# Couplers binding



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

I got these auto racks made by Jeuf because o though they looked neat and I'm a car guy. I found some NEM adapters so I could mount Kadee couplers in place of the European style talgo trucks. They seem simple enough, but there isn't enough swing in the coupler and they bind even on my r22 curves when coupled together. One behind the loco did fine, and I imagine a might get away with putting other cars between then, I just haven't tried it yet. But they won't go back to back. I have an 89' enclosed autorack that takes that curve fine, although I only have one, so I can't test two together. Any ideas on how to get more coupler swing in this setup? Or a different option completely? I'd love to run these. 










Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## Andy57 (Feb 7, 2020)

What is that "T" thing? Do the trucks hit it? I did have that problem on some covered hoppers.
Following.


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Andy57 said:


> What is that "T" thing? Do the trucks hit it? I did have that problem on some covered hoppers.
> Following.


I'm not sure what you are referring to. The trucks do not have d any interference though. I watched closely, the problem is definitely in the couplers. 

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

I think you mean Jouef.

I've never seen short arm coupler mounts on that long of a European model. Models of this length, like passenger coaches usually have a spring loaded articulated coupler arm that swings over and is pulled out as the car enters the curve. Upon entering the straight section again the coupler arm retracts as it returns to a neutral position.

Jouef does things differently I guess.

Are you certain that the buffers are not causing the problem in the curve?


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Fairly certain, but since you bring it up I will double check that when I get a chance. These had talgo trucks initially, which I have trimmed off.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

So, the kind of car that actually does better with tango trucks, and you cut them off.....why? And yet, you keep the tango trucks on cars that would be better without.....

Sorry, but that just doesn’t make any logical sense to me.....


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Old_Hobo said:


> So, the kind of car that actually does better with tango trucks, and you cut them off.....why? And yet, you keep the tango trucks on cars that would be better without.....
> 
> Sorry, but that just doesn’t make any logical sense to me.....


They were European couplers, so useless to me as they were. And in in the prices of changing over any talgo trucks and him and horn couplers that I can, to body mount Kadee couplers.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Old_Hobo said:


> So, the kind of car that actually does better with tango trucks, and you cut them off.....why? And yet, you keep the tango trucks on cars that would be better without.....
> 
> Sorry, but that just doesn’t make any logical sense to me.....


Also, can you elaborate a little? What type of car does better with talgo trucks? And why? 

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Here is a pic at the point of binding. The buffers have plenty of clearance here. The lead car has two wheels up at this point.

Four options I see;

1: move the couplers back to get them closer to the car body
2: Kadee 451
3: Kadee 454 (required something to mount it too... Possibly option 4 required)
4: new talgo trucks with Kadee mounts. This option may require a long shank couplers as I'm not sure standard talgo trucks are long enough.

I'm not certain on any of these by the way, that's just the options I see that might have a chance.










Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

Do you have a link to a product page for these adapters that might have an exploded view to show how they operate?

Have you considered using a "long-shank" Kadee coupler?
(although it looks like it wouldn't help)

Could you show us a pic of the ENTIRE car?
I'd like to see how long it is.

From the pic above, there isn't nearly enough "swing" to the coupler shanks. I'm thinking these cars are just _too long for your layout._ That's the way it goes with smaller layouts with tighter curves.

On my layout (4x8 with an "L" extension), the maximum radius is about 22" (using Kato Unitrack). The longest cars I run are 54' covered hoppers...


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Well, for comparison here is the same corner with an 89' autorack connected to an 80' passenger car. These two together negotiate the corner fine, although the autorack is nearly at it's maximum swing. It will run around this loop all day without issues though.

I think a long shank would be worse,I think it needs more swing. These couplers don't seem to have as much seeing as a standard Kadee box. 

Here is the two autoracks side by side for comparison and some better pics of how I have it setup. You can see the issue with mounting a standard Kadee gear box dye to the lip. The NEM adapters give urgent clearance and take a Kadee 18, 19 or 20.












































Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

Why you want to mix Euro type cars (having buffers) with US type cars I don't get..
But from what I can gather, the reason the cars swing so far out is that the trucks are too far in from the ends of the car causing the coupler 'gathering-range' to over-max out..
Best way to ameliorate the problem would be to move the trucks outward...But this is a big job and these particular strange looking cars don't seem worth the effort..
If it were me I'd cut my losses, moth ball these cars, and fuggeddaboudit !!!


