Has anyone else noticed that the couplers on the Kato GEVO are a lot higher than they should be? Even when compared with other Kato engines. Here are a few comparisons: GEVO/sd80mac View attachment 50527 GEVO/AC4400 View attachment 50528 GEVO/hopper with MTs: View attachment 50529 I was hoping not to have to convert my GEVOs to MTs because I actually like the look of the Kato couplers, but it looks like I'll have to after all.
I just checked both (754 and 819) and everything seems to be OK. The shell and gas tank both snapped into place on the chassis, and I gave an extra little push down just to make sure, but the couplers (again on both GEVOs) still sit higher than on my other engines. Strange. In any event, what would be the best MT couplers to install? It's been a while, but I seem to recall using 2004s on my sd80mac and they were a cinch to install. Would they work for the GEVO as well, or should I use 1015s (or something else)?
I can't be sure what is going on from the photos, and since I have nothing near that modern in my roster, nothing to compare it to. But in the 2nd photo what catches my eye is the difference in platform heights. I would want to compare this loco to another exactly like it to see if it is an issue with your loco rather than another model. Since other folks have stated they don't have the issue at this time could be just an issue with an individaul run rather than across the board. Last time I had something similar to this, although with an F unit, it was an issue with the wrong type of machine screw heads keeping the body high even though the body fit and snapped to the chassis. The change out of the machine screws to a flat head version cured my issue then. As far as coupler change out I would suggest the MT 1015 because the coupler box tends to be a little taller than the other models which would set the coupler down more maybe without the use of multiple shims. I also noted that the plow seems to ride higher in the 2nd photo which again suggests a shell ride heigth issue.
The shell is not all the way down. Check the underbody detail, be sure it is on the pegs under the walkway and fits inside the top of the fuel tank. The coupler is correct for the loco, the body is riding too high. Bob.
I think I've got the shell as flush as it can possibly get. Here are some more photos: View attachment 50550 View attachment 50551 View attachment 50552 View attachment 50553 View attachment 50554 View attachment 50555
OHhhhhhhhhh...its CSX...that explains alot !!! lol But seriously....in the last 3 photos it does look like the shells are the same height...hmmmmm. Got me baffled now :-S
The thing is the ac4400 and the gevo have the same mech. and sill and walkway. I have both the same engines no. 754 and no. 18 and there height is identical. in a side note that is how i changed the front and back railings on my gevo from a csx ac4400 no. 37 so now the gevo has the wide railings. I have changed the couplers on mine to micro trains 1015's
I can't tell from your new pictures either, but it also looks to me like the GEVO shells are riding too high. Mine have the walkways (and couplers) at the same level as my ac4400's and dash-9's. Is it possible you have the detail skirting that sits under the walkway attached backwards? Just grasping at straws...
strange. as said by others the shell sits too high. i have 3 dozens kato gevos and 100+ ac4400 and all have their couplers at the right height. however, there's one question still unanswered. did you install a decoder ? depending on type and version the decoder might cause the shell to sit too high. you'd have to carefully mill the shell on the inside. been there, done that.
I installed TCS decoders the other day, and I also replaced the long shank couplers with short shanks, but even the original couplers were like this out of the box.
It's not the decoder. I just pulled it out and put the shell back on without any circuit board inside. No difference. I'll just install MT 1015s and be done with it. Kato couplers don't function very well anyway.
Seems like you're just kicking the can down the road. If the stock couplers are sitting too high, won't the replacement couplers have the same issue? -Mark
There's nothing else I can do. The shell won't sit any further down than it already does, nor should it really. In spite of what's been said, if you look at the last photos I posted, it sits at exactly the same height as the AC4400 shell. As someone else noted, the 1015 coupler box may serve to push the coupler downward to the correct height.
NS 737, were the handrails direct replacements or did you have to modify them? I never understood why Kato di nit put the wide rails on the Gevos since they already had them. Jeff
I removed the front plows to give a clearer view of the difference between the AC4400 (left) and the GEVO (right): View attachment 50588 View attachment 50589 I'm pretty sure the coupler mounting on the GEVO is higher.
Does look like a design issue. Same size wheels right? And if you removed all the topside circuitry then the idea of a machine screw is null and void. No flash on the inside of the shell or on the chassis that could hold it up a tad? Is there also a difference in the rear coupler heigth? Could be the shell is not sitting level on the chassis front to rear. If it is level both couplers should be too high. As far as using the MT 1015 it would have to be used with looks like at least two shims to bring it down. Then it also looks like the pilot would have to be notched out some to allow the lower position and probably ditto for the plow.
