# Kadee frustration



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

Well guys, I decided to go with Kadees as they look really good and have a great reputation. My first conversion was my USA Trains GP9. This conversion was extremely easy and left me with a positive feeling about my Kadee decision. Once I started my SD70MAC, things changed. I tried 2 different knuckles both of which were recommended on the Kadee site and neither one simply 'did the job'. They both require reconstruction on the engine and some extra work that leaves the engine looking somewhat Jimmy-rigged. I decided to start my SD40-2 so that I could ignore the headache of the SD70MAC for a while. Things went from bad to worse when I spent several hours trying to get this one right. I had to file the heck out of the pedestal, gear box, and a few other things just to get it to sit right on the pedestal. I followed the instructions on the site and contrary to the instructions (which are not the easiest to understand anyways) more filing was needed than they stated.
At this point I am wondering if Kadees are really worth the trouble when the USA knuckles do the job right out of the box and do not require grinding, sawing, tapping, cutting, filing, sanding, whatever... plus they look good enough. If they made specific couplers designed for each locomotive it would be very nice, unfortunately it is more like a one-size-fits-all-provided-you-grind-the-heck-out-of-your-locomotive! So Kadee, how about working with us a little here? What do you guys think of going USA Trains vs. Kadee? Are Kadees worth the trouble in the long run? Thanks.

-Will


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Will, if your getting this upset over installing kadees, you will probably not like laying track or building your RR either. take your time, some things are easier than others. slow down take your time and you will get it, 1st time you do anything is the hardest!!!


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Will, you picked two difficult locos. The Aristo loco has a **** of a time "letting go" of it's old coupler. 

The SD70 can take a Kadee with very little work BUT you have to have wide curves. In most cases, you have to file the opening larger. It's just a BIG LONG loco. 

Did you follow the thread by Ted where he asks about a Kadee on the SD70... he did a lot of experimentation, and in the end, I think Nick's method is easy and effective. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Try the KD conversion kits for the Bachmann HO F7s sometime, nice, but involve cutting up and rebuilding the trucks (and they are body/frame mounted couplers). 

They make a very good product but take time and work to get right in some applications.


----------



## CCSII (Jan 3, 2008)

Ah if everything in LS was free and easy nobody would be doing it!


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By CCSII on 03/30/2009 10:06 PM
Ah if everything in LS was free and easy nobody would be doing it!


Ummmm.... I'd be doing a lot MORE of it!


----------



## Guest (Mar 31, 2009)

seemingly i am wrong, but before i came to this forum i allways thought, that bashing was only for two groups of modellers: 
rivetcounters - the 110 percenters - to give things the last touch. 
and poor guys, who can't afford the prices of ready-made modells. - replacing money with time. 

but i simply can not understand, that so many of you are content to spit out hundreds or thousands of $$ for thrash, that does not run well - right out of the box. 

far to often one reads things like: 
"oh, it's a good modell! you just have to adapt a couple of things..." - followed by a looong list of faults. 

korm


----------



## Dan Pierce (Jan 2, 2008)

Kormsen, there are people that do not like things to run out of the box. They are happy to modify and adjust units until they run better. 
I believe it is not a cost issue, just some like to tinker a lot.


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Even when one builds their own cars they are not perfect, adjustments are made during the build to bring it to a standard that works.


----------



## Dougald (Jan 2, 2008)

OVGRS members have used KaDee couplers for almost 20 years installing them on every loco and piece of rolling stock that runs during the club ops sessions on the IPP&W. In all members have almost 500 cars and about 100 locos converted to KaDee couplers.

It is true that some installations require a bit of work especially locos. But ultimately, reliable operation (coupling, uncoupling, backing movements and staying coupled) require common couplers correctly installed as body mounts.

Our club website www.ovgrs.org has a series of conversions documented at http://ovgrs.editme.com/Tips None of these concern the SD70 or the SD40-2 in question but ... many other locos and cars are shown. 

The question was asked is it worth the trouble? The short answer is almost always yes. IF the intention is to run only USAT equipment in a train and if the intention is to only run in a circle then the USAT couplers are fine and stick with them. Otherwise, a conversion will be beneficial. Once learned, the skill is easily applied.

Regards ... Doug


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

Most all my locomotive Kadee conversions are custom because I like the #1 scale 1789 for all my locos. Sometimes it takes awhile to figure out a way to get a solid good looking install on a model I haven't done before, but when it is completed they are very reliable. Look at it this way, have some patience, do it right , and you won't have to do it again.


