# Kadee vs. Sergent Engineering



## patrick.b (Mar 8, 2017)

I finally have enough equipment that I want to standardize couplers. My layout is focused on switching and yard operations, so having good quality couplers that all work with eachother is critical. 

I plan to replace all rolling stock and locomotive couplers with the same type. I have narrowed down my search to Kadee #158 and Sergent Engineering Type E.

At this point, I dont see myself ever taking my equipment to other railroads (none of the clubs around me model my era) and I could always utilize a conversion car if I had to.

I would appreciate any pros or cons to one or the other based on first hand experience.


----------



## ncrc5315 (Jan 25, 2014)

Personally, I really like the Sergent couplers. They are very realistic looking, they operate more like the real coupler, and the magnetic wand works better than bamboo skewers for uncoupling.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

FWIW, this boils down to pure opinion, and virtually everybody has one... bent toward one or the other (or undecided).
There are pros & cons for each, and neither Kadee nor Sergeant has (or lacks) a majority of advantages over the other.


----------



## quigly7777 (Oct 21, 2017)

Can both Kadee and Sergeant work together?


----------



## patrick.b (Mar 8, 2017)

quigly7777 said:


> Can both Kadee and Sergeant work together?


No, Sergent Engineering doesnt work with any other coupler. Kadee will work with nearly all couplers.

Does anyone have experience using Sergent Engineering couplers on locomotives, are there any issues with installation?


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

If the end of a Kadee car is lifted, the Kadee can be lowered into coupled position with a Sergeant.
Lift again for uncoupling.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

patrick.b said:


> Does anyone have experience using Sergent Engineering couplers on locomotives, are there any issues with installation?


As far as I know, the major issue with installing Sergeants is the _gear box_ (when it has to be used)... on both rolling stock and locomotives.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

I guess I've been misspelling Sergent (at least 3 times).
I auto-defaulted to my Army rank. Sorry.


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

There's no question the Sergent couplers _"look more realistic"._

But... for all practical purposes... that seems to be the end of it.
At least for me.

The Kadees are more compatible, and FAR cheaper per unit.
Enough different variations in the product line to fit almost anything (I said, "almost").
They look and work well enough. Very well, in fact.

Kadee set the standard for everyone else, back in the early 60's (or was it earlier than that?).


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

According to their web-site, Kadee became a company in 1940, and their couplers seem to date back to 1947.....


----------



## ncrc5315 (Jan 25, 2014)

I say to each their own. As i said earlier, I like the looks and operation of the Sergents.
Yes Kadee's are the "standard", and they are everywhere, but the same could be said for horn hooks.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

That's comparing apples to oranges.....hwell:


----------



## patrick.b (Mar 8, 2017)

Thanks for the input everyone, I do appreciate it.

I think I am going to pick up a few of the Sergent couplers to test them and make sure I like how they operate before investing in a large order.


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

Old_Hobo said:


> According to their web-site, Kadee became a company in 1940, and their couplers seem to date back to 1947.....


And all the other Kadee-compatible knuckle coupler variations today were copies off Kadee when their patent expired.


----------



## Severn (May 13, 2016)

Huh, no idea there were any other options. I mean kadee's the best right? But lo and behold the Sergent looks very realistic. 

One problem I have with all this kind of stuff though, is I can't really see it too much. From say 2 ft or more away which I am just about always at least this far from engines and cars -- I can't see much of the detail. When they are moving, it's all just a blurrrrr.

It never really occurred to me the the kadees were not realistic looking. but I guess compared to the sergents, they only resemble real couplers.

I guess, if i ever run into any sergents, I might buy some just to look at them up close. It's possible I'd be a convert and want to replace all I have but it seems unlikely.

I could see doing one engine, and then a conversion piece of rolling stock on hand if I got real excited by it... (sergent on one end, kadee on the other)

That seems a little unlikely but maybe...


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

So, if you can't really see them anyway, as you have said, why would you bother....?


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

FWIW, I've never replaced something I couldn't see very well.


----------



## Severn (May 13, 2016)

Right. Agree. But like the looks and was not aware of the product. So I'm a little open minded. They appear to need a "wand" to engage and disengage. And on a forum I got the idea there's an issue with supply. Although I could be wrong as I was just skimming. Having said all that it's just a general pt about the labors of the fine detail which appear to me to be invisible much of the time. And so is it worth it.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

To some of the "rivet counters", it may be worth it, to other modellers, maybe not.....

For me, Kadees are the best....they just plain work, as well as work with other brands, they are reasonably priced, and have a variety of different couplers that will work on the various equipment out there.....

As for being a slave to detail, what amuses me is the folks who need to have track code that is so prototypical, right down to the height of rail in the thousant of an inch....to run their horn hook Tyco cars on.....:laugh:


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

ncrc5315 said:


> I say to each their own. As i said earlier, I like the looks and operation of the Sergents.


