A while back, and I am sure more then a year or so, I read somewhere about replacing the MT coupler spring with a piece of rubber band for getting rid of the Micro Trains coupler bouncy, bounce, slinky effect. Well, I started to do this on Tuesday and it works amazingly well. Solves the problem so the car moves the same as those that have Accumates or McHenery N scale couplers. As it only takes less then two minutes to do each one from removing from the car, removing the wheels and coupler box, to making the change and reassembling it all. Not hard at all. As to the rubber band I used one that is a little less wide as the spring is long and gut a narrow piece the with of the spring. Close seems to work for doing this. As how to support the truck while I do this is shown in the pictures. The flat car was the perfect height to support the part that is not supported by the wood. You will have to fine what works for you. Using tweezers I put the two coupler parts back on, then drop the piece of rubber band in the slot where the spring was. Then again using the tweezers, laid the box on so the clips lain in the slots on the piece with the other parts. Now is the part that gets a little tricky the first few times you try it. That is to get it all together. A little practice and it becomes easy. I hold the box down while sliding my finger under the truck and lifting it up. Then push the two parts of the coupler box together what sliding the box cover forward until it locks into place. Done! I had a few fall apart as I was assembling them until I got the hang of it. Same with with dropping the rubber band piece in. Takes only a few seconds to redo and start again. Some of the couplers may not line up in the center as with the spring, but as I have no problem with tapping the coupler with a skewer to line it up, it is no big deal to me and the running performance is so much more realistic it is worth the few times I may have to do this. I figure I will change out the rubber band piece if any one does it on a regular bases. And the last attached picture is of my two want to be helpers. Had to chase them out while I put this post together. Cats do not type very well.
Ken, Thanks for the post, seems like a good solution. Assembly of MT couplers is not one of my most favorite things to do. Maybe if I did more of them I'd feel different about it. Happy Railroading Harold
There is nothing like see sawing back and forth until a train starts to take shape and the last car is added on. Back the locomotives up to the train and watch the motion of the "Slack" move down and through the train as they couple up. With the train inspected, all air hoses attached, air check complete and the conductor, yard super and DS give the highball, it's time to get this train out of town. I love to sit back and watch the slack action as the miniature engineer, in the cab, throttles up and the train pulls forward. Following the slack action all the way back to the caboose aka crummy. Oop's the engineer is going to hear about that one. Pulled to hard and knocked the coffee pot off the stove. Someone is going to have to clean that mess up. Realistic? What could be more realistic then a train acting and behaving like the real deal? I'ma thrilled with MTL's and wouldn't change a thing. Just like the hog heads on the 1X1 foot scale I have to move my locomotives about with extreme caution and care. Howbeit the "Slack" being a bit over stated it is about as close as you are going to get. So, don't be messing with my couplers and when you come to railfan my layout....sit back, relax and watch the finest realisim and performance of model trains operating prototypically. ( Is there such a word?) Humm, me thinks I spent to much time track side watching my family of Rails, operate locomotives, switch out train cars and make up trains. Yep, 1X1 foot scale protoitis or something like that.:uhoh:
Rick, once again you have no idea what's being talked about. This isn't about 'slack action', this is about cars bouncing back and forth while the train is moving. Jason
May work for a few years until the rubber deteriorates like most rubber bands do. No thanks, I'll keep the springs and properly weight my cars. Jerry
That's a killjoy solution. If you have nice, free-rolling metal trucks, yet have to put on restraining springs, that's not fun anymore.
slack action = good cars in the back jerking back and forth = bad I don't think the rubber band method is THE solution, as rubber deterioration has been mentioned. But I think he's on to something. How about a thin brass plate that springs side to side? That won't jerk the train back and forth. I must admit I'm seeing less and less of this as I have more metal-wheeled cars on my layout.
Cutting up a rubber band that you found in your desk drawer would probably be a poor choice for material. What about some of the red rubber material used for making gaskets though? That stuff would probably not dry up over time.
I usually don't have much bouncing with cars. But I have a rotary plow and a KM locomotive ( both dummies) that I push sometimes. Those will bounce. I use cut pieces of heatshink tubing instead of the spring, no more bounce.
