CamPac Box, The Direct Fitment Kadee Coupler Box

[Colin_Camarillo]

Hey all,

I wanted to let you all know that I have been working with Ted Doskaris in developing Direct Fitment coupler boxes for Kadee Center Set Couplers (#907) currently for select Locomotives and Rolling Stock. At this moment the boxes I have for sale are for:

USA Trains:

• GP7/9

• GP30

• GP38-2

• SD40-2 (under development)

• SD70M

• Woodside Reefer (uses original draft gear opening albeit enlarged, using #789) - Comes with Template

• Modern Tank Car

• 4 Bay Center Flow Hopper (currently under development)

AML:

• Gunderson Hi-Cube Boxcar

My objective is to stop using the “recommended” Truck mounted coupler box that is an offset coupler box which in my opinion lacks structural integrity and will derail your trains when backing into a siding or backing up in general. As well as cutting up the coupler box or creating stacks of plastic stock to hopefully create a body mounted coupler that is to the Kadee spec. I do want to say that the Rolling Stock boxes require minimum experience to install.

Note: The Locomotive conversions require cutting into the pilot on both ends thus is not for the “inexperienced beginner”

If any of you are interested in hearing more about the coupler box kits, Please directly message me with your email and phone number and we can talk! Or visit CamPac Box

Thank you,

Colin J Camarillo

[up9018 (Chris Kieffer)]

I like raising the coupler up where it belongs without having to use an offset. In your photos, it looks like you are pushing the coupler out from the pilot quite a ways. How does that distance compare to the prototype?

Chris

[John_Bouck]

https://camarillopacific.com/CamPac_Box/CamPac_Box.html

[Ted_Doskaris]

Chris Kieffer said:

I like raising the coupler up where it belongs without having to use an offset. In your photos, it looks like you are pushing the coupler out from the pilot quite a ways. How does that distance compare to the prototype?

Chris

Hi Chris,

As to specific “photos”, what car or loco caught your attention?

We strive to emulate the prototype as to coupler projection, albeit with possible compromise for practical reasons. For example, a modern “Shock Control / Hydra-Cushion” car typically has a projected draft gear.

-Ted

[saintyohann (Red Chaplin)]

Ted Doskaris said:

As to specific “photos”, what car or loco caught your attention?

We strive to emulate the prototype as to coupler projection, albeit with possible compromise for practical reasons. For example, a modern “Shock Control / Hydra-Cushion” car typically has a projected draft gear.

-Ted

Ted,

I’d love to see the Centerflow Hopper version that’s still in development. It may be a solution for some of us that don’t have the kadee mounting pads and can’t get any from USA.

• other jon

[up9018 (Chris Kieffer)]

Ted,

I should have been more specific. I’m looking at the locomotives, particularly the ones that show the coupler installed. I’m working on a USAT SD40-2 build and was interested in your product. From the front sheet to the coupler pulling place should be about 24.75" (give or take a little). My question was how close does your mount get the coupler to that position?

Chris

[Ted_Doskaris]

Chris,

Forgive me, but I can’t quite visualize “…From the front sheet to the coupler pulling place should be about 24.75” (give or take a little)"

On my USAT SD40-2, I measure an overall length of about 27.5 inch end to end from draft gear box face to face with installed custom “CNC” metal coupler boxes made for me by Datum Precision. With these boxes it’s about an inch longer from Kadee 907 coupler jaw to jaw.

I do not yet have a “vignette” about the CNC box application on the SD40-2, but I do have a vignette on repositioning its snow plow.

That said, I and Colin do plan to develop a 3-D printed variation applicable to the SD40-2.

The illustration below shows the SD40-2 dimensions and using the Kadee 907 centerset coupler in the CNC box, that appearance wise, I anticipate would be virtually the same for a planned 3-D printed box including fairing. See the aforementioned snow plow vignette for other pictures.

I hope this helps,
-Ted

[up9018 (Chris Kieffer)]

Ted,

This measurement: (Front Sheet or Front of Pilot)

SD40-2 measures out at 64’ 9-3/4" +/- over the pilots (end sheets) and 68’ 11-1/4" over the coupler pulling faces. It appears (though I may be incorrect) that you are hanging the couplers a bit forward of the original location? So I was just wondering how that compared to prototypes. I would definitely be interested in ones for the USAT SD40-2.

Thanks,

Chris

[Ted_Doskaris]

I now understand; you were using prototype, and I am using 1/29 scaled measurements!

Given your prototype measurement from pilot face to coupler jaw of 24.75 inch, I estimate the USAT SD40-2 with CNC box & Kadee 907 scales up to 29 inch distance.

Or, when compared when 1/29 scaled down, the USAT SD40-2 coupler projection is approx. 0.15 inch longer than the scaled down 0.853 inch prototype.