I can understand the notion that Seargents are a step closer to the real thing in appearance and operation. But from what I understand, mostly you have to assemble them yourself and I've read that is quite the process that has to be done well or operation is negatively affected.

To me it may make sense if you have a limited roster of equipment, but if you have hundreds of pieces of rolling stock, it could be quiet a hobby in and of itself to get them all outfitted and working well.

Add to that I've also read that the guy who manufactures Seargents is trying to get out of the business so getting product may not be reliable in the future.



> Yes Kadee's are the "standard", and they are everywhere, but the same could be said for horn hooks.


Right and horn hooks are in the waste bin everywhere, while Kadee's are on most experienced model railroaders rolling stock. There is a reason for both, but I guess I digress?





> So, if you can't really see them anyway, as you have said, why would you bother....?


WTF? Really? I can only speak for myself, and probably 95% of other model train hobbyists and say, BUT you can see'em! As a teen with my early experience with HO, I thought horn hooks looked and worked like crap and was happy to see them go. Heck, I remember watching that Loan Ranger movie with Johnny Depp and there is a long train scene. They invented their own couplers for the train and they looked really weird - there were a number of shots in the movie where you could see them top down. Anyway, Some may not notice how couplers look but I'd think that's the exception.


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

Old_Hobo said:


> As for being a slave to detail, what amuses me is the folks who need to have track code that is so prototypical, right down to the height of rail in the thousant of an inch....to run their horn hook Tyco cars on.....:laugh:


Enjoying yourself with that "straw horse" example? 

I imagine there may be someone out there that does that, but I haven't see him yet . 

Now back to the real world. Oh, sorry to drag you out of that fantasy.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Well, I have seen what I have mentioned, actually a couple of times, so I am already in reality....but thanks for your efforts anyway.....


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

riogrande said:


> WTF? Really? I can only speak for myself, and probably 95% of other model train hobbyists and say, BUT you can see'em! As a teen with my early experience with HO, I thought horn hooks looked and worked like crap and was happy to see them go. Heck, I remember watching that Loan Ranger movie with Johnny Depp and there is a long train scene. They invented their own couplers for the train and they looked really weird - there were a number of shots in the movie where you could see them top down. Anyway, Some may not notice how couplers look but I'd think that's the exception.


Easy buddy....I wasn't the one who said you can't see them.....that was Severn......I was just asking the rhetorical question.....

As for the Lone Ranger movie, much of that train was pure CGI, so that may not be a good example to go by......

Just sayin'.....


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

Old_Hobo said:


> Easy buddy....I wasn't the one who said you can't see them.....that was Severn......I was just asking the rhetorical question.....
> 
> As for the Lone Ranger movie, much of that train was pure CGI, so that may not be a good example to go by......
> 
> Just sayin'.....


The point remains, even of propagating someone else's comment. Does it really make sense to not care about how couplers look? Truthfully they are not accurate replica's of real couplers, but rather something that is a compromise, which look roughly like real couplers and operate well. Even if you don't look at Kadee's, it would be hard to argue they are the best and most reliable option in HO.

As for the train scenes - from making the movie:



> Making the movie
> Disney and Bruckheimer originally planned to film on an existing mining railroad in southern New Mexico. Construction of the movie's Western towns was already in progress when Disney and Bruckheimer decided to build a brand-new railroad farther north. Albuquerque, N.M.-based Gandy Dancer Railroad and Excavating Services received contracts to do the job. The new line had no outside interchange and was removed after filming was complete.
> 
> According to the production company, Gandy Dancer hauled in 3,889,425 pounds of 33-foot rail, bars, tie places and ties from Blythe, Calif. An additional 60,429 pounds of bolts, washers, and other track parts came from Kansas City, Mo., and 402,000 pounds of ties and spikes from Stockton, Calif. The result was a five-mile loop of single- and double-track line in the Rio Puerco desert. Another mile of track, for the many mining scenes, was built near Creede, Colo.
> ...


Sounds like a real physical train to me. Regardless, my comment was that the train had some very odd looking couplers, CGI or no. The interesting thing is by the design of the couplers, if you turned a car around 180 degree's it would not couple to the car next to it. They could only couple one way, sort of a male, female design. Very odd and stood out to anyone with an interest in trains. You know, kind of like horn hook couplers looking odd too.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

Eeesh. :dunno:


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

riogrande said:


> The point remains, even of propagating someone else's comment. Does it really make sense to not care about how couplers look? Truthfully they are not accurate replica's of real couplers, but rather something that is a compromise, which look roughly like real couplers and operate well. Even if you don't look at Kadee's, it would be hard to argue they are the best and most reliable option in HO.


Hey, I agree with you.....I can see the couplers, so it matters to me how they look.....that's why all my locomotives and cars are Kadee equipped....

Again, I wasn't the one who originally said you can't see them......


----------

