Couplers

[milepost48]

will it be possible to install Kadee couplers?

[96RAF]

I believe the TT:120 couplers use NEM specs 355 and 359 so if you can get kadees to lodge with them then possibly yes.

[D9020 Nimbus]

The only form of NEM coupling pocket that Kadees fit is NEM362 (HO/OO). Kadee don't make any couplings for scales smaller than HO.

The equivalent for N gauge is Micro-Trains (the two firms were originally one, owned by twin brothers, but split many years ago). Micro-Trains do not make any NEM-compatible couplings.

The nearest equivalent is the Dapol Easi-Shunt coupling. It fits NEM355 pockets, and is available in short, medium and long shank lengths.

[Markus1707823000]

I'm afraid that the closest you'll get in TT (visually, that is) without exchanging the whole coupling attachment system is the Roco coupling (https://www.roco.cc/ren/products/accessories/others/30390-tt-close-coupling.html). PEHO also makes quite nice magnetic couplings, but they're quite expensive.

[frey-1222498]

Ok

just my 2 penny’s but if this isn’t close I’m not sure what is. This is way more realistic than my oo stock.

[RDS]

great picture (again) frey, thanks

[frey-1222498]

My Pleasure

also if you look at this picture below you will see 2 little curved arms that hang under the couplers, these can lift in the upward motion so to uncouple the couplers. For example when you pass over the uncoupler ramp that Hornby sell in the track section this will lift the couplers so you can then move forward with the locomotive and leave rolling stock in place. Hope this helps.

[Les1952]

As I'm moving out of N Gauge I have a large number of Dapol's Easi-shunt couplers left over. I bought myself a Piko German Class 290 Bo-Bo diesel to play with and Easi-shunts fit nicely into the NEM pocket of TT gauge couplers.

I've not yet tried them on train set curves (need the train set and track packs to do that. but will keep people posted as to how well they do.

I'm hoping to use the Dapol track magnets for hands-free uncoupling that isn't too obtrusive on the layout- the Tillig/Hornby uncoupler track looks a bit difficult to disguise.

Les

[TT-Man]

@Les1952 do you have comparative experience of Kadee/Micro-trains with the Dapols?

I have used Kadee a lot in the past and never found anything to equal them for HO and OO. If the Dapols are as good then I will probably look at fitting them to some of my stock. But the Tillig style ones already fitted by Hornby are great for general use and have a nice close fit.

[Rallymatt]

I am I well on with my TT layout in anticipation of Hornby stock deliveries. A Piko BR130 and some fabulous Arnold ferry vans have done all the testing. The Arnold couplings (same as Hornby TT20 and Tillig) are a bit of a pain in operation, they don’t couple or uncouple easily. I tried some Dapol Easi-shunts and obviously the NEM pocket is not correct so they flap about like a loose sail which is a big shame as the layout is designed to have some involved shunting and train formation.

[RDS]

@Matthew

Moderator Note:

It is in your own interest to have a unique user name. 

Could you please select ‘My Account’ towards the top right hand corner of your screen, then Community and choose a nickname in the ‘My Profile' tab, rather than your First name that has been automatically allocated by the system. We had hoped a Forum change was coming to prevent this automatic allocation but a manual change is required at the moment and there will be more than one member with your name. This request together with some other information for new posters is contained in a thread at the top of the General Discussion section called ‘Information for new members registering for the Forum’

[Rallymatt]

I did a few hours of faffing about with Dapol EasiShunts this weekend on my Arnold Ferry vans, which use same OE couplings and NEM Pockets Hornby have adopted for their TT120 range (Tillig type)

Without a permanent bodge (glueing it solid) there is no way to secure the Easishunt into the pocket and have it hold level, this would also have to involve glueing up the Kinematic system so it would mean much longer couplings and poor performance on anything less than very open curves. The ‘trip pin’ of the easishunt fouls on point work otherwise. I tried a range of less invasive fixes but nothing really overcomes this issue. When you look at the shank of the couplings they are quite different, the Dapol system would be great if they made one to fit the NEM pockets perfectly, and if you run cork road bed (or similar) you don’t have to cut sleepers away, the magnets can be put in the roadbed and still work perfectly……. Subtle hint to anyone at Hornby or Dapol… get magnetic couplings into production 😁

[ntpntpntp]

I am surprised by this, my understanding was that the TT NEM pocket design is the same as the N version. Maybe the TT pocket doesn't have the little "tongue" normally present in the N pocket to keep a Rapido coupling level?

[Markus1707823000]

Magnetic couplers for TT are available from PEHO.

[TT-Man]

There doesn't seem to be any way to remotely uncouple the PEHO magnetic couplers. It looks like it would require two hands separate them. The benefit of the Dapol EasiShunts is that they can be remotely operated like Kadees. Just a shame they don't fit the TT NEM pockets.

[Rallymatt]

The issue with Dapol Easi Shunts isn’t the NEM pocket on TT120 stock but the shank of the coupler itself, it’s designed to a different pocket spec. Done a pic, hopefully it works…. Nearest is the Dapol EasiShunt, note the shorter locating section of the shank, chamfering on the end and smaller diameter locating pin, Arnold (Tillig/Hornby/ etc TT std) coupler centre and furthest away a Piko TT coupler.

