Is there a recognised standard height for 009 couplings and are the Greenwich couplings for NEM355 pockets ok? For that matter what about the NEM pockets?
No is the simple answer as there are no official standards for 009.
Best bet is to buy one of the height gauges sold by Greenwich or RT Models and then make sure all your stock is the same.
For many years I have used 6mm from top of rail to underside of the loop. I made my own coupling height gauges from Evergreen plastic strip sections, but these days I tend to rely on the excellent coupling height gauge from RT Models which is the same dimensions as my homemade gauge.
Garry
I guess a pragmatic approach is to set the height to suit whatever cannot be changed or adjusted and what (if say there there are a significant number of RTR items) what makes up the majority of the stock.
I made a coupling height gauge very simply by taking a short piece of wood, about an inch thick, and fastening a spare piece of track to it, then screwing a largish countersunk head wood screw into the wood at one end, in the middle of the track, standing up vertically, and screwing it up or down until it was the "correct" height.
Then you can set the coupling to match the height of the top of the screw.
Frank
The main issue with the NEM pockets is that the couplings tend to sag in the pockets.
As mentioned there is no standard for coupling heights in 009.
I have posted this before, but here are some examples of coupling heights in ready to run items.
The critical mesurment is from the rail hear to the underside of the loop that is also the start of the slope on the pin.
Roco:
Small four wheel wagons: 5.8mm (This is what I use as a guide as they can not be changed)
Larger bogie wagons: 5.8mm
Egger-bahn:
Four wheel trucks: 5.8mm (1963 onwards, first to use these couplings)
Four wheel vans: 5.8mm
Four wheel bogie coaches and wagons: 5.8mm
Tram coaches: (Bogies mae by Lima) 5.8mm
Locos: 5.8mm (No loop fitted.)
Jouef:
Decauville V Skip: 4.4mm
Decauville toastrack coach and log wagon: 5mm
Bemo: 5.8mm. (Others will need to confirm this as I do not have many Bemo items with the original couplings.)
Liliput:
5.8mm (Note the couplings tend to start to sag over time in the pivot and in the NEM socket.)
Tillig: 6.3mm. (Measured on the locos that do not have a loop.)
New Minitrains:
Wagons and coaches: 5.8mm
Locos: Most are higher than 6mm, but as I have altered all my ones I can not measure them now.
Perhaps others could add the Peco 009 items as I have none to measure.
So going by the above it would appear that most RTR H0e manufactures use 5.8mm coupling height.
Quote from: B.Meldon on January 25, 2021, 20:20
The main issue with the NEM pockets is that the couplings tend to sag in the pockets.
As mentioned there is no standard for coupling heights in 009.
I have posted this before, but here are some examples of coupling heights in ready to run items.
The critical mesurment is from the rail hear to the underside of the loop that is also the start of the slope on the pin.
Roco:
Small four wheel wagons: 5.8mm (This is what I use as a guide as they can not be changed)
Larger bogie wagons: 5.8mm
Egger-bahn:
Four wheel trucks: 5.8mm (1963 onwards, first to use these couplings)
Four wheel vans: 5.8mm
Four wheel bogie coaches and wagons: 5.8mm
Tram coaches: (Bogies mae by Lima) 5.8mm
Locos: 5.8mm (No loop fitted.)
Jouef:
Decauville V Skip: 4.4mm
Decauville toastrack coach and log wagon: 5mm
Bemo: 5.8mm. (Others will need to confirm this as I do not have many Bemo items with the original couplings.)
Liliput:
5.8mm (Note the couplings tend to start to sag over time in the pivot and in the NEM socket.)
Tillig: 6.3mm. (Measured on the locos that do not have a loop.)
New Minitrains:
Wagons and coaches: 5.8mm
Locos: Most are higher than 6mm, but as I have altered all my ones I can not measure them now.
Perhaps others could add the Peco 009 items as I have none to measure.
So going by the above it would appear that most RTR H0e manufactures use 5.8mm coupling height.
Thanks Brian,
That's pretty comprehensive.
I think I'll invest in that height gauge.
I don't as yet have much RTR stock so I'll just have to be careful what I buy and check any kitbash that I make.
Quote from: Tim Parsonson on January 26, 2021, 07:21
Thanks Brian,
That's pretty comprehensive.
I think I'll invest in that height gauge.
I don't as yet have much RTR stock so I'll just have to be careful what I buy and check any kitbash that I make.
No need to purchase a height gauge!
I just use one of the small four wheel roco wagons as a height gauge.
These are set to what apears to be the most common coupling height and in addition they can not be changed easily so it is perhaps a good idea to use these as a guide.
Basicaly I just make sure every new loco and item of rolling stock I get couples up to one of these small wagons.
You will find that you may well need to change the height on quite a lot of 009 and H0e items to make them all couple together as they should.
Two of my layouts require hands free running round and also shuntting of all the wagons. I use the Egger-bemo couplings with ramps for uncoupling. Preovided everything is adjusted corretly this works very well, even under exhibition conditions.
As I mentioned in my post above the main problem I have found with the NEM pocket couplings is that they tend to make the couplings sag towards the ends. This can have the effect of stopping the loop from lifting on the slope on the next coupling pin. It is not just about the height, but the angle of the loop whe it is down.
Whilst Brian's suggestion of using a wagon (rtr for preference) as a standard is a good one in my view that has a number of pitfalls;
1. If you have a number of rtr wagons with different coupling heights which one is the "right" one?
2. If you don't have any rtr stock to pick from then you'd need to buy one (and which one? - see point 1).
3. That's probably going to cost more than either the RT Models cast resin gauge or the Greenwich etched plate (certainly if buying stock new).
