Kadee 158 vs 148 on 85' Passenger (Walthers) cars


Y

Yannis

Active Member
Hi all,

I recently bought some Walthers Proto 85' PS and Budd cars. I am in the process of changing the couplers to Kadee. Since i had only #158 available (the ones i use on freight cars and locomotives), i tried some 158s on a few cars. Dragging a consist by hand as a quick (but inconclusive and not adequate) test did not exhibit any issues around a 30" radius curve*.

Having read about issues with uncoupling on longer cars when using the "scale" 58/158 couplers, is the 148 option a safer bet? On the flip-side, are the 148 ones troublesome to uncouple with passenger cars and diaphragms in comparison to 158 ones? As you can understand, i am trying to decide if i should get more 158s or go for 148 ones for the passenger cars.


*I have a minimum 30" radius on this layout, and 36" on the next/future layout, with #6 and #8 turnouts (Peco code 83) on the passenger line / coach yards. I think i should not need to mix/match #146 with #148 which i have read around as a solution for tighter radii.

Many thanks in advance for your time and replies.
Yannis

PS. Kadee recommends #146 on Budd built cars, and #148 (or others...) in other Passenger cars, but there is no specific reference of Pullman or ACF cars so i guess the 148 is a go.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As they are from the Proto line, they will have Walther's metal #5 copy couplers in them from factory. This came about because the Kadee patent expired. They do have the advantage over the 58/158 of having the deeper head and less likely to uncouple over uneven joints etc. They are virtually invisible with the diaphrams in place, but for manual uncoupling with Kadee's tool etc, the diaphram does get in the way. Track mounted magnets, I think, would do a better job. You shouldn't have any problem with binding of the cars on 30" curves.
 
I have been replacing any plastic couplers with Kadees before they even go on the layout for years. Recently, I have been replacing #5's with 158's on freight cars and locomotives, or what ever size or the new size coupler is needed on locomotives.

I have not gotten around to my Walthers passenger cars yet. With the factory couplers the cars are very close together with the diaphrams right out of the box. My minimum radius is 32" in one location, but much broader for the rest of the layout. They track very well and I have no problem backing them through numerous turnouts into one passenger station which the train has to beck through a yard to get to. Number 6 turnouts and double crossovers are no problem at all.

I did have one awakening at the model railroad club I run at. I had a mix of Walthers and Riverossi passenger cars and would occasionally have a derailment. Being new to the club, no one mentioned that passenger cars with three axle trucks would not run properly. (all track is Peco code 100) Also passenger cars with diaphrams also would have a tendency to derail as some of their curves were quite sharp due to space limitation that they have. I am guessing that in a couple of places the curves are down to 22 inches.

One member has a complete Walthers Empire Builder and in order to run the train at the layout, he installed couplers with a longer shank. I will not be taking any more passenger trains to the club.

Thanks for the post. I think I will leave the Walthers cars alone. I do have a couple of Con-Cor short passenger cars that I put 158's on. With the factory couplers they ran just fine but did have uncoupling issues on my home layout.

IMAG0393-1.jpg

These are really nicely detailed cars and this is perfect for a local train set in a rural area. They had #5 put back on them and again run fine. With the 158's on them, the diaphrams were almost touching. I am wondering if that was the problem.
 
Toot thanks for the reply mate!

Indeed some of the newer cars that i got have couplers that look like #5s. The older-run cars have the plastic ones which i replaced for the time being (today) with #158. In comparison to the stock plastic ones, coupling is greatly improved. I take it, you recommend going for #148 right?

Chet, is that a photo from the home layout? Great photo there!!! You got #158 on the Con-Cor cars? Any issues?
 
No issues with the #5's on the Con-Cor cars after changing back to the 158's. I was having uncoupling issues ftom time to time with the when the had the 158's. The coupler height was right on but I think that the diaphrams on the Con-Cor cars could have been the problem. They were touching with the 158's and being operational may have been what caused it.
 
So you got back to #5 from #158 right? I might go for #148 then just to be on the safe side (the #5 whisker equivalent).
 
