# Kadees - G or #1 ??



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

First - Ron, thank you for your detailed instructions for coupler upgrades. Even though I don't, for instance, have any LGB, it's helping me get my head into this subject. I'm not a mechanical engineer.

Now that I've got my train shed and yard pretty close to finished, I'm looking at swapping the OEM couplers on my rolling stock (Aristo & USAT) for Kadees which I came to love during my HO days. Now I'm trying to figure out what's the deal with their G and #1 couplers. I bought a few G items last fall - packages are still unopened - before I learned about their #1 couplers. The differences seem to be minor.... or are they?

I think my track is pretty smooth with no curves under 7 foot radius (14' diam.); I do want the cars close-coupled where possible, just for looks. Before I spend the cash for a load of couplers, I'd appreciate thoughts from our general population as to G or #1, or mix&match.

JackM


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

No problem Jack am glad to do it. 
The main thing I like about forums is peoples "how to" posts. 
I have learned a lot from Ted D's posts, and everyones else's efforts and am happy to be able to contribute a little myself.

The main differences between the 2 are size and strength of the couplers.
The #1's are smaller and closer to scale, but as a result not as strong.
The G scale couplers are larger than scale, but much stronger.

Both will work for G-scale equipment, it's more a personal preference.

Myself I would rather have the stronger coupler, and besides I like the look of the larger coupler as well

Ron


----------



## Dean Whipple (Jan 2, 2008)

Jack, 
The #1 couple is closer to 1/32 or 1/29 scale it also is use by some in 1/20.3 scale to represent the 2/3 sized coupler by many narrow gauge RR. 
The G coupler is closer to the correct size coupler for the 1/24, 1/22, and 1/20.3 scales, also because of it's slightly larger size is a little more forgiving on less than perfect track.


----------



## steam5 (Jun 22, 2008)

Posted By BodsRailRoad on 03 Aug 2011 03:03 PM 


The main differences between the 2 are size and strength of the couplers.
The #1's are smaller and closer to scale, but as a result not as strong.
The G scale couplers are larger than scale, but much stronger.



Is the #1 coupler really that much weaker? Weak enough to be an issue? Would Kadees break under pressure of large scale trains?

Alan


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By steam5 on 03 Aug 2011 04:39 PM 
Is the #1 coupler really that much weaker? Weak enough to be an issue? Would Kadees break under pressure of large scale trains

Alan

I was wondering that as well.
The recommendation I have always heard was to use #1 Kedees for 1/29 scale because they look much better size-wise; that they my not be strong enough is a new one to me.

I would think that proper 1/32 scale equipment in brass would be heavier than the typical 1/29 plastic G-gauge equipment.

Knut


----------



## bcer960 (Dec 27, 2007)

The #1's are smaller and closer to scale, but as a result not as strong. 

I use only #1 guage kaydee's and run trains 20-25 cars, as well as a full Aristo passenger set, I have 3.75% grades and never have I had one break in the almost 20 years I have been doing this. 

it's slightly larger size "G" guage couplers are little more forgiving on less than perfect track 

This is correct. Although I am now indoors, I wasn't always and did have some couplers come apart on bad track. This was especially so with the Aristo U-25B. It has a bad swing for the couplers and would pull the lead car off the track at times. 

Ray


----------



## Dr Rivet (Jan 5, 2008)

Alan 

Regarding the relative "strength of Kadee #1s... I use them on my 18 car Accucraft Daylight. That is about 220 pounds of train. I have also installed them on all my MDC, MTH, early 1:32 Accucraft, and most of my brass rolling stock. We regularly run trains of 40 to 60 cars behind the drawbar [as opposed to splitting the train with a mid train helper]. In this case we have run more than 100 cars in a single train. I have never broken a coupler during operation. I would not worry about it. 

MTH has mounting for 820 #1s, USAT and Aristo mounts are designed for the G size 830 box. On uneven track the larger G family is more forgiving of the vertical changes in the track.


----------



## steam5 (Jun 22, 2008)

Posted By Dr Rivet on 03 Aug 2011 05:26 PM 
I have never broken a coupler during operation. I would not worry about it. 

Thanks Jim, I really didn't think Kadees would break, especially now they have been improved!

