Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Indeed the Deltic workings were intensive, not just for the fact that they had to do the work of twice as many A4s when they were introduced.

Ive got an AS Deltic, it is Nimbus, unfortunately it has gone back for some rectification on a kinematic coupling mechanism which keeps sticking and causes the occasional derailment.

The detail is excellent, but I have had quite a few bits drop off (some during delivery) since receiving it whilst it trundles around. I think AS are on a steep learning curve with detail vs robustness, which I read they have acknowledged.

I am not bothered by the non scale wheel conundrum as to sell in the volume to make the model viable it had to be able to negotiate “trainset curves”, the people who demand 99% scale running usually find other specialist suppliers or scratch build for that near perfect model, you’ll never get it with mass production.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Babz

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
The fundamental problem is the tension lock coupler that is 'standard' for RTR OO product. It simply doesn't have the capability to work these cammed swinging linkages: what is required is a coupler system that links the NEM pockets as a rigid bar; that then 'works' the mechanisms correctly so that they recentre immediately as the vehicles exit curves. (I have been using the Roco pattern within sets of Bachmann and Hornby coaches with complete satisfaction for over 15 years, and plan to trial magnetic types.)

Of the Hornby diesels which exhibited the same problem - back in the day there were many threads on the subject - I have been able to test both the 30/31 and 50: substituting a Roco pattern coupler for the tension lock produced a reliable result with the coaches buffered up to the loco on straight track, and moved apart proportionally to the curve radius to prevent bufferlocking. I would expect the same to apply to the Accurascale implementation. It will be Accurascale's call whether they suggest a more suitable coupler; that would be the winning plan in my opinion.


It has always been the case that the more refined the detail fit becomes - both in quantity of the really small parts represented, and adherence to scale dimensions - the greater the risk of detached parts. (Only once have I seen a small applied detail piece actually 'in the act' of falling off an OO model, generally they 'disappear' unseen.) This I feel we have to live with, if we want to operate the models. (Current champion, the NRM/Rapido Stirling single, nothing has fallen off - but then it is an occasional runner, and not daily 'belted along' on a heavy load - such as a Doncaster pacific or this diesel replacement would be, on 'my ECML' running timetable services.)
But mine was derailing without anything coupled up, it was light engine.

Once back mine will be running with Kadees anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
In my experience this indicates snagging, and this can be in either or both of the concealed camming mechanism, and on the more visible coupler pocket and coupler contacting buffer beam detail. It can be very slow getting to a solution that retains as much detail as possible, but at least you have Accurascale on the job...

Much better than the tension lock, but the Kadee doesn't form the ideal rigid link between the NEM pockets. What I found did the best job in restricting hinging between the Kadees was melting the NEM pocket interior with an old screwdriver modified to match the end of a no 5, and fitting a no 5. (Well that was how I used to do it, but have now abandoned putting Kadees into NEM pockets of passenger stock, and am instead body mounting them through the bufferbeam. It looks rather neat having a buckeye correctly positioned right under the Pullman gangway faceplates. )

Whatever, you can have fun experimenting to find what you feel is best.
To restrict movement on the Kadee 17-20 you just need a tiniest blob of (I use super Phatic from deluxe) glue on the pivot, but NOT the horn pivot :LOL:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Julian2011

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
The fundamental problem is the tension lock coupler that is 'standard' for RTR OO product. It simply doesn't have the capability to work these cammed swinging linkages: what is required is a coupler system that links the NEM pockets as a rigid bar; that then 'works' the mechanisms correctly so that they recentre immediately as the vehicles exit curves. (I have been using the Roco pattern within sets of Bachmann and Hornby coaches with complete satisfaction for over 15 years, and plan to trial magnetic types.)

Of the Hornby diesels which exhibited the same problem - back in the day there were many threads on the subject - I have been able to test both the 30/31 and 50: substituting a Roco pattern coupler for the tension lock produced a reliable result with the coaches buffered up to the loco on straight track, and moved apart proportionally to the curve radius to prevent bufferlocking. I would expect the same to apply to the Accurascale implementation. It will be Accurascale's call whether they suggest a more suitable coupler; that would be the winning plan in my opinion.
I bought several ROCO couplers not the Hornby copies which are a cheaper moulding from the same pattern it appears, but even with the ROCO you don’t get the delayed uncoupling that the Kadees are able to do, I also found that even the genuine ROCO (and same with Fleischmann) couplings they needed a fair old force to couple up, far more than was prototypical without spilling everyone in the buffet coaches teas and coffee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 34C

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
David I bought some excellant couplings a few months ago which i had never seen before they are Liliput. So i have replaced all my Swiss stock with them supplied by MSL

Babs
That looks interesting, does it facilitate remote uncoupling?

It looks like a very much better designed tension lock type, nice and neat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
David Good Morning ( Just ). Do you mean an uncoupler in the track that pops up. If so i do believe they would work i will go up in the loft at the weekend and give them a try.
Babs
No sorry, I meant delayed uncoupling as in the Kadees.

With the Kadees I have one area with mini magnets under the track at the mouth of the yard (under the loading gauge actually) so I can uncouple there and I can shunt into each of four sidings and leave the wagons as I merrily chug* away.

*CHUG a term that can cover both steam and diesel…….and narrow boats come to think of it :LOL:
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top