----------



## cid (Jul 3, 2014)

I think, restore the talgo trucks, with Kadee adapters and couplers. The talgo trucks were the mfg's solution to the geometry.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Frankenstein cars.....


----------



## Aard D'Vaark (Aug 1, 2019)

at least it will keep you busy, rofl


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

cid said:


> I think, restore the talgo trucks, with Kadee adapters and couplers. The talgo trucks were the mfg's solution to the geometry.


I'm not sure there is a way to do that. At least not that won't look extremely goofy.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

telltale said:


> Why you want to mix Euro type cars (having buffers) with US type cars I don't get..
> But from what I can gather, the reason the cars swing so far out is that the trucks are too far in from the ends of the car causing the coupler 'gathering-range' to over-max out..
> Best way to ameliorate the problem would be to move the trucks outward...But this is a big job and these particular strange looking cars don't seem worth the effort..
> If it we me I'd cut my losses, moth ball these cars, and fuggeddaboudit !!!


To each his own. I like seeing the different types of autoracks and plan to integrate more when I get the time.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

vette-kid said:


> I got these auto racks made by Jeuf because o though they looked neat and I'm a car guy. I found some NEM adapters so I could mount Kadee couplers in place of the European style talgo trucks. They seem simple enough, but there isn't enough swing in the coupler and they bind even on my r22 curves when coupled together. One behind the loco did fine, and I imagine a might get away with putting other cars between then, I just haven't tried it yet. But they won't go back to back. I have an 89' enclosed autorack that takes that curve fine, although I only have one, so I can't test two together. Any ideas on how to get more coupler swing in this setup? Or a different option completely? I'd love to run these.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





vette-kid said:


> I got these auto racks made by Jeuf because o though they looked neat and I'm a car guy. I found some NEM adapters so I could mount Kadee couplers in place of the European style talgo trucks. They seem simple enough, but there isn't enough swing in the coupler and they bind even on my r22 curves when coupled together. One behind the loco did fine, and I imagine a might get away with putting other cars between then, I just haven't tried it yet. But they won't go back to back. I have an 89' enclosed autorack that takes that curve fine, although I only have one, so I can't test two together. Any ideas on how to get more coupler swing in this setup? Or a different option completely? I'd love to run these.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


vette-kid;

Your clear close-up photo of the couplers in a curve shows the basic problem. The now rigidly body-mounted couplers are way out over the rail because of the length of the cars, the relative positions of the trucks and couplers, and the tightness of even your 22" radius for those cars. That's why the manufacturer put talgo trucks on these cars in the first place, to let them make it around tight curves. The couplers need to be able to move when the car is in a curve. There are several ways this is done, but the easiest would be to mount Kadee talgo trucks with long shank couplers on the cars. The file below explains truck-mounted (talgo) vs. body mounted and behavior in curves. 

Good luck;

Traction Fan


----------



## cid (Jul 3, 2014)

Ya, that's kinda where I was going, too, when I suggested reverting to the Talgo trucks...


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

I have actually ordered a set of walthers talgo trucks, as well as an assortment of Kadee options. There are so many different options for Kadee couplers it's mind boggling! I do fear the walthers trucks may have to be modified a bit to fit the plastic pins on these. But I think it's doable.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

traction fan said:


> vette-kid;
> 
> Your clear close-up photo of the couplers in a curve shows the basic problem. The now rigidly body-mounted couplers are way out over the rail because of the length of the cars, the relative positions of the trucks and couplers, and the tightness of even your 22" radius for those cars. That's why the manufacturer put talgo trucks on these cars in the first place, to let them make it around tight curves. The couplers need to be able to move when the car is in a curve. There are several ways this is done, but the easiest would be to mount Kadee talgo trucks with long shank couplers on the cars. The file below explains truck-mounted (talgo) vs. body mounted and behavior in curves.
> 
> ...


Actually I think the pic your are referring to is the closed autorack and the passenger car that functions fine around that bend. It is over the rail, but there is enough swing in the couplers to accommodate that. The cars in question bind before they even get that far. These couplers just don't have much swing to them at all. 