Alan


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

First off I Never said the #1 scale couplers were weak, I said that they are smaller and not as strong as G scale couplers and they are.
I said that it's basically the look that determines choice for most people, some like the small one and some like the larger ones

here is what Kadee says about the two choices

"Since "large scale" covers several different "scale proportions" ranging through but not limited to 1:32, 1:29, 1:24, 1:22.6, 1:22.5,
and 1:20.3 ratios the particular choice of coupler size is up to the modeler. There are many who like the small #1 scale coupler for the
more to scale "appearance" (these are also used mostly on the 1/32 and 1/29 scale models). There are many that use the larger G scale
coupler because it has a larger pulling face for use on rougher trackage, like that on outdoor layouts that are exposed to weather and
temperature variations (these are used mostly on the 1/24 and larger scale models).
In our large scale coupler conversion list we show the two recommended coupler options of using a #1 or G scale coupler that applies
to most models. Many of our #1 and G scale couplers use the same draft gear box so the modeler can follow the same mounting
procedures for both scales. The shanks of these couplers are molded to compensate for the difference in the coupler height between the
#1 and G scale couplers."

Ron


----------



## Dr Rivet (Jan 5, 2008)

Ron 

Just in case.. my "strength" comment was not directed back at you. I have had several folks claim that the Kadee plastic knuckles were subject to breaking with long trains. I suspect they fail for the same reasons that they do on 1:1 scale, usually slack action in the train. It is possible that the new 900/1900 series of "E" couplers will be even better.


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

Agreed the couplers are super strong I have pulled 60 cars through multiple "S" curves with no issues.

I think the main advantage of the G scale coupler vs the #1 scale for us outdoors is they are much more forgiving to less than perfect track work because of the larger coupling face.

Ron..


----------



## Tom Leaton (Apr 26, 2008)

A garden railway magazine ran an article in which knuckle couplers from lgb, bachmann, AMS and kadee were compared with each other to determine how couplers of different manufacturers worked with each other. The magazine drew up a compatibility chart based on their experiments. Some did not do too well. The g size kadees were judged to be capable of interacting with the greatest variety couplers of differing brands. 

cheers


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I've been using the Kadee #1s for 25 years or so with nary an issue. They've proven every bit as reliable as one would expect from Kadee's couplers. I've had one broken knuckle in all those years, but that was due to an overzealous baggage handler.  The key with any coupler is to make sure they're all mounted at the same height, and the mounts are solid. Do that, and you'll eliminate probably 90% of any issues people face with couplers. (And don't rely on glue of any kind to hold couplers onto the cars. Mechanical fasteners are a must.) 

Later, 

K


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

I agree with Kev 
I started with G way back because of an artical in GRYs mag that talked about stronger. I like bigger is better. But now have seen enough #1 run on my layout that I wish i had started with #1. 
Looks is better. 
I can run 60 cars ;but in reality, I don't, 20 to 30 at the most. To much work to through a switch and take another string out. 
I'm lazy. 
but thats life.


----------



## Jerry Barnes (Jan 2, 2008)

I use 820's and like them a lot. Hated the Aristo's.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

From Kadee themselves, paraphrasing, the smaller coupler is not a strong in a "pulling" contest as the G scale one, but, they have never had any problems with breakage EXCEPT some guys in Arizona, in extreme heat. Kadee did make #1 couplers with a metal knuckle (not the jaw or shank). 

Very few people have ever had a problem, but Kadee made these available for their "extreme" customers. 

I would buy the #1 with no qualms... If I was in an extreme climate, I'd get them with the metal knuckle. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## steam5 (Jun 22, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 03 Aug 2011 08:02 PM 
Very few people have ever had a problem, but Kadee made these available for their "extreme" customers. 

Excellent! Extreme model trains, and Kadee will make a coupler just for them







I like that


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

Can't go wrong with Kadee's. Well almost. My suggestion would be to stay with the ones with a straight or near straight shank like 820 (1906) or 1789 (1907) for #1 scale. Avoid the ones with a large offset if you are going to run longer trains. The 1906 and 1907 are the new knuckle design. I just put a 1907 on the pilot of Aristo's new consolidation. It does look good.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Hey Paul, would you post a picture? I need to do the same. 

I totally agree with the straight shank recommendation, even though many of the Kadee recommendations are for offset. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

What I'm taking from this discussion is.... 
1 - it depends on what you need and what you want. 
2 - if you don't know what you need or what you want, it probably doesn't matter. 

As I mentioned in the question that started this thread, I have fairly smooth track, wide curves, etc. Also, I don't expect to run especially long trains - probably just 10-12 cars. So I think what I'll do is mount a few of the 907s and 789s that I already have and see what I think. Maybe I'll decide I'd prefer the smaller #1. Maybe it won't be important to me. If I don't like what I have, I'll buy the other. Either way, it won't be a mistake. 

Thanks for the input! 

JackM


----------

