QUOTE (Daz @ 19 Dec 2007, 23:12)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Sorry, some more questions on this 34C. Which system do you think is better? Are you saying that you use R8220 on bachmann coaches? How does the R8220 uncouple? I currently use Kadee's.
Within sets of coaches fitted with the close coupler mechanisms (both Bachmann and Hornby) I use the R8220. They will not autocouple because the connector face plates come into contact before the couplers make. They uncouple using a raised ramp, much as for tension lock types. (Note however that a permanently raised bow of flexible cellophane cannot be used as this will uncouple every vehicle.) As you may gather my operation uses pretty much fixed coach formations. I am intending to through wire for DCC control of lighting also.
At both ends of the sets I use Kadee, specifically for the reliability of auto coupling and uncoupling, which happily comes with reasonably prototypical appearance .
Good though the Kadee is, it doesn't form a rigid bar between coupled vehicles: if it did I would use it for preference over the R8220. To operate coaches with the connector face plates in contact on straight track, and retaining absolute reliability when they are on curves, demands a coupler which forms a rigid bar. The rigid bar will drive the close coupler mechanisms positively enough to get the necessary separation between vehicles as the first enters a curve, particularly when pushing; and also forces the Hornby version of the mechanism to re-centre. (The Bachmann is intrinsically self centering.) If I could find a way to make the Kadee perform the job I would use it, but no joy in experiments to date.