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## Murv2 (Nov 5, 2017)

Try this: take off the front screw, loosen the back screw so the mount will pivot and see if the cars will go through the curve.


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Murv2 said:


> Try this: take off the front screw, loosen the back screw so the mount will pivot and see if the cars will go through the curve.


I have no idea why I didn't think of that! I would still have a problem with it not recentering on it's own, but that should be a minor issue that I could probably live with.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

Honestly, those cars are just too long for a small railroad with relatively tight curves...


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

J.Albert1949 said:


> Honestly, those cars are just too long for a small railroad with relatively tight curves...


I don't believe that. The closed autorack that I have and several passenger cars do just fine on that curve. R22 should be, from what I can tell, big enough to handle pretty much anything out there. I accept that there will be some overhang that may not look realistic, but it will handle it with the right coupler setup. Those other cars are all longer than this one (although the trucks appear to be set back further in this one) and are using basic Kadee couplers and boxes, nothing trick or fancy.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Murv2 said:


> Try this: take off the front screw, loosen the back screw so the mount will pivot and see if the cars will go through the curve.


That works great, actually handles the R18 curves great as well. I need a way to put some sorry of centering spring on there, backing is less than perfect, but functional. A centering spring might help that. 

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## Murv2 (Nov 5, 2017)

There is an extra screw hole, bend the last turn on a couple click-pen springs, cut the screw down so it doesn’t pass into the car, pins on the outside wall of the car. A little complicated but should do the trick.


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

I was thinking along those lines, just needed a spring for it. I'll try the pen idea, it may not be strong enough... Or I need better pens

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## Eilif (Nov 6, 2017)

The Talgo trucks you ordered are likely the best solution but the idea of giving some play to the coupler box has merit as well especially if you can rig some kind of centering mechanism.

I suspect at this point you're spending more on upgrades then you did on the cars.

You are technicaly correct that the cars you have chosen could/should run on 22" curves but you're really pushing the boundaries of what railroaders have long known are the limitations of smaller curves and large equipment.

There are lots of situations where you can easily find compromise cars that are designed for such curves but its tough with autoracks. The only two short ones I know of are the open autoracks by Life-Like and Tyco which are based on 50/60s prototypes.


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Eilif said:


> The Talgo trucks you ordered are likely the best solution but the idea of giving some play to the coupler box has merit as well especially if you can rig some kind of centering mechanism.
> 
> I suspect at this point you're spending more on upgrades then you did on the cars.
> 
> ...


I hear you guys keep saying it, and I keep repeating, the 89' closed autorack with body mounted Kadee couplers does just fine on this track. As do all the passenger cars that I have switched to body mount couplers. The issue isn't with the car length, it's that the initially chosen coupler had VERY little swing to it. Maybe half that of a standard Kadee coupler/gearbox combo. I'll see if the walthers trucks with any better than this setup, but so far this send a pretty good solution. 

I'm clearly not after the realistic prototyping that many of you are. I like the different types of cars and the variety. I do enjoy building models and will try to faithfully recreate some streamliner classics. But mostly, we just want to run trains. I can't afford to accurately model every car that catches my eye, especially if that means different consists, with different couplers, foreign makes etc. But we can modify some of those to run with what we have and enjoy the variety.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

vette-kid said:


> That works great, actually handles the R18 curves great as well. I need a way to put some sorry of centering spring on there, backing is less than perfect, but functional. A centering spring might help that.
> 
> Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


vette-kid;

You might try reinstalling the coupler mount screw closest to the end of the car, and removing the screw tat is closer to the truck. Try that arrangement on your track. If it works well, then the hole for the rear (closer to the truck) screw can be bent up and used as a spring bracket, Use a small, light pull coil spring, with one end in that hole, and the other end connected to a screw driven into the car floor further back toward the truck, and on the centerline of the car. That spring should then set the coupler back to center when it comes out of a curve. I'm glad you got things working. A pivoting coupler is one of the "several ways this is done" that I mentioned without explanation. It's an alternative to a talgo truck. Whatever works.

Traction Fan 🙂


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

To be honest, the challenge here is part of the fun. A mini torsion spring is what's needed. 

