Why doesn't the industry switch to z scale couplers

I've been putting Z couplers on most (but not all) of my Climax models, small steam, and models subject to EXTREME CLOSEUP on the camera. They work quite well, and work amazingly well in a mixed-mode operation between regular N couplers and the Z ones. I use magnetic uncoupling, too, with success - just rebend the trip pins.

What's out there isn't a bad compromise; a smaller coupler that works with the existing ones, for when it matters. I'm happy with that.

It is true though that if you look at really old MT couplers they are noticeably smaller than the 'standard' MT N coupler today, particularly on the vertical height. The biggest positive change has been on the RDA head modification that self-centers pulling forces to the head rather than the bad old days that pulled them apart. I trimmed hundreds of couplers myself to fix that.

I'd like to see a little more flexibility in the "Z" head designs where there was at least a drop-in; say a fit directly in the existing N trucks with no modifications; a drop-in fit to the 1015/1016 box, a drop in for the existing 1025 body-mount box, that kind of thing. I could certainly go for that in a big way. I'll keep the existing couplers on my long trains, but on display equipment and on all my logging equipment I'd convert to Z right now if it didn't mean retrucking and reboxing every car I have.

 

Also, the industry can no longer buy MTL Z-Scale trucks or couplers in bulk after July 31st. Micro Trains has cut out any other manf from using their Z products. BTW, the purchasing public can not buy Z trucks and couplers in bulk either.

Go figure ...

 

MTL Z is trying to make it harder for the competition to produce a RTR Z scale model .

MTL N puts in slinkies knowing many will buy reverse slinkies to replace them .

MTL N puts in sombreros knowing many will buy Lo-Pros to replace them .

 

This is called marketing, every industry does it. Marketing is not about selling a product people want, its getting people to buy the product you sell. I have some early Kato trucks with an N scale version of the HO X2F coupler, we're lucky the marketing people didn't push that one on us before Kadee stepped in.

A lot of us are not advocating wholesale change, just a better range of couplers for those of us who want them.

 

I have a troop train I put together with MTL troop sleepers and kitchen cars, and a bunch of WOT Harriman coaches. I have more problems with the MTL couplers on the Harriman coaches than any other couplers I own. Under a string of 10 or 15 Harrimans, they'll pull open, slip up and down, etc. etc. I have no problems with the Z scale couplers on my troop sleepers, and can drag them around trouble free on my club's N-Trak layout. The Z couplers are not as week or unreliable as people imagine. My biggest gripe is the slinky effect when slack runs in and out, and that's not much for me to gripe about when I know how to fix it.

 

Thanks everyone! I came away with a bunch and a new question.
1) A good reason I won't be switching is I won't be able to buy z in bulk..... Don't care why I can't, they won't be available, so for now the point is moot.
2) z is probably more expensive for a reason.
3) I need to look at my whole layout/hobby approach before any changes ie: will I lay my track carefully, do I intend to join a club, do I want to spend money on something that passes the 3' test? Do I want to spend time making this change? (Someone here spends time talking to the owner of the Big Little Train Store in NJ, or at least thats where I hear the 3' rule at a LHS)

And now the questions...
1) How do I fix the slinky effect?
2) Before I consider switching to McHenrys, is addressing the slinky effect a priority at MTL?

 

Slinky effect

Silly question:

Maybe one of our real life railway people can answer this for me. When a modern era freight comes to a stop...dont the cars 'compress' ( for the lack of a better word) slightly at the couplers? When the engine starts forward again...don't the 'compressed' couplers move away from each other just enough to cause a 'slinky effect'...especially with the more cars there are ?? I have seen freight trains start...and have heard all those freight cars clanking couplers while the engine creeps forwards quite a bit...before the last car actually begins to move. I am not sure if this is the effect everyone is talking about...or if they are haveing a problem with couplers moving back and forth while the train is already in motion. Can someone please explain 'The slinky effect' both in real life...and in our hobby...thnxs

 

Amen Charlie. Forget about trying to run Z scale equipped cars on most N-Track layouts. Been there done that, the fact is your train won't stay together the way most N-Trak layouts are set up. There is usually too much slop at the module interfaces for Z couplers to stay together. This is especially true with longer equipment like passenger cars and any longer freight equipment.