-Ted

[up9018 (Chris Kieffer)]

Thanks for the info Ted. I will be looking forward to the SD40-2 pocket (not in a huge hurry).

Chris

[Bob_Cope (Curmudgeon at Large)]

One comment: Pricing on your web site would be helpful to those reviewing the information.

One Question: Is there any intent to add the larger ‘G’ couplers (830/930) to the lineup?

[Ted_Doskaris]

Hi Bob,

As to showing pricing information on Colin’s Web site, he will have to speak to that.

When compared to couplers used in the Kadee 830/906 box, the smaller foot print box Kadee 789 /907 couplers, albeit without “slack action” feature, are favored for confined conditions typically prevalent on locos and some cars when operated on tight curves to resolve wheel rubbing on the box (examples: USA Trains long modern tank car & AML Hi-Cube box car operation on 8 to 10 foot dia. curve). Considered in the mix, too, are the aesthetics.

That said, is there some application you are thinking of?

Thank you,
-Ted

[Bob_Cope (Curmudgeon at Large)]

As for application, I am in the process of converting all my rolling stock over to Kadee 830 ‘G’ body mount couplers. Although the smaller #1 couplers give a better appearance and are easier to fit in many cases, I find them to be more fragile in the ‘road show’ environment my trains live in. As for application, I might be interested in the USA Trains GP7/9, Cow/Calf (SW?), and the F3 A/B. Barring some major surgery to mount an 830, I may use the Kadee 779 on the GP.

As for pricing, I will see if there is a response from Colin.

[Ted_Doskaris]

Bob, I agree with your assessment about the Kadee G vs. the #1 coupler.

Just to clarify for folks, the Kadee 906 kit (and older kits 830/930-rust color) and 907 kit (and older kit 789) both include “G” scale type centerset couplers. The knuckle portion of the respective coupler types are physically the same. However, the newer types emulate the prototype AAR “E” knuckle and are slightly lager. Corresponding Kadee #1 scale couplers are very much smaller.

The 906/830/930 has a long shank with one centering spring housed in a relatively large box.
The 907/789 employs two small side-by-side centering springs all housed in a smaller box.
The knuckle portion of respective types are physically the same.

Example Kadee 907:

Example Kadee 906:

Example older Kadee 930 - rust color (otherwise same as standard black 830):

The various 3-D printed CamPac boxes typically utilize the coupler, springs, and lid from the Kadee 907 or 789 kit - but obviously not Kadee’s box.

The smaller foot print of the box portion utilized in the 3-D printed offering is desirable for confined areas where space is limited, such as on locos, and where wheels may otherwise rub against a larger box, such as the case with USA Trains modern tank car when operated on tight curves.

CamPac offerings integrate the small box with direct body mounting adaption for selected products, including locos and cars. Coupler track height alignment is also achieved with respect to the Kadee 980 or older 880 gauge.

-Ted

[Paul_Burch]

Ted or Colin,

I use #1 couplers. My favorite is the 1789 (1907). They fit in the same box as your new conversions. The knuckle on these has a reverse offset of about 1/16". Here is a good photo of a knuckle from Ebay. They are 1840 but are the same knuckle as the 1789. https://www.ebay.com/itm/282965101724?ssPageName=STRK:MESINDXX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1436.l2649

I’m just wondering how far off the Kadee #1 gauge these would be if used in one of your new conversions? If they sit high it wouldn’t be too hard to shim.

[Ted_Doskaris]

Paul,

I suspect the Kadee 1907 with its intrinsic downward offset, when installed in a CamPac box, would align with the Kadee #1 gauge without needing a shim.

I don’t have a Kadee #1 gauge to try it.

-Ted

[Paul_Burch]

Ted,

Might be worth testing. If your Campac box will work with #1 scale couplers it will broaden their market appeal.

[Ted_Doskaris]

Paul,

I obtained a Kadee No. 1 scale gauge and used an example USA Trains 4 Bay Hopper equipped with the direct fit CamPac Box.

See illustration below for comparison of “G” vs. No. 1 scale coupler installation: The No. 1 coupler is slightly too low to the railhead, maybe by 0.015 to 0.020 inch.

Contact Colin if you think it worthwhile to make slight alteration to the box intended for “G” scale for a “spin off” specific to the 1907 coupler application that will be dedicated for No. 1 scale.

-Ted

[Rooster]

Good stuff guys !!

[Ted_Doskaris]

Bob Cope said:

Snip “… As for pricing, I will see if there is a response from Colin.” Snip

Colin has posted pricing on his Web site. If you had previously accessed his site’s CamPac Box page, you may need to clear your browser’s cache to effect the updated page that includes pricing and other info.

-Ted