I love my Cw44-9. I am amazed at the tight radius the engine it will go through, but it cannot pull any cars because of the body mounted coupler will cause derailing or uncoupling of the cars. So I have been thinking of ways to modify the coupler. First, I foud out on the SD-40's have a coupler box that can swing. Rob, can this be retrofited to the C44. My second Idea is to use to two wires to connect the engine to a car. MY third idea is to build a doble hinge coupler. Some of the modification wil permanently couple the engine to the car. I would like to hear what you think of my ideas, and would like to hear suggestion to the uncoupling problems in tight radius.
Tight radius curves are a problem for most of the AZL line. The locomotives have been designed to go through 195mm curves and broader. I personally like 220mm and above for looks and operations though I still use a lot of 195mm in my track work. For the sounds of it, you are running tighter than 195mm. The length of the loco and the body mounted couplers will cause issues. AZL and Ajin started producing locomotive with coupler boxs that swing a little to allow for more coupler movement. This has helped on the tighter curves. The problem with the C44 is the coupler box sits very tight in the shell. You will need to modify the brass around the coupler box in order for it to swing. In running these locomotives, I have found a weighted car right behind the loco really helps. Make sure the car has truck mounted couplers. I use FR hoppers since they are so heavy, but you can also use MTL or Pennzee cars with extra weight. Try this first and see if it helps. Next, what about the use of a draw bar? You may want to remove the coupler box from the loco and one car and add a permanent draw bar. This may go a long way to solving the problem and be a better solution than wires. It may also be easier than a double hinged coupler. Another solution is to double head with a SD40-2. I run a pair of NS AZLs at shows. In may case the SD40-2 leads the C44-9, but you can easily switch. The SD40-2s are also a little shorter which helps. For future considerations, AZL is planning more large locomotives. I really recommend for those planning layouts to consider using at minimum 195mm curved, but really try using 220mm or above. For instance, the upcoming AC12 cab forward may have issues running on 195mm (it is a massive loco!). The SD70s coming out will have truck mounted couplers. So operators rejoice! Rob Kluz
I have the same problem with my SD-45's, and just loosened the screw so the coupler can swivel more freely, and only use them on a 9" radius or larger. It is a long locomotive after all, and the problem stems from the distance from the trucks to the end of the shell, so I cannot think of a solution yet, othe than use a longer heavier car with body mounted couplers on one end as a head end car, and truck mounted couplers on the other end. -Robert
I knew the problem before purchasing the locomotive, but seeing how well it runs throught the smaller radius makes me want to find a soulution to the coupling issues. I think the perfect solution for the problem is truck mount the coupler, but that is beyond my limited skills. Today is a great day for me. I hit the perfecta. Two items came in today. First, my TRE engine came in, then the spine cars. After years of getting plain old mail, I finally received some royal mail.
I have been doing some experimenting with truck mounted and body mounted couplers on a box cars to see wich would work better, and to my surprise, body mounted coupler are less likely to derail on tight radius with the dash 9. The problem with truck mounted couplers is that the engine tend to pull the truck out of the rail. So, my short term solution is to run a Aztec cleaning car right behind the dash 9. The other solution is to run it with a F59, wich is also heavy enought to withstand the pulling of the couplers.
I have been messing around with an idea of using a pin and pintle setup for my SD45's. The idea is much like the Marklin Steamer's tender. I think I can make a crecent or half moon cutout shape of styrene that screws into the coupler pocket, Like a farming truck or old narrow gauge car's coupler but almost as wide as the locomotive yet only sticking out 1/10". And I would have a "head end" car that has a pin on a drawbar, just like a steamer tender, that is truck mounted to a well weighted car with normal MTL couplers on the other end. As the locomotive negotiates tight radius turns, the pintle would swing over the outside rails, but because of the crecent cutout, the pin would just slide to the inside rail side of the pintle on the turns naturally, and not derail itself or any other cars behing it. This is something I can do really easy, and if it works, I'll cut you out some out of plastic so you can fix your loco for tight radius turns too. -Robert
Robert, let us know how your experiment works. I like your idea. If it works, just make extras. Like all your stuff, more of us would want some of it. By the way, I am really interested in your center beam car. It really looks nice, but I am a proscrastinating because all my purchases have to be in money order. It doesnt leave any evidence, but its not as convenient as credit card.
Robert, I been thinking about your crescent shape coupler. Since you have access to a laser. Why not make it out laser cut plexiglass. I think the trick to make it work is to make it a percect semi-circle, so that it doesn't bind as it make the turn. I guess I am wishfull thinking in finding the perfect coupler to my C-44-9.
Robert, I been thinking about your crescent shape coupler. Since you have access to a laser. Why not make it out laser cut plexiglass. I think the trick to make it work is to make it a percect semi-circle, so that it doesn't bind as it make the turn. I guess I am wishfull thinking in finding the perfect coupler to my C-44-9.
That's a good idea. I'm going to stop by Tap Plastics after work and see what thicknesses I can find. -Robert
