I reentered the hobby in 1988, since that time all I use is #5's, if and when I can find them. Nearest hobby shop orders #5's and receives #3's. I don't know what the deal is with that, but oh well. At this point I don't have grades, unit trains or long trains for that matter. But I simply prefer to put them together myself. It doesn't make any difference what piece I'm working on, they all get drilled and tapped for a 2-56 X 1/2" du-bro cat. no. 310 (socket head cap screw) for rolling stock & 2-56 X 1/2' du-bro cat. no.174 (bolt sets with lock nuts & washers). This makes for an easy replacement if something fails. It's all good.

Charlie

KD #5's are the old reliable and the bulk packs are cheaper than the 148 couplers.  However, over the years I've found in some cases the #5 with the bronze spring can bind up after the draft gear cover is screwed on due to the extra thickness.  The #148 seems to work a little better in those circumstances.  I did get a bulk pack of #58's at a train show last spring for nearly half the regular price - those have the bronze springs so I'll use those where I can, but generally now I'm only getting the whisker type.

To the OP, you can get a 2-pack of the #5 and see how they fit on a couple of you 100 cars, and if they work well, g'head and buy the bulk packs.  The #5 in bulk are cheaper than the 148.  If the #5 binds in the coupler box, try the 148.  If both work the same, go with the less expensive type (#5).

Cheers, Jim

Metal kadee all the way. Don't matter what number as long as hight and skadee are correct for your model or prototype.

I have found that # 5 or # 148 work just as good as the other. Some newer cars prefer the 148s but you just have to experiment. 

Like most people who have been in this hobby will tell you ....the plastic nuckle couplers just won't take long or heavy trains. They will bend and cause more hight issues than metal. You might save a few $ using plastic but the headaches just ar not worth it.

This is what I recommend and use, cars equipped with anything else compatible or not get replaced with these or a similar type as the situation requires. For different height and length requirements that show up on occasion Kadee makes couplers to address that.

Link to their website http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/page140.htm

Video of the couplers in action train is 160 cars in length and goes up and down grades of more than 2%, cars are heavier than NMRA recommended practice by one to two onces, and have metal wheels. More videos of 100 car trains available on my YouTube channel.

Link https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDmC2GjPPfARE7xdZPSjGaw/videos

Is there a reason that you folks that are really dedicated to 148's don't use 158's?  Seems like the 158 is everything the 148 is but, better looking.  I don't have a dog in the fight, as I do not run Kadees, but Sergents.  I am just asking out of curiosity.  

I have some of the finer scale couplers by Kadee and do like the looks of them. However the larger knuckles of the standard head have a larger engagement area than the more scale couplers and keep trains together over irregularities better than the others. In a club layout environment where one occasionally encounters track irregularities that is a real plus. If I was going to operate on only a layout that I constructed and put down all the roadbed and track with out being in a hurry and had it done to my standards the finer scale would be my choice. Since I run my equipment on different layouts I have gone with the greater reliability of the slightly oversize coupler.

If I understand your question correctly. I prefer the #148s or #5s because of their reliability. They are oversized but that also helps when you have slight car height differences.

The scale couples do indeed look better but in my experience they also are more likely to separate over uneven track. I think on a home layout where you personally keep track of your rolling stock defects any coupler is fine. But when you have lots of club cars that may have Coupler hight issues over looked, the Number 5 or 148 will be more reliable.

Just my .02

Hobbez, I do have the 58 couplers - many come on some of the better RTR freight cars out of the box, such as ExactRail and Tangent.  However, like LMACk above, the KD #5 and the whisker version are yes, bigger and have a greater vertical relief.  Due to this it's logical that they would be less likely to uncouple due to height mismatches and if you have a train break apart and race down a grade and fly off the track, that's not a good thing.  So reliability against false uncouplings.

So better looking does come at a cost of being less forgiving.  Now I do try to build my track as smoothly and even as possible, but lets just call it a little extra insurance.  In an ideal world where everything was tuned perfectly and track very even etc. I'd go with the 58/158 all the time.

As for Sergents, it would cost me a fortune to replace many hundreds of freight cars and 150 engines couplers with them - it's not even a question for me; I'm happy with KD's.  If I had small switching RR with a small number of cars, I might look into them.

I was wondering if any of you have experience with rotating couplers that can be used with coal hoppers and a rotary dumper.

I've found several types but just wondering about anyone's experience with the idea and particular couplers.

Thanks.

Ron

Rio Rancho Northern Railroad (RRNRR)

Thank you guys for the answers.  The larger knuckle face makes them more reliable?  I can see that would be very valuable if you run on multiple layouts with differing levels of track smoothness.

Since I have been using Sergents for a loooong time, I just add a pair when I buy a new piece.  As they cost the same as a pair of scale metal Kadees, it's not an added cost.