casting a Z scale sized coupler for N scale application, but never formally scheduled this work, given we always seem to have a full slate of work scheduled for our Engineering and Tooling Dept. Until such time you might want to give the idea outlined above, a try. Thanks again David So there is the reply. Not much new, but maybe a glimmer of hope........... Point 3 is why I do not go the Z scale coupler route
Maybe we need to push McHenry to produce a Z, or even T-scale knuckle coupler. If all the train weight is on the foremost knuckle, then only that part of the McHenry would need to be strong material. The rest of the coupler could remain a cheaply manufacturers material, unlike the MT which would require the entire jaw shank to be the expensive/strong material as it's one rigid piece.
A How To: I can take a McHenry knuckle coupler and mount it in a MT #1015 box, (blasphemy, discretion) remove the top of the box or lid off the coupler box, whittle some on the locomotive - the coupler portal, remove the Micro-Trains coupler out of the box (actually it does that all by itself), replace it with a McHenry, tap and drill, screw the new set-up in place and I now have an over sized coupler on the front of my F7's. The bonus is it's close coupling. It works but not to my satisfaction. I just got my Walther's Flyer, for HO they now have a LL Proto Coupler that allows for close coupling. I have no idea why I thought it was important to share that. I know. To say that someone else did it in HO. And ask why can't MT...provide us with one in N scale only with a Z scale coupler? Oh, that's right. Sorry, we already have a answer. It's Ok we've planted a seed of an idea now then let's see where it grows. .
