| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| BNSF Fan |
Posted - 06/22/2012 : 6:22:05 PM
I am considering upgrading to Sergent couplers and am curious as to what experience my fellow modelers have. I am a modern era modeler so my diesels are SD70 series as well as a few new GEs.
Respectfully,
BNSF Fan
|
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| bullbrauch |
Posted - 07/22/2012 : 11:21:34 AM
I lubricate mine with PBL's Neolube, makes them run like butter. I just take a small brush and lightly paint the inside and working surfaces with it. |
| rch |
Posted - 07/22/2012 : 12:13:02 AM
quote:
Originally posted by BNSF Fan
rch,
Thank you for the coupler type usage info. I really like how the Sergent couplers look and, more importantly, how they operate. I had difficulty uncoupling KD couplers using a skwer stick. (I don't like magnetic uncoupling so I have been removing the trip pins on my KD equiped freight cars.)
I reordered three additional packages of the EC87As and the assembly jig. So far I have only assembled one pair with mixed results; one coupler works flawlessly while the other acts as if the little bitty ball is sticky. I probably got a little piece of debris in the wrong place. I am going to soak the offending coupler in finger nail polish remover and redo that one.
Do you model the BNSF by chance? Your knowledge of the couplers found on BNSF engines leads me to believe you may.
Once again thank you for the info.
Respectfully,
BNSF Fan
Glad to help. You might also try some powdered graphite to help that knuckle open better whether you rebuild it or not.
I don't model BNSF, but you're not far off. I work for BNSF as a conductor. |
| BNSF Fan |
Posted - 07/21/2012 : 4:12:34 PM
rch,
Thank you for the coupler type usage info. I really like how the Sergent couplers look and, more importantly, how they operate. I had difficulty uncoupling KD couplers using a skwer stick. (I don't like magnetic uncoupling so I have been removing the trip pins on my KD equiped freight cars.)
I reordered three additional packages of the EC87As and the assembly jig. So far I have only assembled one pair with mixed results; one coupler works flawlessly while the other acts as if the little bitty ball is sticky. I probably got a little piece of debris in the wrong place. I am going to soak the offending coupler in finger nail polish remover and redo that one.
Do you model the BNSF by chance? Your knowledge of the couplers found on BNSF engines leads me to believe you may.
Once again thank you for the info.
Respectfully,
BNSF Fan |
| rch |
Posted - 07/21/2012 : 3:27:09 PM
quote:
Originally posted by BNSF Fan
Well, my Sergent couplers arrived Friday and are now installed for testing purposes. So far, I like them. I bought a package of the EC87A (assembled) at $7 and a package of the EC87K (kit) at $7.
Although, I have been a model railroader for more than 40 odd years; I don't know what all of the various coupler types are used for. Can someone point me at a link that will make me smarter. Here are my misconceptions:
type "E" coupler is good for most freight cars,
type "SE" double shelf is good for tank cars,
type "F" is a mystery,
type "SF" is a mystery, and
type "H" is a mystery.
Respectfully,
BNSF Fan
Type E are standard couplers used on a variety of equipment from autoracks to boxcars to intermodal equipment to locomotives. Unless otherwise specified, most rolling equipment is fitted with Type E couplers.
Type E with the single lower shelf are good for many boxcars and covered hoppers as well as some flatcars such as centerbeam or bulkhead flats.
Type E double shelf are good for many tank cars, but may also be found on some covered hoppers (typically four bay hoppers that carry chemicals) and even some boxcars.
Type F without the shelf are good for rotary coal gondolas and hoppers, as well as the engines dedicated to that service (at least on the BNSF - not sure about other railroads). [Since you mentioned you are modeling the modern era, I recommend you refer to prototype photos when choosing couplers for your engines. I've seen Type F couplers on a variety of BNSF engines, from SD40-2s to ES44ACs and everything in between.]
Type SF are installed on new tank cars and are the interlocking Type F style coupler with shelves. Tank cars should have either double shelf E or F couplers.
Type H are interlocking couplers for use on passenger cars and locomotives.
Count me among those who use Sergent couplers exclusively. I've run some pretty long trains over various Free-mo layouts and haven't had any problems. I prefer the operations related to coupling and uncoupling since it resembles the prototype far more than operations with Kadee couplers. I also prefer the roughly 80% reduction in slack action the change from Kadees to Sergents yields. |
| Ollie |
Posted - 07/20/2012 : 9:07:07 PM
quote:
Originally posted by nberpa
quote:
Originally posted by runningextra
BNSF Fan - I have been using Sergent's for about a year and half now and will never use anything else.
