Large Scale Central

CamPac Box, The Direct Fitment Kadee Coupler Box

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.

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:

Kadee 907

Example Kadee 906:

Kadee 906

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

Kadee 930 - rust color version of Kadee 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

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.

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

Ted,

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

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.

CamPac Box fitted with "G" & No. 1 Scale Couplers

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

Good stuff guys !!

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

Ted,

Thanks for doing the test. Pretty close to a match. In your photo it looks like the #1 coupler on the car might be sitting at a very slight downward angle. Could that be why they don’t match? I have never had to make the coupler hole larger on a Kadee coupler to fit the Kadee box. The same 911 box is used for both G and #1. I will try one of the pockets if I get a chance. I don’t have anything in the works right now, but it does look like I could use these for locomotive body mounts.

Paul Burch said:

Ted,

Question1:

“Thanks for doing the test. Pretty close to a match. In your photo it looks like the #1 coupler on the car might be sitting at a very slight downward angle. Could that be why they don’t match?”

Answer1:

The camera lends can also affect how it looks in picture. Something to consider, too, is from different production runs, there may be factory car tolerance variations in the manufacturing & assembly process.

The difference in No. 1 coupler height from the railhead is small enough that a very thin shim could be placed under the tail of CamPac Box to remedy the mismatch with the Kadee No. 1 gauge. The one caution about doing that is that it’s critical there be sufficient mounting screw thread penetration into the car’s mounting pad bosses when fastening the CamPac Box. The factory bosses don’t have that much depth for threading in mounting screws normally used for attaching their adapter. Paul, I know you will appreciate that and have the skill level finesse to make for a good result.

Question2:

“I have never had to make the coupler hole larger on a Kadee coupler to fit the Kadee box. The same 911 box is used for both G and #1. I will try one of the pockets if I get a chance. I don’t have anything in the works right now, but it does look like I could use these for locomotive body mounts.”

Answer2:

The CamPac Box coupler mounting post diameter is optimized for mounting the Kadee “G” AAR E type coupler - like the coupler from the Kadee 907 kit. (The “G” scale AAR E coupler shank hole is larger than both the older “G” version and the No. 1 scale coupler, too.) The CamPac Box post diameter was done to minimize coupler vertical offset sag that is more critical for a coupler design with short shank compared to a long shank coupler that’s in, for example, the Kadee 906 large foot print box.

From measurements made, the older style Kadee “G” coupler from the Kadee 789 kit has a smaller diameter hole in its shank. The “G” AAR E coupler shank hole also includes a small “v” notch in it that the other couplers do not.

The Kadee No. 1 coupler from the Kadee 1907 kit shank hole diameter is approximately 0.020 inch smaller than the Kadee “G” AAR E coupler.

Consequently, the two basic difference between the “G” AAR E application and No. 1 appreciation (slight coupler height mismatch with gauge & smaller shank hole) may justify a “spin off” version of the CamPac Box.

-Ted

Colin Camarillo said:

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.

Colin, Ted,

Have yall thought about patent infringement? You are including a copy of the Kadee draft gear box design. When Eric Reuter and I were working on Kadee coupler adapters for USAT locos, I considered incorporating the box but thought better of it to avoid any legal issues.

Dan,

Having done a search, Kadee has patents on the coupler. I have not found patents on the box itself.

The CamPac box can be considered as an accessory that uses the parts from a Kadee coupler kit, except for the box. The user is to acquire the whole Kadee kit to obtain those parts.

The CamPac box facilitates direct body mount fitment of centerset type couplers to selected 1/29 scale cars and locos.

-Ted

Hey all,
Sorry for my absence, as I have been VERY busy. Thanks Ted for answering all of the questions!

Chris K, Thanks for the interest and comments. Stay tuned for more updates as we continue to develop the SD40-2
Red C, Looks like Ted added some photos of the 4-Bay CFH and now there are more on the website.
Bob, The site has been updated with the pricing. Thank you!
Paul, if you are interested We might make a spin off box for the 1907 coupler, at this moment we are focused on dialing-in the 907 “G” coupler type.
Rooster, THANKS!
Dan G, I think Ted said it all!

