E-Z mates and Mchenry Couplers, The same?????

[Matthew Ginkel]

It always made me wounder, are E-Z mates just Mchenry Couplers made under the bachmann name? They are exactly the same in design and color. Can anyone provide an answer?

[rogertra]

Can't answer your question but I replaced all my E Zed Mates and McHenery's with Kadees.

The other two tend to crap out after a while, where as the Kadees don't.

[ebtbob]

Matt,

       There are two EZ Mate types of couplers.   The EZ Mate I should be taken off the market.  The problem is the small plastic "whisker" that is used to hold the knuckle shut.  Over time,  this "whisker" would fail to hold the knuckle shut causing many unwanted separations of cars and engines. This the same as the original McHenry and for all I know,  Bachmann may have gotten the rights from McHenry.
       The EZ Mate II is like the McHenry couplers on the market today,  with a coiled spring holding the knuckle shut as a Kadee does.   I have use both the EZ Mate II and the McHenry with great success in certain applications such as the pilot coupler on steam engines.   Almost 100% of my On30 equipment as the EZ Mate II couplers and I will only replace them with Kadees if they start to give my problems.
       Now,  all that being said,  the Kadee is still my coupler of choice.   Being a metal coupler you can expect them to take more abuse and last longer,  but....if you have any McHenry or EZ Mate II couplers in use, and they are not causing any problems,  then there is no need to change anything right now.

Bob

[Atlantic Central]

Matt,

To follow up on what Bob said and add some more info, the following is a repost of something I posted some time ago.

I will outline as simply as possible why all the generic knuckle couplers (EZ mate, Proto, McHenry, etc) are not as good as original Kadee couplers. But before I do, let me say that for their intended purpose of providing an inexpensive universal coupler for the North American Ready to Run Train Set market, these generic couplers are OK, not great, but OK. With trains of limited length (10-20 cars) on typical track work, they do work as well or better than the horn hook X2F that preceded them.

All of the generic knuckle couplers in question suffer from the following problems, some brands more than others regarding each problem.

The knuckles are larger than Kadee couplers allowing considerable more slack in the train. This becomes a serious problem as train lengths increase. This excess slack contributes to down hill uncoupling or emergency stop derailments and uncoupling.  This also increases coupling distances between cars which is an appearance problem. As I will describe later, this is not the only part of these designs that increases slack, making matters even worse.

The pivot holes in these couplers are generally larger than Kadee so that too increases slack. In addition to problems of slack and sagging, this can work with the centering springs to tilt the coupler sideways, affecting it performance.

The shanks are thinner in the vertical dimension, combining with the loose fit of the pivot to allow the coupler to droop, or when under load, allowing it to work up and down causing uncoupling at vertical curves at the beginning of grades or uneven sections of track. This droop also results in the pulling faces not being parallel, contributing to the problem of one coupler working up over another, rather than sliding slightly on vertical curves.

The integral cast on springs require that the material used be soft and springy, this makes the knuckle too weak. This is why they fail on long trains, and may account for the loss of knuckle springs on those versions with separate knuckle springs.

All of the integral cast springs (centering or knuckle) are subject to fatigue when left in a loaded condition, this than causes failures when the train is moved.

Good coupler performance requires that slack be minimized, coupler shanks be parallel to the track, and coupler heights be precisely set - the generally sloppy and poor fit of these couplers in most of the existing coupler boxes on the market is the main cause of their poor performance with long trains.

Several others have commented about using Kadee couplers exclusively in the Kadee coupler boxes. While this does eliminate any problems of poor fit, it is only necessary in a few cases. Athearn cars for example can benefit greatly from the simple operation of squaring up the bends of the stamped metal covers and/or crimping the cover onto the box with a pair of pliers.

Additionally, for situations that require the type of centering spring found on EZ Mates, Kadee now makes the #148, which work very well.