Tillig type used by Hornby and Arnold are interchangeable with the Piko TT pocket but sadly it’s asking too much for the EasiShunt to fit properly into a pocket it wasn’t designed for. Not a fault, it’s just the wrong spec for this application.

The Tillig type couplers do need a good firm contact to get them to engage fully and so far I have found overhead uncoupling with a magnetic screwdriver is most reliable method. I will reserve judgement until a have tried a Hornby uncoupler ramp.

Remote uncoupling on a small scale like TT 120 would be game changer

[RDS]

@Rallymatt

I think that remote coupling on any scale would be a game changer! I currently operate a DCC 00 layout but I have pre-ordered a TT:120 set, which I will convert to DCC but it has always frustrated me that no-one (to my knowledge) has yet come up with a coupler that can be operated anywhere on a layout.

[TT-Man]

Yes, having modelled in N, HO and OO over the years, my biggest disappointment in railway modelling has always been the annoyance and frustration caused by couplers that won't couple or uncouple when you want them to without manual intervention.

Many won't couple without a push and most uncoupler mechanisms are very hit and miss.

I have tried most of the well known commercial couplers and uncoupling mechanisms in various scales. The only ones I have ever been moderately satisfied with are Kadees. But they are not cheap and often require quite a bit of tinkering with to operate reliably (usually the fault of the rolling stock not having consistent NEM pocket mounting heights). Of course they won't fit TT NEM pockets.

I have tried to resign myself to 'the hand of gxd', but that only works on areas of the layout you can reach. The only consolation is that real 'shunters', the men on UK railways who were responsible for coupling and uncoupling real rolling stock did so with a pole to reach in between the wagons and hook and unhook the couplings. This was to avoid accidents caused by having to stand between the rolling stock. So using my miniature uncoupling stick is a bit of role playing rather than 'the hand of gxd' after all LOL.

It seems the Ayatollah is in control of this forum as the word 'gxd' can't be used!

[Rallymatt]

@ RDS, yes it would!

The team at McKinley Railway have an incredible cotton on a motor control of couplers on their shunters that is run off a DCC CV 😳 quite brilliant!

beyond me on TT 120

The hand of Dog (I always knew it was a misprint and it should have been Dog all along as we will learn the entire Universe was created by a Spaniel/Collie cross as a plaything) does have some realism when you consider the real role of the ‘shunters’ hooking up/uncoupling 😁

The magnet on a stick seems to work from above reasonably well on the Arnold couplers so looking good when the Hornby stock arrives.

[Rallymatt]

An update on couplers.

I have acquired some Tillig couplers to compare to the Arnold and presumably Hornby TT 120 versions. In the picture the Arnold/Hornby item is on the right. It’s almost identical in appearance to the Tillig item save for the additional plastic moulding (air pipe?) protruding downwards in use.

However in operation they are quite different, the Tillig couplers hitch up first time every time and release easily even when paired with a Arnold/Hornby coupling.

It’s also possible to run without a metal hook in one part, ie on a loco like is often done on the old tension lock couplers of OO and is very easy to do.

[Silver Fox 17]

Rallymatt,

From your comments I take it that the Hornby/Arnold coupler does not work all the time?

If so that is not a good advert. The whole idea is supposed to be able to remotely couple and uncouple.

If I remember correctly, the initial video showed two coaches having to be hand coupled instead of just backing up with a train.

Garry

[TT-Man]

Couplers have always been a cause of a love/hate relationship for me with railway modelling. If you like unassisted operations like shunting it's nearly always a cause of frustration.

For unassisted coupling you are dealing with some straightforward matters of physics.

Coaches and wagons are usually very lightweight and free rolling. So there is very little inertia to stop them moving. Most couplers however, require a degree of friction to be overcome in order to connect with another coupler. Unfortunately the ability of the rolling stock to roll is usually greater than the amount of friction required for the coupler to work.

As a result you either need a long rake of rolling stock to provide enough weight to overcome the friction or resort to running into the said rolling stock at speed to smash the couplers together. You could weight the rolling stock but then you limit the amount of stock an engine can pull.

In my experience very few coupling mechanisms operate reliably without the hand of dog (see above). Even Kadee type couplers require fine adjustment and the application of PTFE powder periodically to give good performance.

Hornby have gone with the most common design seen in European TT. That is understandable. To invent their own unique Kadee quality type coupler would have been great, but it would have added quite a bit to the price of the rolling stock.

The Arnold brand coupler is, in theory, the same design as the Tillig. If when tested the Tillig one does work better I shall replace all mine with the Tillig. They are approx. £44 for 50 (a Kadee type if they were available for TT would be approx. £134 for 50).

[TT-Man]

will it be possible to install Kadee couplers?

 

 

No. The Kadee couplers do not fit the TT NEM coupler pockets.

[ellocoloco]

You can install Kadee couplers if you wish, but as Kadee don't offer a TT120 coupler you would probably need to use HOn3 couplers - 705 or 713/4. These are designed for models using 10.5mm gauge track.

It would not be a simple exchange.

[TT-Man]

You can install Kadee couplers if you wish, but as Kadee don't offer a TT120 coupler you would probably need to use HOn3 couplers - 705 or 713/4. These are designed for models using 10.5mm gauge track.

It would not be a simple exchange.

 

 

As you say it would not be simple or for the faint hearted.

That would involve destroying the KK-Kinematics mechanism. Major surgery that would disable the spring mountings that enable close coupling and that extend as stock negotiates curves.