Remote turnouts switches however, ceased being fun a while ago

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

vette-kid said:


> To be honest, the challenge here is part of the fun.


I'll give you an "Amen" on that, brother! I love it when people say "It can't be done!" I just smile and say "Watch me!"


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

Same here. Impossible only costs a little bit more.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

To paraphrase Henry Ford, "if you think you CAN do something, or think you CAN'T do something, you're right."

As I'm fond of telling people, don't ask IF it can be done, but decide what needs to be done and do it. The Chinese have a proverb: the man who says something is impossible should not interfere with the man who is doing it.


----------



## Rich1853 (Jun 25, 2018)

vette-kid said:


> I got these auto racks made by Jeuf because o though they looked neat and I'm a car guy. I found some NEM adapters so I could mount Kadee couplers in place of the European style talgo trucks. They seem simple enough, but there isn't enough swing in the coupler and they bind even on my r22 curves when coupled together. One behind the loco did fine, and I imagine a might get away with putting other cars between then, I just haven't tried it yet. But they won't go back to back. I have an 89' enclosed autorack that takes that curve fine, although I only have one, so I can't test two together. Any ideas on how to get more coupler swing in this setup? Or a different option completely? I'd love to run these.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Andy57 said:


> What is that "T" thing? Do the trucks hit it? I did have that problem on some covered hoppers.
> Following.


The two "T" things are buffers


Andy57 said:


> What is that "T" thing? Do the trucks hit it? I did have that problem on some covered hoppers.
> Following.





Andy57 said:


> What is that "T" thing? Do the trucks hit it? I did have that problem on some covered hoppers.
> Following.


Those "T" things are called buffers found mostly on European trains.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Actually, the “T” things he mentioned are not the buffers....they are the little T shapes on the sides of the car, which are almost even with the outer axle of the truck.....which look like they could be hit by the truck in a turn.....


----------



## Railtwister (Nov 5, 2015)

The Kadee #451 coupler may fix your problem, check it out on Kadee’s website. You won’t be able to couple or uncouple on a curve, but once coupled together, you should be able to run through the curve.


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Railtwister said:


> The Kadee #451 coupler may fix your problem, check it out on Kadee’s website. You won’t be able to couple or uncouple on a curve, but once coupled together, you should be able to run through the curve.


I have those on order, thanks.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Old_Hobo said:


> Actually, the “T” things he mentioned are not the buffers....they are the little T shapes on the sides of the car, which are almost even with the outer axle of the truck.....which look like they could be hit by the truck in a turn.....


I'm not sure what it's supposed to be, but it doesn't not interfere with the trucks.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

I thought they were tie down points, but I don't see any others. Are they all up and down both sides of the car or only at these two points?


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

I initially thought tie down as will, but that's an odd location. It's only two on each end at that location from what I remember. I take a look and get better picture tomorrow if your interested.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

So, does “doesn’t not” mean it does?


----------



## Andy57 (Feb 7, 2020)

Yes Old_Hobo, that is what I was asking about. On my hoppers there was a ladder step that would stop the truck from turning properly on an 036 turnout. It would derail that truck or the truck on the coupled car. I used small clippers and cut off ladder steps and no problems now. Thanks


Old_Hobo said:


> Actually, the “T” things he mentioned are not the buffers....they are the little T shapes on the sides of the car, which are almost even with the outer axle of the truck.....which look like they could be hit by the truck in a turn.....


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Old_Hobo said:


> So, does “doesn’t not” mean it does?


Oops! Auto-correct gets me a lot, I need to proof read!

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Andy57 said:


> Yes Old_Hobo, that is what I was asking about. On my hoppers there was a ladder step that would stop the truck from turning properly on an 036 turnout. It would derail that truck or the truck on the coupled car. I used small clippers and cut off ladder steps and no problems now. Thanks


They are only on the ends, as I thought. They are close, but not interfering.
















Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Railtwister said:


> The Kadee #451 coupler may fix your problem, check it out on Kadee’s website. You won’t be able to couple or uncouple on a curve, but once coupled together, you should be able to run through the curve.