Hope this helps

Sheldon           

[Stephen Warrington]

I have found the clones to crap out on even short trains of less than 10 cars on my flat 4x8 layout especially the Proto 2000 clones I replace them with Kadee #148s or #158s before they even touch the rails. I usually give the clones to a friend who for some reason likes them. I guess because they are free.

Stephen

[Dr EMD]

On April 23, 1996 a patent (#5,509,546) was granted to Robert H Staat. This coupler design included a cantilever centering spring and a integral leaf spring to hold the coupler knuckle secure.

On Oct 20, 1998, patent number 5,823,371 was granted by the USPTO to H Lee Riley and Robert H Staat. This design was different as it used a coil spring to keep the coupler secure.

It is most likely based on these two patents, McHenry and Bachmann couplers are the same. It may be safe to say Bachmann obtains their E-Z Mate couplers from McHenry.

Robert H Staat is a dentist who teaches at the University of Louisville dental school and founder of McHenry. H Lee Riley is with Bachmann.

[Atlantic Central]

And,

Until the recent purchase of McHenry by Athearn's parent Horizon, Athearn advertised that the knuckle couplers supplied on it's equipment where Bachmann E-Z Mate's.

Athearn train sets also include Bachmann E-Z track. All of this shows the cooperative nature of these business arrangements.

There have been in the past and continue to be many such business arrangements in this hobby.

Sheldon

[Paul M.]

And,

Until the recent purchase of McHenry by Athearn's parent Horizon, Athearn advertised that the knuckle couplers supplied on it's equipment where Bachmann E-Z Mate's.

Athearn train sets also include Bachmann E-Z track. All of this shows the cooperative nature of these business arrangements.

There have been in the past and continue to be many such business arrangements in this hobby.

Sheldon

I wa going to sya that, but you beat me to it!

[r.cprmier]

Rule one:  purchase engine/rolling stock.
rule two:  take out of box.
Rule three:  promptly remove any plastic coupler, and thow them in  the scrap box.
Rule four:  Install kadee"58s.  They look great and operate as good as the old standby, #5.
RUle six:  Give the crappy plastic couplers away, so you aren't tempted...

Oh, by the way:  my psychological mainstay is that I would rather have only twenty cars that are set up and operating to my satisfaction, than 2000 cars- that aren't.

[Atlantic Central]

Rich,

There are three facts about the use of the Kadee #58 "scale coupler" that some may not be aware of. Before heading down that road all should know that:

One, if you are using regular NMRA Standard wheel track tolerances (that would be most of us) and you do a lot of switching, the Kadee #58 (or McHenry scale couplers) will not be as reliable during coupling because they have a smaller gathering range.

Gathering range = the amount that the two cars can be off center side to side and still have the coupler mate. The tolerances in the track guage, wheel sets and truck mountings are such that if one car is off to one side and the other off to the other side, the scale couplers will not couple.

This is the main reason the original Kadee coupler was made oversized in the first place and was a major discussion point in during the NMRA coupler research committee many years ago.

It should also be noted that while they do work with the regular couplers, that is a less than perfect situation as well. It takes more force to couple a #58 to a #5 than when coupling like styles, be they scale or regular. If your cars are very free rolling, as I have achieved and many new products are now, this can be a problem as well. The car can be just pushed away rather than coupling.

Two, In order to make the scale coupler compatable with the regular coupler, the knuckle opening length wise is oversized, so semi-scale would be a more correct term. This space gives the #58 the same or maybe even slightly more train slack motion and that motion seems less controled than with the regular coupler, this is an issue if you run long trains.

Three, Kadee has just released some additional shank lengths and styles in the scale coupler, but versions to fit all equipment do not yet exist. For me having some of each is not a disirable situaton, nor would conversion of 500 cars and locos be a desirable or affordable project.

These observations are based on tests I personaly conducted back when the scale couplers first came out.

The scale couplers do look good, providing an appearance more in proportion to the equipment, but operationally be aware of these limitations. If you do not do a lot of switching, or all your switching is close to your layout edge where you can align couplers if necessary, than you will have no problems with them.