Using one of the commercial gauges - I'd favour the RT Models one as it avoids inaccuracies due to not having an etched plate 100% vertical - should mean that your stock will couple up to anyone else's (either yours visiting other layouts or vice versa), without issues that might arise because you have used a Joueff Decauville skip (4.4mm) as your 'standard', whereas Fred has used a roco wagon (at 5.8mm) and Jim has used a Tillig wagon (at 6.3mm)...
The problem for me, that others may also fisnd, is that using anything other than the 5.8mm height used in the Roco wagons (also by Egger, Liliput, Bemo and the new Minitrains wagons and coaches) is that the coupling height on these small wagons and bogies is very difficult, in not imposiable to change.
With just about everything else it is quite easy to change the coupling height.
If I did use another height measurement other that 5.8mm it will basically stop me from using these wagons successfully as they would not couple up without manual intervention.
But it is all about individual choice, for me with lots of Egger, Liliput and Roco as well as using the Roco log bolsters as bogies complete with couplings quite extensively, it makes sense for me to stick to this 5.8mm height for everything else as well.
However, this may not be the best way for everyone.
The last time I saw the 009 society second hand stand they had a box full of these Roco and Minitrains four-wheel wagons in as new condition for £4 each, so they are not a major outlay for anyone who has not got one!!
Yes, individual choice and requirements. I think it is clear that if ones layout involves a lot of moving say Minitrains or other skips about (or any particular piece of stock) then it makes sense to use that as the datum. If the stock is of mixed origin and varying coupler height then choosing the height of the stock that is most tricky to couple seems sensible and either modifying other stock or if that is not an option then choosing a compromise height that is biased towards suiting the most temperamental stock.
It is not uncommon for SG modellers to use entirely different couplers on different stock that best suits the application. They may go for close-coupled corridor coach stock to give the best appearance and something with delayed action coupling for use on goods stock that will be shunted. Along vaguely similar lines the Dundas 5-pack of skips suggests as a possibility the permanent coupling of groups of skips with simulated chain links, and with standard couplings only on the ones at the ends.
Quote from: B.Meldon on January 26, 2021, 13:57
<snipped>
If I did use another height measurement other that 5.8mm it will basically stop me from using these wagons successfully as they would not couple up without manual intervention.
<snipped>
The last time I saw the 009 society second hand stand they had a box full of these Roco and Minitrains four-wheel wagons in as new condition for £4 each, so they are not a major outlay for anyone who has not got one!!
Just out of interest I had a quick look at the RT Models website and whilst I haven't checked the height of my RT gauge it's states as being 6 mm, so I'd imagine that the height difference wouldn't cause any issues with your 5.8 mm roco wagon standard, and at a cost of £3.75 is certainly cheaper though that doesn't include P&P, and at the moment it's readily available given that 009 sales is currently closed due to COVID-19 restrictions.
But ultimately it's up to Tim how he would like to proceed, and I must admit that when I started (who said "when the dinosaurs ruled the earth"!?) I also used a roco wagon (which means that they are compatible with the RT height too).
Well, stir up a hornets nest why don't I :o
However, thanks as always for the useful advice from all sides.
I currently have virtually no RTR stock as this is my first layout (I'm only 70!). I've invested in the Greenwich gauge, perhaps I should get an RT models one as well just to be on the safe side. Anyway my first task is to ensure that the new loco I am assembling has (for me) a known coupling height so I can judge future purchases. My layout will not be portable so I'm unlikely to want to run stock from anyone else.
As always, the society provides much food for thought.
Everyone's got their own pet method, Tim. You'll find this happens all the time when you ask such questions. The only thing we have to be careful about when answering is not to sound as though our method is somehow the best and get into arguments, sorry, discussions, about who's got the biggest. Unfortunately sometimes that's the way it goes... Just don't ask about reverse curves... Please...
Personally I use the RT Models gauge for all my kit stuff and that works well enough with my RTR (Bemo, Liliput and Roco).
Roughly 3 years ago i started modeling in 009/Hoe and i ran into this problem of couplers and their different heights.
Fortunatly as i make most of my rolling stock i decided to use Micro Trains N scale couplers.
I have 5 locomotives in total. 3 Minitrains plus 2 scratch/ kit built. I decided to use an intermediary flat car to couple my
mismatched rolling stock.
But then, that's me. :) :)
Quote from: Robin Webster on January 27, 2021, 16:12
decided to use an intermediary flat car to couple my
mismatched rolling stock.
The key is simple, use one "gauge", whatever it might be, and stick with it.
I'm going to be heretical here and suggest that if you are not going to be doing any hands-free (un)coupling, then so long as all you stock stays coupled up, you do not have to set all your couplings to the exact same height.
Quote from: hughn on January 28, 2021, 11:51
I'm going to be heretical here and suggest that if you are not going to be doing any hands-free (un)coupling, then so long as all you stock stays coupled up, you do not have to set all your couplings to the exact same height.
There is more to it than that.
If the loop is too low it will hit on the vertical part of the next coupling and not lift up and not couple up.
The loop has to hit the part of the pin that is sloping to lift up.
This is quite common on the new minitrains locos where the couplings on the loco are set too high for the loops even on the minitrains rolling stock.
There is also more to it than just the height as well.
For example, the Peco GR-101 009 couplings have too long a distance between the front face of the coupling and the back edge of the pin for other makes of coupling loops to get over. These have to be modified by filling down the front face or the back edge of the pin.
This may not be obvious using a coupling height gauge, but it is when using a complete coupling on a wagon as a height guide.
Brian Meldon