----------



## Bill Swindell (Jan 2, 2008)

This problem of having to work on equipment, even whe new, is not anything new. For many years, HO modelers bought beautiful brass locomotives that ran very poorly. A cheap plastic diesel model ran better that a brass one that cost many hundred dollars. The same was true of steam engines that cost near $1000. Poor mechanisms.


As far a couplers, some of Kadee's instructions are very complex because they are trying to still allow you to run your trains around 4' radius circles. If you have larger curves, simpler rigid mounts are possible. Get yourseld a Kadee coupler height gauge. That allows you to easily determine the proper eight for your coupler mounts. I made a coupler mount with 1 piece of plastic for my SD-45. I trimmed the existiing mounting post and fastened the plastic to it. Then I mounted the coupler to the plastic. It was very simple.


Good luck, take your time and you will certainly enjoy the results.


----------



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

More of the problem is the necessary reconstruction on a brand new diesel that cost hundreds of dollars. It's hard to say "This SD70MAC is prototype" when you ground half of the snowplow's life away to make room for the coupler. I have no problem doing the work, but it seems that Kadee could make them just a little more compatible with specific locomotives without having to grind on them so much. 

-Will


----------



## Dougald (Jan 2, 2008)

Will

You actually have hit the problem in your statement about compatibility - but you blamed the wrong guys. In HO after a long battle that spanned three decades, KaDees became the standard by 1980 and were (and are now) factory installed on everything. In large scale, arrogant companies who believe that their proprietary stuff is best make it difficult. Pin the blame here on USAT for using a proprietary coupler and not providing an easy mount for the standard replacement so many of us use. 

I would also add that the large scale modeller's penchant for hairpin curves leads to truck mounted couplers and other arrangements which make a standard coupler mounting difficult. Sensible curves and body mounts will give a very reliable coupler for all operations. The main equipment vendors can help by either factory installing KaDees (unheard of in large scale) or by providing a solid structure for an easy body mounted conversion. USAT does this on their freight cars but not their locomotives so they do in fact understand the issue.

Regards ... Doug


----------



## Tom Leaton (Apr 26, 2008)

Am I right in assuming that (1) your Kadees are the larger G gauge units and that (2) they don't work with the USAT knuckles?

cheers


----------



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

Doug I am going to disagree with you there as, if I manufactured a line of locomotives and rolling stock I would not be designing my product around Kadees. I would design it based on what people want, and Charles Ro has obviously done that. To design the front of my locomotive away from prototype just to accomodate Kadees would cost me extra time, money, and resting on my laurels about prototype. I don't think USA Trains should have to design their whole line around a long series of couplers that were designed to accomodate the older of the G-scale manufacturers and sacrifice their idea of prototype to appease the Kadee crowd. That is their choice and I respect that. BUT, if any other manufacturer respected this 'standard coupler' size you speak of then Kadee would only be putting out one coupler for each 'scale' and everyone's equipment would adhere to that, but that is not the case. It is no more USA Trains' fault then it is Aristo, LGB, Bachmann, Accucraft, MTH, and whoever else has been a success in the G-scale market. As many people have been sending me messages that it is no easier mounting couplers on Aristocraft locomotives, the problem does not rest with USA Trains. I think personally that it is no more arrogant to bring out a product by my own standard and idea of what is prototype, then it is to expect all new participant manufacturers to adhere to my coupler. When it comes down to it, USA Trains would have to sacrifice their idea of how their locomotive should look to be faithful to prototype to accomodate a coupler that many people use? That doesn't make sense. The who-should-do-what battle is always going to rest with what manufacturers we have preference with. But from a huge manufacturer's standpoint, USA Trains, Aristocraft, etc. should not have to design their equipment around a company that offers a good coupler. That is like Cadillac designing their fender to accomodate a Goodyear tire.... It would cost Kadee much less money to make a coupler for a USA Trains SD70MAC or an Aristocraft GP40-2 then it would for them to design their locomotives around 1 of several coupler types that Kadee offers as there are many, just not enough. Kadee is just as responsible for adapting to changes in the market as every other manufacturer. I would have pointed this argument just as easily at USA Trains if they had made an airhose to go with the Kadee coupler and using their own instructions lead to a crumby-looking job that screwed up the look of the coupler. My whole point was how difficult putting on a coupler was, following barely negotiable instructions, and having to alter the appearance of my locomotive to accomodate it. I have no qualms with the Kadee coupler at all. I think it is a great coupler. The coupler for my GP9 was a very easy install and KUDOs to Kadee for that. Had the SD40-2 and SD70MAC been such a cinch to put on, this thread wouldn't exist. I can't ignore a problem I am having to stay in good graces with Kadee fans, I think problems should be addressed. I really do want to go with Kadees so it is frustrating that it has not been fun installing them on 2 of my locomotives. If Kadee brought out a SD70MAC/SD40-2 coupler (as the design on these 2 locomotives is exactly the same for the coupler) that would take care of the problem. Instead, they are recommending a coupler that was designed for a different locomotive and entrusting us with difficult instructions to make that coupler feasibly work so long as we are willing to change the appearance of our locomotive. Please forgive me if I am starting a coupler war here, it was not my intent =( 