One final note, all of the problems I have discribed can and do happen even with regular Kadee's from time to time and depending on the tuning of your track and equipment. Use of the scale coupler will make carefull tuning and maintenance even more important for good operation.

Sheldon

[Matthew Ginkel]

This post seems to have strayed from my original question. For the record im covnverting my equipment, All engines (except bachmann) have KD 58's as well as 50% of my freight cars (about 20+to go). Passenger cars have #148's between them and for now McHenry scale couplers on the ends (2 observation cars and a bi-level cab car.) 

Anyway it just seemed to me that E-Z mates and McHenry's standard couplers look Exactly the same, I was just woundering if they were made under liscence from Mchenry at bachmann (like how atlas makes their own Accumate couplers)

[RAM]

If you don't already know it.  Every oil company does not ;make lube oil.  Every part on a GM or Ford car maynot be made by them.  Sear's does not make washing machines, Walmart does not produce egg and milk.  I often cost too much to do it yourself.   Now I can have you make a product for me and put my name on it.  We both  make money off of the deal.  That  is life.

[Atlantic Central]

Matt,

Based on all the info provided in all the posts above, it is safe to assume that they are most likely actually produced in the same factory in China, some for Bachmann and some for McHenry, all under contract agreement with the two patent holders. And maybe that is a Bachmann factory or some other third party manufacturer in China.

Bachmann is one of the few companies we buy these products from that actually has some kind of ownership connection with the factory in China that makes the goods. Most all of these other American companies making products in China simply contract the work out to manufacturing companies over there. Athearn, Atlas, Walthers, etc, do not own any buildings/land/machinery in China.

Just like RAM said, Sears does not make washing machines, Wirlpool makes washing machines and stamps "Sears" on them as part of a contract deal. Sears does not make ANYTHING, they just sell other peoples stuff with "Sears" stamped on it.

In some cases however, parts are made here or in Europe, by one company, send to China to be assembled by another company, then sent here to be sold under whatever brandname is desired by the owners of the product line. This is most likely the case with at least some of Athearn's RTR line and most likely with Intermountain as well.

Look at all the private label stuff Bachmann does, mostly in On30 and Large scale. If you have enough capital, you could get Bachmann or Athearn or whoever to produce "Matt's Trains" and you would not need a factory of your own, just a name, a distribution plan, a warehouse and lots of money.

Cox, the model airplane company, did that with Athearn in the 70's. Athearn was not in the RTR business at that time but produced some of their products in RTR form to be marketed in toy stores by Cox.

Many years ago, before Athearn and Model Die Casting where part of Horizon, they both did tool and die work for each other based on who had the machines to do various types of work. And, they, in a very Gentlemenly way, did not compete with each other simply by not making many of the same prototypes.

No one meant to hijack your thread, but I think everyone felt the question had been answered and they where responding to other comments made along the way. That's what happens.

Dirty little secrets - only two companies in the world actually make the tape transport section of a VCR,

and,

the same factories that make Sears tools make S-K tools and MATCO tools,

and,

Intermoutain wheel sets and REBOXX wheel sets are the same and made in the same factory in China, REBOXX just offers more different items,

and,

Some of the parts in a new Cadillac are made in the same factory, by the same company that used to make Checker Taxi Cabs,

and,

the Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis are built one after the other on the same assembly line.

Just to name a few. This is how manufacturing is done.

Sheldon

[Paul M.]

Matt,


Bachmann is one of the few companies we buy these products from that actually has some kind of ownership connection with the factory in China that makes the goods. Most all of these other American companies making products in China simply contract the work out to manufacturing companies over there. Athearn, Atlas, Walthers, etc, do not own any buildings/land/machinery in China.

Sheldon

Sheldon is correct. Walthers doesn't own any machinery in CHINA. They make their stuff in DENMARK.

[Stephen Warrington]

  Looks at brand new Walthers car MADE IN CHINA stamped on box instructions PRINTED IN CHINA, when did Denmark take over ChinaI musta missed that news reel.

Stephen