Has anyone tried this? I was messing around with a Bachmann bobber caboose that I had just put new wheelsets and couplers on, and decided that the 2004 couplers sticking out at each end was way the heck out of scale (especially compared to such a small caboose). I got to thinking about what the HO scalers do for scale couplers, they use HOn3, then I figured I'd try bolting up a Z coupler to this caboose, and lo and behold it works perfectly with regular N scale couplers!!! I'd post pics, but I don't have a digicam yet... Maybe within a few days.
If the whole train were Zscale MT-equipped, would it still be as reliable as N MT couplers? Would break-in-twos occur on long trains, when they normally wouldn't on the same train Nequipped? Wht's the price difference? What's the conversions for say, a Kato SD40-2, and SD80MAC, Atlas SD60M? LL Geep 20's? Freight cars would all have to be body-mounted, tho... That's a lotta work on 150+ cars.... On cabeese it would look more proto, but easier to convert than the whole goshdarn fleet!
You know, on a side note, MT-equipping a passenger loco such as an E9, or F7 with Z-scale couplers up front, and on the last car of the train would look very nice.... Rather than a huge stock MT coupler hanging out the pilot.....
I have been using z scale couplers on my engines and cabooses for many years. I have had no problems with them pulling apart. here is a picture (I hope) of a GP20 that I just finished. http://www.sdsons.org Jim
This certainly is a great idea putting Z scale couplers on back end of cabeeses and the pilots of steamers. I have just started doing that also. I wish that all those experienced model railroaders out there that have been doing this for years would have mentioned it earlier to us newbies. It seems us new guys have to keep reinventing the wheel. These Z scale couplers certainly look better than the N scale ones on the pilots of steamers, particularly the Bachmann Consolodation, but I doubt they would hold a 70 car N scale coal train or a ten car heavyweight passenger train if they were put on the back end of a steamer tender or diesel. How about someone doing a test of their holding strength. I think all you long experienced model railroad guys should be posting tips like this on Trainboard for the new guys and even if someone is already doing it, a little reminder never hurts.
I don't have any test data, but several guys in our NW NTRAK Club have cars and locos equipped with Z Scale couplers and they haven't caused any problems, especially for home layout use. I know that they aren't as strong as the normal N Scale couplers, but should not be a problem with passenger trains (less than 30 cars) or freights less than 50 cars. For the monster record-breaking NTRAK 200+ car trains I would put them on the back end as even the regular MicroTrains knuckles will give out under the right conditions with enough weight on them... Charlie
That is exactly what I have in mind. I have some E-8's and a Consolidation that all need pilot couplers. I may temporarily mount a coupler on the tail of a string of heavy locomotives, and sacrifice one coupler for the purpose of testing strength. If I do so, I'll let y'all know how it goes.
What N scale really needs is a scale coupler, such as has been done by Kadee in HO scale with the #58. I have about 50 of my frieght cars converted to body mounts. I did experiment with the Z scale couplers on some of my N equipment. They look great. The biggest problem is with the mounting of the coupler boxes. The Z scale boxes are smaller than the regular N ones and the shank is shorter. Due to the shorter shank, the mounting box must hang past the end of the car in some applications, (89' flats etc.). Micro Trains has realized that there is demand for closer to scale flanges, maby the N "scale" coupler is coming next. A scale coupler may help them get back some of the market lost to accu-breaks and other MT knock offs. Brian
Whatever happened to the new Kato coupler. It was on the RDC cars and the caboose they released. I thought they were to make it available in bulk packs. Also, MT had their low profile flange wheelsets out several years before the hoopla raised by Atlas's code 55. Most people never paid any attention to them and were quite content with the regular wheelsets. Suddenly Atlas releases its code 55 track and because of a manufacturing problem has to make the spikes oversized. As a result MT regular wheelsets are now taboo. In general if you want to run low profile wheels and scale sized couplers be prepared to redo your track because the smaller the scale the smaller the tolerances. It can (and has been) done. The question one must answer is the usual one of does the end result justify the time, effort and money one has too invest to achieve that result. That is a question that each one of us has to answer for ourselves.
I have never experienced any operational problems with Microtrains Low Profile wheelsets. All of my rolling stock has had these wheels for a few years now. This is more of a result of body mounting my couplers as the large flange wheels rub the body mounted coupler box on some sharp curves. I don't proclaim to have the best trackwork in the world, but I do weight my rolling stock a little bit over the NMRA standards. Brian
Regarding the coupler length, I did notice that the Z coupler is a bit short for N. It also looks like it would be rather difficult to trim the box to make the coupler look longer. You've got a good point there. I still think the Z coupler is better for pilot mount and some finescale applications, out of what's currently available. Regarding the wheel flange issue, I'm of the opinion that if large wheelsets interfere with operation on closer to scale track, it's not that big of a deal to replace the wheelsets. Although expensive to replace wheelsets on large fleets, think about it this way: It's only a little over a dollar per car (based on $12.95 for a 48 pack of MT lopro brown wheelsets from my LHS) when you spend anywhere from $8 to $20+ for a single MT car.
Just don't run long trains as the couplers tend to fail when excessive weight is applied. I am having some problems with strength and reliability on N scale MT couplers, as they tend to ride up or down against each other. Frankly I now prefer Unimates or Accumates as they are stronger and can interchange with practically just about everything. Ken "Steamguy" Willaman
