Tonight I took 14 new cars in a Deluxe Freight Car Case to our club layout in Vista, CA. Out of the 14 cars 3 failed immediately. All 3 failures were on cars equipped with Accumate couplers. Two had couplers that the knuckles wouldn't close. One drooped so low that the pin caught on the ballast and popped the coupler out of the pocket. No cars equipped with Micro Trains couplers failed. I just didn't feel like fixing them. I shouldn't have to on a new car. I was there to run trains, not make repairs on brand new cars. I know some people on this forum find Accumate couplers to be O.K. Accumate failures are the largest problem I have with equipment by a long shot. They aren't a good design and are trouble prone. I feel much better after venting.
Normally MTL are my favorites, too. Nevertheless I just don't want to waste all these Accumate trucks, and they are not that bad And the Accumate 100 ton roller bearing trucks have no real equivalence by MTL, so I use them for the respective cars. Using MTL 1035 with 36" Fox Valley wheels is what I do for MTL cars. I have found that the coupler boxes of the Accumates tend to open a bit, due to poor fit of that tiny clip that holds it shut. Pressing them shut with fine tweezers helps. Fastening with a "micro-dab" of glue might help more. Still there is a certain variation in the coupler height, probably to higher tolerances of the parts. I normally exchange couplers and try until it fits. Especially the Deluxe cast flat cars have been converted from MTL to Accumate by me, because the MTL coupler pin collides with the casting where the brake wheel shall be mounted. I still have to mount the brake wheel on these cars, and they might end up with MTL trucks as well. With Accumate trucks they are too long for their boxes, with MTL it is a tight fit (a bit too tight IMHO).
I think the more recent editions of Accumates have solved the 'explosive disassembly' feature the early versions had. I frequently received brand new cars four or five years ago with the coupler disassembled in the jewel box (Intermountain boxcars & Atlas wood reefers). After IMRC stopped using the Accumates and went to Micro-trains as their standard coupler... Accurail improved the coupler box to cut down on the undesired disassembly feature. This is not to say that it may still happen to this day... but at least the ones I've received on the Atlas & Athearn rolling stock have behaved thus-far. Some of the Accumates still droop somewhat and I have to bend the metal pin upward to avoid catching on turnouts... but I've had to do that with Micro-trans too. So Pete... as John asked on the prior post... who is the manufacturer and is it a current (within the past 2 years) release?
i replaced all accumates with mt trucks. then i sold the accumates on ebay you'd be amazaed how much you actually get for them. (about 4 dozens or so. can't remember)
Car 1 Athearn tank car (coupler fell apart) Car 2 Athearn box (Old roundhouse tooling) (knuckle won't close) Car 3 Athearn bulkhead flat (knuckle won't close) All are brand new. First time on track. All have been purchased within the last 4 months. Of the 14 cars in the Deluxe Innovations box, 7 had Accumates (3 failures 43% failure rate) 7 had Micro Trains (0 failures 0% failure rate) Not a great scientific study because the sample is to small, but certainly an indication of quality issues. I was used to the older Accumates failing. Most of the older cars from a couple years ago, when I bought a string of Atlas tank cars, have had the Accumates replaced with MT. It gets expensive to pay for a nicely detailed car and have to shell out additional money to replace the couplers. Reminds me of the old Tonka slogan, "A toy shouldn't break just because you play with it" Makes me want to find one of the new Athearn cars with the McHenry couplers.
I'm not particularly thrilled with the last few cars I bought with the Accumates. They aren't very reliable on uncoupling ramps at all. They may uncouple but they seldome offset for backing cars into sidings. IMHO, the MT's are far more reliable in that situation.
Pete, Try this. After putting a small dab of glue on the clips which hold the couplers on the trucks, push the coupler from the "knuckle" side toward the "thumb" side. Insert a piece of 0.010" styrene between the coupler spring and the side of the box. This will have the effect of increasing the spring tension, giving a better hold. Plus, having glued the box, it's less likely to "explode". I've done this to several cars and it works well. Hope this helps...John C.
But what about the truck? If they are using the Accumate truck then the coupler box sticks out too far and you still have that 10 foot gap between cars. I would like to see the McHenry coupler with a "T" shank and a shorter one at that.
There are definitely two camps on this one. Some like the plug-and-play reliability of MT right out of the box. Others prefer the non-slinky action of the Accumates. The good news in this is that there is a market for swapping right here at Trainboard. Several years ago, we had folks actively seeking Accumates in trade for MTs. The ratio was based upon retail price differences (I think I traded around 50 Accumates trucks/couplers for 30 something MTs). Those who are looking to convert might make their desires known.
I have use Atlas cars with the Accumates on my pass N Scale ISL(Industrial Switching Layout) with good results.Mind you that was pushing/pulling 1-5 cars at a time.
I have now read "slinky action" in about three coupler-related threads over the last few days after never hearing it used before. What does "slinky action" mean? (And I will go ahead and say "DUH!" in advance since I am sure it will be obvious as soon as I read it!) Jamie
The design of the MT couplers makes them act like a "slinky" (toy). This is especially obvious on grades. When pulling a car with MT, the coupler spring is compressed. As tension on the spring is relieved, the spring will uncompress. The Accumates provide a more rigid connection. That is why I prefer Accumates vs. Microtrains on engines such as most/all Atlas offerings. I never liked having my engines "piston" as they traveled around the layout. Edit: CSX - I just noticed your age from the Trainboard post. At 41, it is possible that you missed the "Slinky" craze (60's and earlier IIRC). Things were very boring back then, although with a Slinky as the alternative, playing with trains had great appeal! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slinky
The DI cars with Accumate are from the first generation of Accumate. The current Accumate couplers on current release Atlas cars are from the third or fourth generation. Much improved.
One former N scaler, Kisatchie (and his banana toting sidekick Dee Rayle), used to combine the MT coupler box with the Accumate coupler to get a coupler like a Micro-trains without the slinky action.
I had a slinky when I was a little, though it was made out of plastic and I never had stairs to watch it go down =( I was told that the original ones were made out of metal and also made your hands smell after you played with it! =0 Anyhow, back to the original topic, I hate the slinky action when switching cars, but I HATE the Accumates even more so I'll deal with the slinky. You mean you had one that the pin actually stayed in on? Amazing!:tb-biggrin: -Mike
To be 100% clear, this is true of some MT couplers. For instance 1015's have the spring in front of the pivot, so no slinky going forward, but slinky in reverse. 1023's have the spring behind the pivot, so slinky going forward, no slinky in reverse. Grab your coupler gently and push straight in and out. If it moves, you may have slinky action, if not, you won't. Also for the record, this may be prototypical. There is some slack action on some prototype cars, and cushioned underframe cars can have even more movement. Not everyone likes it though; and a lot depends on your particular grades and train lengths.