I don't have any passenger cars to compare, but I have a problem with #158's that I tried, coupling with my over 600 freight cars that have #5's. I stopped using them and I now use #148's on any conversions that come up and have no difficulty with them and #5's.

Willie
 
The newer Walthers Proto 85' passenger cars come with Walthers proprietary metal Kadee #5 Clones. These are a perfect match for Kadee #5 and Kadee #148 couplers. Earlier versions come with plastic Kadee clones that don't work well on lengthy trains. Kadee #58 and #158 are scale head couplers, which don't work as well IMHO. The #5 / #58s come with coupler pocket springs, while #148 / #158 have whisker coupler springs attatched to the coupler shank.
 
Yannis said:
I recently bought some Walthers Proto 85' PS and Budd cars. I am in the process of changing the couplers to Kadee.
Click to expand...
As a couple of the others have already pointed out the newer Walther's cars come with the ProtoMax coupler which is identical to the Kadee. I would leave those alone.

For the others I would go with the #148. A larger (taller) coupler head is always a safer bet. While I doubt the issues of uncoupling have anything to do with the actual coupler (would expect more of a hump in the track), one cannot usually see the coupler on a passenger car anyway. I use the smaller headed couplers for looks. In my opinion if one can't see it, it is a moot point.

PS. Kadee recommends #146
Click to expand...
long shank. Is the vestibule that much longer on a Budd car?
 
I take it, you recommend going for #148 right?
Click to expand...

The #148 is the new whisker centering spring type, will replace the #5, and can be used to replace other coupler manufacturer's clones as well, has a similar sized head. Elminates the old brass centering spring like the #58/158.
 
I am in the process of converting to #158's on locos and freight, mainly for the appearance. Haven't had that much problem with coupling to #5's except they might be a problem if you do a lot of switching, they are not so easily uncoupled manually with a pick, or push together, not by hand, connecting to a #5. The jaws are a different shape, apart from the size. One club member, who runs operating sessions to timetable, reported his operators complained the #158's prevented them from completing moves in the time allowed. He went back to #148's.
 
Toot, Chet, WJLI26, Willie and Iron Horseman, many thanks for the help! I ll go for #148 on the passenger cars and use the rest of the #158's i got on 40' and 50' freight cars.

Indeed, a few Budd cars of the newer releases that i have, do have metal #5 style couplers and they work fine so i ll keep them stock. At some point i might add American Limited diaphragms.
 
Toot - So far I haven't had any problems with the 158's coupling. I will shy away from putting them on passenger cars though. All of the Walthers cars do have diaphrams along with the two Con-Cor cars and these cars are the only ones I have had problems with. I am not on an all out conversion to the 158 couplers, but if I have any maintenance to do on any cars, they will get new couplers. I have a raft of #5's sitting in a parts tray now.

One thing that I do with all of my Kadee Couplers, both #5's and 158's is to use a very fine file across the face of the coupler where they would meet when coupling. This eliminates any minor flash from the casting. I started this when I first started the layout and most of my cars, are still in service, many being old blue box cars and have been operating with no problems after many years of use. The time spent when installing them and making sure that they all are at the correct height apparently has paid off.
 
montanan said:
One thing that I do with all of my Kadee Couplers, both #5's and 158's is to use a very fine file across the face of the coupler where they would meet when coupling. This eliminates any minor flash from the casting.
Click to expand...
I do this also. I also file any burrs off the top of the joint pin. Just not too much it has to be mushroomed to stay in place. Once I filed it so far it just fell right out and so the coupler just fell apart.
 
One of the things I have noticed with the #158's, is they can have a tendency in some pockets, to hang down, the worst being the Walthers with extended pivots, not only found on their passenger cars, but other long cars such as Centerbeam flats. I think it's the lack of the #5's brass centering spring. As the #5 metal clones they use on these cars still use the brass spring (which looks like it was purchased from Kadee) in those pockets, another reason to retain them. I have, when using #158's where they are visible, cut the springs off the sides of the Kadees and used them under the #158's to pack them up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top