Close-coupled Bachmann DMU's?

[Dogmatix]

Bachman produce a number of DMU models, and I wonder which - if any - feature close-coupling mechanisms on the inner couplings? I believe the Thumper does (being similar to the CEP and EPB models); but do any others?

[Guest dubdee1000]

The 150 has provision for this, but none(so far as i know) do any others. 

[Gwiwer]

The 220 / 221 have similar but unpowered coupling bars to the 150 etc. which hold the cars remarkably close.

[Silver Sidelines]

Hello

 

I was not aware of any Bachnamm close couplings solutions for the Class 105, Class 108 and Derby  Lighweights.  I have described my own solution in my Blog.  The Class 108 works best whilst  the Derby Lightweight with its unsprung buffers is the least satisfactory.  I had problems with buffer locking with the Class 105 Cravens until I realised that the buffers were smaller diameter than the Class 108.  Obvious really.

 

Regards

 

Ray

[Removed a/c]

Can you not use Kadees for coupling? Or are they not long enough? 

 

Does the 150 and 411 share the same coupling bar?

[Allegheny1600]

I used Fleischmann "Profi" close couplers between my 105 and 108's and they gave wonderful close coupling and totally reliable running in either direction!

Cheers,

John E.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Absence of a close coupling mech on the Class105/108/DL DMU sets was something of an oversight I feel. After some experiment I am going for sprung screwlinks and buffering by a chunk of very soft black foam inside the gangway connectors. I have tried Bach's mk1 coach 'pipes' connector thermally reset for closest possible spacing consistent with getting round the 30" minimum radius I use; however this did cause the occasional derailment so had to be abandoned.

[Dogmatix]

Thank you all for your replies.

 

It occurs to me that the absence or presence of close-coupling mechanisms on inner ends has to do with where the driving bogie is. On the EMUs and the 2H, the motor bogie is at the outer end, leaving room for mechanisms on the inner ends. On the 105 and 108 and Derby units, the driving bogie is at the inner end, and there is little room for mechanics.

 

I have some sharp (hidden) curves, unavaoidale given the size of my railway room, so for close-coupling I need to use mechanisms extending on curves. These have been standard on continental models for over three decades, and it works very well, but British models manufatureres are still behind on close-coupling, and on some British models that have these mechanisms, they are not always very reliable. Especially in reverse.

 

Ray, thanks for the link to your blog; interesting stuff there!

[31A]

I used Roco close couplings plugged into the NEM pockets of my two Cravens units, both within the set and on the outer ends to allow multiple working.  I don't think the cars could be coupled much more closely without the risk of buffer locking (or gangways fouling).  I used genuine Roco ones which are shorter than the Hornby lookalikes; don't know the part number though I'm afraid as they were donated by a generous Continental-modelling friend, who uses a different type.

[FelixM]

Hi Dogmatix, hi everyone,

 

it is interesting to see how close coupling mechanism topics always veer off to discussions about the type of coupler used. A close coupling mechanism has been invented to give close coupling distances on straight track but not in curves where the mechanism stretches the NEM pocket. It is intended to be used with a close coupling but not a specific close coupling.

 

A friend of mine converts all his newer and older rolling stock to symoba close coupling which he highly recommends and I think he is right. He calls himself LMS on our forum and has uploaded some pictures here http://75355.homepagemodules.de/t1937f32-Alternativen-zu-den-Tension-Lock-Couplings-Diskussionsthread.html and here http://75355.homepagemodules.de/t1561f32-Kurzgekuppeltes.html. There is sometimes the possibility to shorten given coupling pockets like those with Bachmann Mk1's but not always. You can see such a solution here http://75355.homepagemodules.de/t1775f32-Sichere-Kurzkupplung-fuer-Bachmann-MK-Coaches-im-geschlossenen-Zugverband.html.

 

Symoba do the smallest close coupling mechanisms I have ever seen so they are a good bid if you intend to convert your DMU's.

 

Kind regards

Felix

[Francis deWeck]

I used Fleischmann "Profi" close couplers between my 105 and 108's and they gave wonderful close coupling and totally reliable running in either direction!

Cheers,

John E.

After reading this tip I went out and bought a couple of sets for my 105/108s, just the job. Works a treat. However, for the Derby Lightweights a sprung buffer is required. A temporary solution was adopted in that I removed one set of buffers (and shanks) and the pair look a lot more realistic (if you allow for removal of the buffers and shanks). However, the DLWs don't like (1) the Peco double slip (2) the Peco curved point, but I can get round that on my layout (read large trainset!).

 

However, I thought I would raise this with Bachmann at the collector's club meeting at Coventry, wherein several suggestions were put my way by the PR man and then when I spoke to him again at York advising him of what I had done for the DLW he told me that Bachmann were going away from sprung buffers, because they break and the customer does not want them. This seemed like an awful amount of BS because the only problem I have had with sprung buffers was on the Deltics. The examples fitted on this model were a poor design, which resulted in them dropping out, rather than breaking. All that was needed was to check the line/shed area and re-insert same! The sprung buffers on the 105/108 DMUs are just fine, a lovely job.