 

I prefer the Z couplers and do NOT pull long trains. If and when I have a problem with either an N MT or Accumate coupler and it needs replacement, I will replace with a Z, except for locomotives, which I will switch out voluntarily if it fits and is not a life altering event.

I will not, however, ever again try to assemble my own Z's. The pieces are just too small for comfortable handling, even with the MT Z jig.

 

Goodaye to all,
an interesting discussion going on here, first of all to answer George, I drive real trains (up to 99 wagons and 5000 tonnes and up to 1800 metres in length ) and there are considerable draft (pulling apart) and buff (pushing together) forces with a real train especially when you close the throttle too quickly from notch 8 (full throttle) to idle. The effect from doing so will almost give you whiplash such is the surge from behind. So on a long train you have to take care not to throttle up or down too quickly. On the full size trains you can coast for miles (kilometres) with the loco in idle (no power) with little reduction in speed, try that on a model (i have both N and Z ) and everthing comes to a sudden halt as soon as you remove power. So if you have problems with your model trains coming apart from a standing start or jumping off when you slow down, try to increase or decrease power with less haste just as i have to in real life, and think how much easier it is for you to replace wagons on track compared to full size.
I have converted a big chunk of my Marklin Z wagons to MTL couplers and can run 50 coal wagons with metal wheels behind a double ABA loco setup with only minor dramas, caused by variation in coupler height. This also happens in real life, if the difference in height between two couplers is more than the width of a clenched fist then we have to remarshall the train to eliminate the height difference.
long train fan
wunlwunt

 

Answer #1: The slinky effect a result of the design of the coupler with an in line spring. That spring is essential to the operation of the coupler. That is key to the design of the coupler so don't expect MTL to change it. But the "slinky effect" is easily and very cheaply remedied. But realize what causes it in the first place. That is lack of rolling resistance. In short the cars roll too easily so that when pulled the spring compresses then that energy is released causing the car to sort of yo yo back and forth. But note that this yo-yo effect only occurrs at the rear of the train. The cars in the front and middle have too much rolling resistance caused by the cars in the rear. All those people who changed wheelsets to metal wheels because they roll better are only exacerbating the slinky effect by reducing the car's rolling resistance. I have a unit train of Walthers double stacks equipped with MTL trucks/couplers. These cars are made of cast metal. They are not light weight by no means. There is no "slinky effect" with these cars because the weight causes more rolling resistance. But you don't have to add weight all your cars. All you need is one car with the axle resistance springs to add some drag to the rear of the train. The ideal car to use is a caboose. That's an easy way of knowing what car has the spring and which do not. Now if you don't want to deal with the dreaded "slinky effect" there are couplers that you can use. But be forewarned that all the other couplers have their downsides also and most of them are more significant than the slinky effect.

Answer to "2: As for the McHenry couplers, they are very new and I'm waiting for someone to run them in a long train on an Ntrak layout before I try them. But I am not going to ditch all my MTL's for them. As far as MTL addressing the slinky effect that would entail an entirely new design for their coupler so I don't think that will happen.

 

Even with good fitting joiner track modules with little or no center support, over time will tend to sag causing "ski jumps" at the module ends. These will cause couplers to ride over each other especially on long cars like passenger equipment

 

I'm just getting started in the hobby so I've been trying to decide which kind of couplers to go with so I can just convert them as I buy them, rather than decide 200 cars later. With that said, I had planned to go with MT N scale couplers. This talk about the slinky effect has given me a question. If you normally pull trains of 10-15 cars will you likely see the slinky effect or is it more likely to see it on longer trains?

