The Kaddee design has an oversize flattened knuckle and that darn  
spring.  The #5 is small overall for S and the 802 is about spot on.   
Only the knuckles are oversize and wrongly shaped compared to the  
body. BTW; The shank design of the 800s is the same as the original  
#4.  The new design Kaddee has come out with for Large Scale and now  
"O", has a hidden spring and a redesigned knuckle.  They wont say  
about an On3 version of that coupler.


On Mar 3, 2013, at 7:15 PM, Ed wrote:

> That's most interesting.  How did the myth get started that KD#5 was  
> too small?  It appears they fall in between the Type D and E. Being  
> right in the middle is not bad at all.  Not debating on the  
> betterment of either, but just commenting and somewhat surprised.
>
> That S couplers are a bit oversize does not surprise me at all.  
> Since the HO couplers are oversize for HO, why not the same for S?  
> Then again, the amount of oversize is darn small -- at least when  
> compared to a Type E.
>
> Ed Loizeaux

Talmadge C 'TC' Carr
Sn42 and Hn42 somewhere in the wilds of the Pacific Northwest
[email protected]





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to