-Will


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Posted By Engineercub on 03/31/2009 10:31 AM
More of the problem is the necessary reconstruction on a brand new diesel that cost hundreds of dollars. It's hard to say "This SD70MAC is prototype" when you ground half of the snowplow's life away to make room for the coupler. I have no problem doing the work, but it seems that Kadee could make them just a little more compatible with specific locomotives without having to grind on them so much. 

-Will




Will,
If you are grinding on the snow plow to make the kadee fit your doing something wrong email me and i will walk you thrue it or you can give me a call...


----------



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

Yes Tom that is the case. Would you recommend the #1 Kadees instead? I haven't really considerred that yet. 

-Will


----------



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

Nossir Nick I couldn't stomach grinding on my locomotives, the 70MAC or the SD40, so I left well enough alone and went back to the original couplers.


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

Will,
I don't understand something. You talk about not wanting to "grind" on trhe SD70 and alter the way USA made it. The way they made it is not correct for the prototype at all. Gaping big hole and a coupler that sits way too low to even look like the prototype. Take a look at this prototype,the stock USA and my Kadee conversion. I think my Kadee conversion is a lot closer to prototype than USA's stock loco and yes I did some cutting on the pilot to make it work.
http://espee.railfan.net/spsd70m.html


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

you must not have any of Uncle charlies doubel stacks , they don't even come with couplers. hook loops. try that on for size.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Marty sounds like you got taken. All my USAT stack packs came with knuckle and loop couplers. Later RJD


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

I should have said 5 packs, really did not have any.. really!!! RJ you got to believe me!!!!!!


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

Well Marty,looks like you were had. Description says both hook and loop and knuckle provided.
http://www.usatrains.com/usatrainsttx5.html


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

It does not matter, I installed 820s on them now for some slack action. little easier to run.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

You tell him Marty! Who needs anything else but Kadees! ha ha ha! 

Greg


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Following me around again ha?? no really, we have to make light of many of the same stuff new folks are going through because we have all gone through it our selves.. Every so often it (the subject matter) will come up again. 
We've all said, yea back when I ran trains right out of the box there was only two companies with a few cars each. we was happy with what we had. 

I need to find an old photo I took after an NMRA convention (went to a layout tour) of some crazy no-mind who had a colorful LGB set in his yard,,, of all places. crazy???


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I find this thread somewhat funny... Will, your first post talks about how "bad" the SD70 conversion was because of "reconstruction", etc. required. It turns out that you did not do it. 

Not everything bolts up. 

Then you have a real long post about arrogance about designing loco to work with a coupler, etc. etc. 

Will, not everything just bolts on. If this experience has upset you, you are going to have a hard time in this hobby, since ANY Aristo steamer you buy will eventually spin it's drivers, and if you get enough USAT diesels you will eventually get a "Cracked axle" to be replaced, and the chuff cams on your Accucraft locos will go intermittent and your Bachmann locos will spin gears on the axles. 

There is no such thing as a perfect locomotive. The mounting pads of locos are NOT standard, and that's why there are so many different "conversion" kits for locos. The manufacturers themselves use different coupler shanks, mounting methods etc. 

Several people have mounted and described on MLS how they put couplers on their SD70's... there's a thread on it... it can be done and it's not that tough. 

Now I only buy USAT and AML rolling stock because I don't want to make shim pads for every box car, but some people prefer Aristo and they do this for their body mounts. To each his own. 

This is not a slam, it's just part of what is out here right now. 

Look at HO, they standardized, everyone supports Kadee or a clone right out of the box. Large scale is not standardized yet. It's just where the hobby is out right now. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Guest (Apr 1, 2009)

There is no such thing as a perfect locomotive.


greg, 
in your list of faults you named just northamerican brands/chinese built locos. 
i run one 38 year old loco, a couple of over 30 years old and one young loco of only 26 years. (two different european brands) 
the only things i had to "repair" were replacing worn out contactsliders and the traction gummy rings. 
so seemingly it is possible to produce faultless modells. 
why are you northamerican customers so humble, to pay big bucks for every crap, somebody offers?