They operate just like the real deal and being a railroader for the last 14 years realism is what I am after.
Since you have them in your hands now I am sure you can see they are not a rip off. Here are some Sergent's on three of my locos.
- Scott
Awesome weathering!
Wow, those MKT units look awesome!!!! |
| n6nvr |
Posted - 07/18/2012 : 10:57:34 PM
I leave the pins on my freight cars so they can be used in switching operations. I have just about the longest arms of any of the members of my club and I can't reach all the switching locations to use a skewer, knitting needle or magnet wand.
Passenger cars mostly keep them, in most cases they could come off since I don't switch them, but since they aren't broke I don't fix it.
the pins come off on almost all the road engines primarily for appearance and avoid pilot interference. The pins stay on most of the road and yard switch engines since they do switching operations. |
| brakie |
Posted - 07/07/2012 : 4:07:22 PM
Guys,I have always preferred to use KD couplers as intended-hands off coupling and of course the delayed action.
To my mind cutting off the pins and manually uncoupling cars would be a giant step backward as far as switching cars. |
| drolsen |
Posted - 07/07/2012 : 2:13:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by sd80mac
However, when you cut off the trip pin, you effectively disable this feature, and must use some sort of tool to manually uncouple cars; essentially rendering them no different operationally than Sergents.
I personally find Sergents much easier to operate than Kadees with the trip pins cut off. I was modifying my Kadees like that before I switched to Sergents because I preferred both the look and the manual uncoupling with a pick when operating, but I think Sergents are a heck of a lot easier to uncouple than Kadees, which want to spring back into the closed position as you're fighting them with a pick. I think it's easy to open the Sergent knuckle to prepare for coupling, and uncoupling is a breeze.
Dave |
| sd80mac |
Posted - 07/07/2012 : 2:01:54 PM
Hey Big Al,
I'm going to have to disagree with you here, my man. The whole idea behind the Kadee coupler was to provide "a reliable, realistic, automatic coupler" (http://www.kadee.com/animation/c1.htm). Thus, the trip pins were integrated into the coupler head to facilitate the delayed magnetic uncoupling feature. However, when you cut off the trip pin, you effectively disable this feature, and must use some sort of tool to manually uncouple cars; essentially rendering them no different operationally than Sergents. (Oh, and they ARE much cheaper by 33% when purchased in bulk.) |
| runningextra |
Posted - 07/04/2012 : 10:10:53 PM
BNSF Fan - Cool, I hope you enjoy the realism as much as I do.
Cody - Thanks buddy |
| nberpa |
Posted - 07/04/2012 : 4:03:48 PM
quote:
Originally posted by runningextra
BNSF Fan - I have been using Sergent's for about a year and half now and will never use anything else.
They operate just like the real deal and being a railroader for the last 14 years realism is what I am after.
Since you have them in your hands now I am sure you can see they are not a rip off. Here are some Sergent's on three of my locos.
- Scott
Awesome weathering! |
| BNSF Fan |
Posted - 07/04/2012 : 3:49:53 PM
Scott,
Yes, I like the looks of the Sergents, enough so that I ordered some more.
Respectfully,
BNSF Fan |
| runningextra |
Posted - 07/04/2012 : 1:26:28 PM
BNSF Fan - I have been using Sergent's for about a year and half now and will never use anything else.
They operate just like the real deal and being a railroader for the last 14 years realism is what I am after.
Since you have them in your hands now I am sure you can see they are not a rip off. Here are some Sergent's on three of my locos.
- Scott |
| nursemedic97 |
Posted - 07/03/2012 : 06:30:26 AM
quote:
Originally posted by BNSF Fan
Can someone point me at a link that will make me smarter. Here are my misconceptions:
type "E" coupler is good for most freight cars,
type "SE" double shelf is good for tank cars,
type "F" is a mystery,
type "SF" is a mystery, and
type "H" is a mystery.
Respectfully,
BNSF Fan
According to the all-wise, all-knowing Wikipedia [/sarcasm], the Janney/AAR coupler type "F" is a freight-car "tooth and socket" tightlock coupler and the type "H" is the passenger tightlock coupler. I assume that the "SF" is a type "F" with a shelf to prevent the "tooth" from puncturing tank cars and the like in the event of a "traumatic decoupling."
Mike in Colorado |
| cf7 |
Posted - 07/02/2012 : 4:09:34 PM
I cut all of my trip pins off of my Kadee Scale couplers.
I see no reason to have something that looks un-prototypical
especially when I have air hoses on most of my freight cars.
And I use a 18 ga. Tapestry Needle to open the knuckles
when I want to un-couple.
cf7 |