As for updates with the products:
The USAT 4 Bay Center Flow Hopper car is Complete, (Pending locating the correct screws that are used to secure it to the Car Frame) Photos have been added to the website, once we locate the correct screws pricing will be added.
“At bat”, is the USAT SD40-2
“On deck” is the USAT F3

That being said. If anyone can send me a link of where I can find the OEM screws used for the USAT 4 Bay Center Flow Hopper Car, That would be awesome!

Thanks!

  • Colin

Ted Doskaris said:

Dan,

Having done a search, Kadee has patents on the coupler. I have not found patents on the box itself.

The CamPac box can be considered as an accessory that uses the parts from a Kadee coupler kit, except for the box. The user is to acquire the whole Kadee kit to obtain those parts.

The CamPac box facilitates direct body mount fitment of centerset type couplers to selected 1/29 scale cars and locos.

-Ted

Unfortunately, Googling Kadee patents would not hold up in court. Of course I’m sure Kadee would not spend the money to sue you. I’m just thinking since you are obviously looking to profit using their product design, maybe you should get their blessing. Just the right thing to do IMHO. Better than them finding out by someone calling Kadee and ordering “some more of those CamPac adapters”.

Dan Gilchrist said:

Unfortunately, Googling Kadee patents would not hold up in court. Of course I’m sure Kadee would not spend the money to sue you. I’m just thinking since you are obviously looking to profit using their product design, maybe you should get their blessing. Just the right thing to do IMHO. Better than them finding out by someone calling Kadee and ordering “some more of those CamPac adapters”.

Since Kadee, AML and USA all use the same(-ish) box design without issue, I wouldn’t worry. Besides there’s no way Kadee could clear the prior works clause to get a patent on a box to hold a coupler.

Colin Camarillo said:

The USAT 4 Bay Center Flow Hopper car is Complete, (Pending locating the correct screws that are used to secure it to the Car Frame) Photos have been added to the website, once we locate the correct screws pricing will be added.

I was pretty sure the screws were m2.5x4mm.

Red Chaplin said:

Dan Gilchrist said:

Unfortunately, Googling Kadee patents would not hold up in court. Of course I’m sure Kadee would not spend the money to sue you. I’m just thinking since you are obviously looking to profit using their product design, maybe you should get their blessing. Just the right thing to do IMHO. Better than them finding out by someone calling Kadee and ordering “some more of those CamPac adapters”.

Since Kadee, AML and USA all use the same(-ish) box design without issue, I wouldn’t worry. Besides there’s no way Kadee could clear the prior works clause to get a patent on a box to hold a coupler.

Kadee would have to go all the way back to Mantua and Globe and a few others from the 30’s, 40’s and 50’s…

Dan Gilchrist said:

Ted Doskaris said:
Snip…Unfortunately, Googling Kadee patents would not hold up in court. Of course I’m sure Kadee would not spend the money to sue you. I’m just thinking since you are obviously looking to profit using their product design, maybe you should get their blessing. Just the right thing to do IMHO. Better than them finding out by someone calling Kadee and ordering “some more of those CamPac adapters”…Snip

Dan, I did not use Google searching. I went direct to the USTPO. Are you a patent attorney or agent?

-Ted

Ted Doskaris said:

Dan, I did not use Google searching. I went direct to the USTPO. Are you a patent attorney or agent?

-Ted

I am not. I apologize. My statement was not mean’t to be taken literally. Only that searching the Internet is not sufficient protection against litigation.

I just thought it would nice if you let them know. I will continue to print adapters that use the Kadee boxes and give them away.

-Dan

I would tend to take Red’s perspective, that these other manufacturers not only make a pretty close clone of the Kadee box, but in the case of AML, they also made a coupler to fit in it.

If Kadee did not go after AML, you would think this situation and the fact the consumer still needs to buy the complete unit from Kadee, should be much less of a deal.

Greg