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Well, I will say that I will agree that I listed just "northamerican brands/chinese built locos"... 

When I wanted to get in the hobby there was LGB and everyone else (I did not count Aster, museum grade stuff, and I am Standard Gauge... so keep that in mind). 

So the LGB Mikado was a big deal when they LOWERED the price to $1,200.... I bought my Aristo Mikado for $269.... 

For that price differential I can buy Aristo and USAT all day. I'm not complaining, just saying that this is what you will run into. 

Yep LGB may have been nice quality, but not 5 times as good! (And I think the market also voted, LGB is dead, Aristo & USAT alive) 

So, there is a quality difference, but also a huge difference in price... also LGB is not faultless.... but let's not turn this into an LGB vs. the world thread (they already lost)... 

*Bottom line, if you buy this level of quality, you will always find something to "hobby" on... fair trade to me, sometimes beginners think everything should be perfect... it's not... and it's really not for ANYTHING. *

Regards, Greg


----------



## Guest (Apr 1, 2009)

aparently i am not able to make myself understood. 
so i rest my case. 

korm


----------



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

Greg let me bolt you up then so that noone calls the fact police. The thread was written just as it progressed, I did the conversion and grinded the pedestal to death and filed here and there to get it right. I finished the SD70MAC with the exception of the plow because changing the look of that is not something I am willing to do. Nicholas is going to help me through the install so that I don't have to grind on the plow (Thanks Nicholas ^^). Now there's a concept.... Helping people who are frustrated instead of nitpicking what they write searching for inconsistencies. I'm a little disappointed that you pulled that one on me Greg. I never write these threads with consistency in mind. This is not a house debate, nor was I inconsistent. I was not trying to turn this into a silly war about newcomers to the hobby not respecting their roots and elders back in the day when there were 2 manufacturers to choose from with 10 pieces of rolling stock each. I wasn't interested in G-scale back then for just that reason, there was not enough, I didn't like the look of what was available, and wouldn't have settled for that. Things are different now. G-scale is a big market, and it is growing. The older crowd will have to grow with it or just hate the changes. But that includes the manufacturers too. I do find it humorous when people pull the age card and since youngsters don't have to experience the frustrations of old they are scoffed at. It was no different for them when their parents had to plow fields with horses rather than tractors. Age is a completely relative thing. No reason to use it as a cudgel to beat each other over the head with, I have and always will respect my elders so long as I am respected right back. 

-Will


p.s. - Marty you did get ripped, my dbl stack came with knuckles too ;-P and you still owe us some more pics of your bridges mister!


----------



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

Afterthoughts: 

In retrospect, I think I've learned my lesson here. [Don't negate a manufacturer if you don't want to get jumped by their fans] Honestly, it is good that people support the companies that they like, it assures their success. If I had it to do over again I think I would have made the thread a little more objective instead of writing it out of frustration. Karma got me good as whatever you put out there you surely get back. I should have written it differently in the first place instead of using the forums to vent. I apologize for any hurt feelings.


-Will


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

My misunderstanding Will, I am really trying to understand what happened, but when you said: 

"Nossir Nick I *couldn't *stomach grinding on my locomotives, the 70MAC or the SD40, so I *left well enough alone* and went back to the original couplers." 

I took that to mean you did *not *grind on your loco, and did *not *modify anything. 

OK, so I read that you _*did *_"grinded the pedestal to death".... and Nick will help you...* GREAT!!! *

I am truly sorry you are going through all this frustration. I tried to read what you posted before, and you can see that I quoted what you said, so please try to understand how* I misunderstood* what you wanted to say. 

What I thought was you posted all this stuff, and then it turned out you did not modify anything, so I was not understanding your level of frustration. 

I understand it now. 

Don't give up! 


Regards, Greg


----------



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

Thanks Greg and no problem, I just really want the Kadees to work. =( 

-Will


----------



## Bill Swindell (Jan 2, 2008)

Will, I agree with you. If Kadee makes a conversion for a locomotive, it should work. For what we pay, there is no excuse for slipping gears, split axles and loose wheels.

I also found that if you apply Kadee's to some locomotives that have large offsets between the coupler mount and the coupler itself, the mounting will flex under heavy load and cause the train to uncouple. I have seen this on an SD-40. My 0 offset coupler installation on my GP-9 does not flex and will pull anything without uncoupling.


----------