In Barstow Rick's defense (although i recognize that the "bouncy bounce" problem exists) the coupler slack phenomenon afforded with M-T couplers on a starting train is valid, and I enjoy seeing it, too. In fact, when I was a kid, I lived along the Erie at the foot of Gulf Summit, where there were often helper engines hooked onto the end of the train, and when they started up again, they used coupler slack to get the train underway. The engine up front would yank the train BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM right down the line, and then the pusher shoved and right up the line the train went BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM, and so on. I doubt you could duplicate that in N scale, even with DCC, but in real life it was pretty awesome. Living in a small town, where nearly everyplace was "near" the railroad, I saw and heard coupler slack all he time, and when a long M-T train is started up, in that respect at least, it is very realistic.
Well, there's no problem with that. The problem is after you get all that slack out of the train, it starts to 'bounce' down the track. It just looks very poor when you're running, and makes it look like you have a poor running engine as well as not looking realistic. I mostly do switching layouts, so I don't have to worry about it much. Slow speeds and a few cars make it hard to notice, but it's one of the most noticeable things at shows IMO, and I'm glad it doesn't just bug me! Alex
I knew this would stir up the hornets. Jay: Slack is still taken up as in the real thing as the rubber piece does not stop the coupler parts from moving. They just move a lot less.Once the slack is taken up then there is minimal back and forth as with real rail car couplers. I have never talked to any one who worked on or around trains that said the bouncy bounce slinky back and forth happens on the real thing. It does not and any one who thinks so is in denial. Watch any train in person or on videos and the cars do not bounce to the rear and the to the front over and over. No one would put up with that. Not the crews or the shippers with having damaged goods, nor passengers. The husband of a friend of my wife's who drove engines (F40PH) on the SF peninsula commuter line came over to look at the layout and when he saw my cars doing this, his comment was, to the affect, "what is wrong with the cars that bounce". And no he is not into model railroading.:crying: So sad, I know. As to the rubber going bad. This is a newer rubber band so I know it will last a long long time before I have to worry. I will deal with that when it happens. It is so very easy now for me to swap it out for an other piece. I may refine the process if I come up with something even better, but I will swap out all MT couplers and trucks to Accumates before I will ever go back to the way the MT couplers were. It is not going to happen. So, there. Any way I put this out as a method to correct a major failing of the couplers. You can use it or not. As you please. As of now it works very well for my needs.
just to trow it out there i use a dcc eot car the drag is enough to get a lot of the slinky out.it keeps it tight.
Jerry: My cars are properly weighted. Weight or no weight had nothing to do with the MT slinky effect. I have tried it both ways. Still the same problem. So for a few years I get a much more realistic model railroad while others watch bounce, bounce. A few years with the rubber bands is very good for me. It is so very easy to replace.
I just ran all 11 of the cars I have done so far, behind one of my GP38-2s from one end of the layout to the others. Through the yard, over switches, #4 and #6, straight and diverging route then around 11" curves and up a 2% grade that wraps around the back side. About 80feet. Absolutely flawless. Then backed it up the whole distance. Absolutely flawless. When you can run backwards on all of the layout as I was able to do with these cars you know you have gotten it correct. I will start on the rest tomorrow.
Might be to stiff? Though if you come up with something as easy as a rubber band give it a try. The rubber band usage is not written in stone. It is what I had and I knew it will, in the future need to be replaced, but that is a long ways away. As far as uncoupling with magnates. I have know idea as I gave up doing that. I only use skewers. Maybe some one will try it and let us know if it works.
I do not enjoy seeing cars go bounce bounce or slink slink (whatever you want to call it), however I only notice it occuring on two bay hopper cars or other light weight cars. After adding weight to these cars the bounce bounce effect goes away for me. I'm sorry it does not work for you. In any case not all layouts, trains or operators are the same. I also will not tolerate cars that defy coupling up with one another for any reason. I applaud your interest in resolving this issue and hope that it fuels more thought on the subject. Jerry