 

This discussion is certainly interesting. However no one has mentioned the horizontal "gathering" area of the couplers. on truck mounted couplers this isnt much of a problem as the trucks align the couplers. On body mounted couplers the alignment varies with the length of car, short car long car's couplers dont align well on curves! Recuireing some fidling with an uncoupling tool. The smaller the couplers (z scale) the narrower this gathering area is. This however isnt as big a problem as the verticle as most cars are coupled Uncoupled on straight track areas. I thought it worth mentioning in this discussion. Also the transition from horizontal to grades affects how the smaller sized couplers perform. Too rapid a transition will cause the couplers to seperate vertically. Just two more areas to consider when decideing whitch couplers to use. Also these are factors that the manufacturer's have to consider also. Personally, N scale MTs are fine for my needs, except for a couple of engines that i'll show as artwork! Happy Modeling Y'all

 

Don't get me wrong.... I am PERSONALLY in favor of smaller, scale (Z-Scale Sized) couplers for my own use.
The issues of horizontal coupler alignment on curves doesn't impact me because I won't use 9 3/4" Radius curves or anything approaching them on my railroad.... in fact, I really moan when I have a situation where I have to go down past 24"....
For now let's not complicate this great discussion with the subject of wheel flanges and contours... while there is some interelationship and arguments that involve wheels when discussing truck mounted couplers, it isn't the issue.
I would agree that the M-T "slinky effect" is the cause of most false uncoupling... coupled with (sorry for the pun!) the loose tolerances of the coupler internal size, and the vertical slop in the coupler halves and draft gear box which are a result of the floating spring concept.
The RDA is a bandaide on a open sore.... it may mask the problem somewhat but does not solve the root cause of the problem.
We'll see how the McHenry does in service. We'll need some shank variations to meet
coupler problems that the M-T and Accumate do not solve.
Charlie Vlk

If Chuck Short is active on this list, please send me a private email... I have some questions for you!!!

 

Taking the Slack Out!

"Slinky Effect", is about as real as it gets. It's called "Slack" in American Railroad Lingo. Simply an engineer must take out the slack as he starts to move the train forward and must reduce the slack from behind as he prepares to stop.

The last time I wrote this I shared a story about my great uncle a conductor for the ATSF. I can repeat the story later but for some reason my computer and TB threw it off.

Slinky Effect, and we call ourselves modelers of the real rails or model railroaders. Unless something has changed in the world of railroad lingo it's still called "Taking the Slack out."

If you haven't already read "wunlwunt 220's" story from Australia, go back and read his account. It's directly above, at the start of this page.

Have fun!

 

I Highly Recommend MTL

On a visit to the Sacramento Railroad Museum and a train ride on a three car passenger train my dad pointed out that there is still a need to "Take up the slack". His point was well made when the engineer blew two shorts on the whistle, warning us we were about to move forward. Only forward was reverse and we were placed into our seats quickly and snuggly.

MTL isn't the only one that builds slack into their couplers. If you look long enough you will discover they all do. It's as real as it comes and creates for us the same operating problems the real rails experience. Now that's model railroading at it's best.

 

Slack , and slinky are very different .

Slack is slop , that once stretched taught holds the trains length to a constant .

Slinky , is that stinking spring many MTL types pull against . That causes the trains length to constantly change , as well as make the rear most of the train speed up then slow down noticeably .

Slack is ok , slinky stinks .

 

Thanks all. I thought there was a difference between "taking up the slack" and slinky. I was taught as a small boy that a train would first go into reverse to push the cars together. In this way it only had to exert enough energy to start 1 car rolling at a time. There is no way an engine could start a really long train all at once, but inertia etc. would allow the cars to be started 1 at a time. I'm guessing this is part of taking up the slack. Slowing down in scale also makes sence. Again inertia, the only brakes on a model train are in the loco. I'm guessing you guys that get to do this for a living have more braking

I'll google and seach on the tension springs for some of my cars. I run wierd mixtures of what my kids and I like, so we have length differences, weight differences etc... Thanks