I got these today. They do work, sorta. I can't figure out the centering spring. It's installed, but it doesn't seem to do anything at all. The couplers still hang out to the side. I assume I'm doing something wrong, but the directions aren't that great and I don't see another way to put them together. The coupler in the gearbox works fine, but the spring at the back by the mounting screw didn't seem to do anything. 










Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## Murv2 (Nov 5, 2017)

I wonder if those tie downs are for securing a ramp at the end of the car, hinged up for transit, down for loading/unloading?


----------



## Aard D'Vaark (Aug 1, 2019)

those 't' shaped things -could- be a simulation for the water fill tees that passenger cars used to have ??


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Aard D'Vaark said:


> those 't' shaped things -could- be a simulation for the water fill tees that passenger cars used to have ??


But what would they be doing on an auto rack? Murv2 is on the right track; they're some kind of tie-dowh hardpoint.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Maybe those cars had a covering/tarp kind of thing that was anchored down over the cars being carried to protect them in transit, and the “T”s are the tie-down points for it.......?

We’re all WAGing this until someone finds the real answer.....


----------



## Andrey (Oct 20, 2019)

Hello. NEM and Kadee couplers can be coupled together. Watch this video since 6:18 to 6:34.


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Old_Hobo said:


> Maybe those cars had a covering/tarp kind of thing that was anchored down over the cars being carried to protect them in transit, and the “T”s are the tie-down points for it.......?
> 
> We’re all WAGing this until someone finds the real answer.....


Wag away, I'm curious now because you guys bright it up. I could have slept peacefully a lifetime before, but now that the question is out there it's going to bug me!

I searched briefly but I can't even find any info on this type of autorack. 

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Andrey said:


> Hello. NEM and Kadee couplers can be coupled together. Watch this video since 6:18 to 6:34.


That's one way to do it. 

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

vette-kid said:


> I got these today. They do work, sorta. I can't figure out the centering spring. It's installed, but it doesn't seem to do anything at all. The couplers still hang out to the side. I assume I'm doing something wrong, but the directions aren't that great and I don't see another way to put them together. The coupler in the gearbox works fine, but the spring at the back by the mounting screw didn't seem to do anything.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I thought I replied to this before, but apparently never posted it.

I have no experience with these couplers, but I have a set of Bachmann Spectrum New Haven coaches with swiveling coupler mounts. Those swivel in the same direction as the truck turns to help the coupler stay closer to the track centerline. Those look like they are swiveling in the opposite direction, so that the coupler is farther from the centerline. Could they be installed backwards or upside down?


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

They have no interaction with the trucks at all. I'll try and pay some pictures later of the 451 mechanism. I'm not really understanding how it's supposed to work at all. The little bushing and spring seem like they are unnecessary, but I don't imagine they are there for the fun of it, so I must be doing something wrong.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

As for those little “T” things....maybe they are jacking points/pads, for car maintenance..,..?


----------



## Jscullans (Jul 8, 2019)

traction fan said:


> vette-kid;
> 
> Your clear close-up photo of the couplers in a curve shows the basic problem. The now rigidly body-mounted couplers are way out over the rail because of the length of the cars, the relative positions of the trucks and couplers, and the tightness of even your 22" radius for those cars. That's why the manufacturer put talgo trucks on these cars in the first place, to let them make it around tight curves. The couplers need to be able to move when the car is in a curve. There are several ways this is done, but the easiest would be to mount Kadee talgo trucks with long shank couplers on the cars. The file below explains truck-mounted (talgo) vs. body mounted and behavior in curves.
> 
> ...


I am in complete agreement with your statement. I have some serious curves on my layout and auto rack cars don’t look good even on the curves that are roughly 5’ radius let alone being reliable on such a tight turn


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Jscullans said:


> I am in complete agreement with your statement. I have some serious curves on my layout and auto rack cars don’t look good even on the curves that are roughly 5’ radius let alone being reliable on such a tight turn


I don't understand this? My enclosed autorack (89'), is completely reliable around the R22. I've run it for close to an hour with no problems, out probably went around there 60+ times in a row. Now granted, it wasn't home to another autorack, just a 50' boxcar, because I only have the one at this time. But it seemed to do just fine. I won't argue on how it looks on that radius, it definitely has some overhang. But that isn't a concern for me, just the function. And your telling me you're won't run reliably on an R36!?

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk


----------

