RTR vs Kits... Economics, Variety and Quality: a discussion.

[JaymzHatstand]

Print off moving figures too!

But we are perhaps 100-200 years from that.

Now that would be useful, a scale, DCC controlled shunter who couples/uncouples stock on command!

 

No more 'big hand from the sky', as they could be strong enough to give a loco a prod when it stalls on a dirty bit of track!

 

Then they become self aware, and James Cameron makes a film about the rise of the model railway robots! 'Listen, and understand. That shunter is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop until every last coupling has been unhitched!'

 

Terrifying stuff!

 

As you were...!

 

Cheers

 

J

[Jeff Smith]

I point you here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/99937-kitbuild-challenge-entry-lner-f5-2-4-2t/?hl=nile

And if that isn't a respectable model I don't know what is.

 

Built from the very same kit, I believe, or certainly for one of his other ones. Incidentally, if you have any concerns I suggest you put a PM in to 'L49' on here.

This is a great thread to read and surely gives a good idea of the work required, it has however persuaded me to consider the extra outlay for FUD!

[sem34090]

The reason for my posting that thread was to allow people to decide for themselves what they think is the best, and the final model is a good one. Note also the effectiveness of the WSF chassis.

[Jol Wilkinson]

The reason for my posting that thread was to allow people to decide for themselves what they think is the best, and the final model is a good one. Note also the effectiveness of the WSF chassis.

 

Effective in what way? Smooth running, accurate to prototype. easy to assemble, long term reliability? 

 

I don't regard the finish as acceptable for a "kit" that is supposed to motivate people to have a go at making one, in comparison to what they can buy RTR, even if it is a "shake the box" kit and costs (with all the necessary bits) less than two thirds of the cost of a model in a box from a Chinese factory (referring to the topic title). A smooth surface finish, that can be sprayed with an aerosol without any preparation other than straightforward cleaning is what people would want

 

While the extensive RTR "Wishlists" and annual polls on RMweb give the impression that "modellers" desperately need and want particular models, they aren't willing to have a go at building one from the kits that have been available for many years. So hoping that you can motivate them into making something that will have a noticeably different level of finish to what they have become used to, is more than optimistic. A look at some of the threads will show that, as well as a fear of soldering irons, it is the belief that they can't paint and line a loco is the most commonly offered reason for not trying to build a model from a kit. 

[Craigw]

To enable a bit of comparison, here is an etched brass F4

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1515/entry-20598-and-so-finally-we-come-to-almost-the-end/

 

Full credit to the builder EHertsGER.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

Edited March 20, 2018 by Craigw

[sem34090]

Some people really don't get it do they?

 

I really want an LBSCR B4. I could do with one for my next layout project.

 

I am not, however, able to spend £129 on a (lower-priced than many) brass kit. I do not have that sort of disposable income. That isn't unwillingness, that's the reality for myself and quite a few other younger modellers. 

 

3D printing isn't the only answer, possibly it's not the answer at all, but given I have limited funds it seems to me the best way to go about getting the models I want at a price I can actually manage. If I had enough money to buy a couple of brass loco kits and see how they turn out then I would try that: £129 is competitive with RTR, maybe less so after running gear, but (If I had money to burn) I would seriously consider the kit. The risk for me is that would be roughly 6 months of constant saving for a kit I may be unable to build. Even a (very tempting!) LRM coach kit would be about a month or two, though that may go on the Christmas list as I've heard some very good things about LRM.

 

Brass will generally produce a model of higher quality, but the price is out of reach for many modellers of my age. We can't even afford brand new RTR now, unless it is discounted. I was fortunate to have someone Pre-Order a Hattons Andrew Barclay for my birthday, but beyond that second-hand locos (both kitbuilt and RTR, I'm currently preferring the former) are all we can manage.

[JSpencer]

Basically - while there is a market for top end Brass/white metal kits, there is also a market for cheaper, easier kits for newcomers. I don't think this should be discouraged.

 

People starting with cheaper kits will - as they get older - doubtlessly move to more expensive detailed Brass ones.

[chris p bacon]

Some people really don't get it do they?

 

I really want an LBSCR B4. I could do with one for my next layout project.

 

I am not, however, able to spend £129 on a (lower-priced than many) brass kit. I do not have that sort of disposable income. That isn't unwillingness, that's the reality for myself and quite a few other younger modellers. 

 

3D printing isn't the only answer, possibly it's not the answer at all, but given I have limited funds it seems to me the best way to go about getting the models I want at a price I can actually manage. If I had enough money to buy a couple of brass loco kits and see how they turn out then I would try that: £129 is competitive with RTR, maybe less so after running gear, but (If I had money to burn) I would seriously consider the kit. The risk for me is that would be roughly 6 months of constant saving for a kit I may be unable to build. Even a (very tempting!) LRM coach kit would be about a month or two, though that may go on the Christmas list as I've heard some very good things about LRM.

 

Brass will generally produce a model of higher quality, but the price is out of reach for many modellers of my age. We can't even afford brand new RTR now, unless it is discounted. I was fortunate to have someone Pre-Order a Hattons Andrew Barclay for my birthday, but beyond that second-hand locos (both kitbuilt and RTR, I'm currently preferring the former) are all we can manage.

 

 

But we do 'get it'

 

Some of us are just pointing out that the difference in cost between cheap 3D and brass/rtr is the standard of finish, which to me actually makes the latter look better value for money.

 

You are not alone in having a restricted budget, and I doubt there is anyone here who has an unlimited spend on their hobby. Personally I figured out a few years ago what I enjoyed the most and stopped purchasing items I only had a passing interest in, I now concentrate on my core interest* and my money goes a lot further and the hobby is more enjoyable than it's ever been.

 

* The GN......just try buying RTR....it makes you build your own.

[hayfield]

Effective in what way? Smooth running, accurate to prototype. easy to assemble, long term reliability? 

 

I don't regard the finish as acceptable for a "kit" that is supposed to motivate people to have a go at making one, in comparison to what they can buy RTR, even if it is a "shake the box" kit and costs (with all the necessary bits) less than two thirds of the cost of a model in a box from a Chinese factory (referring to the topic title). A smooth surface finish, that can be sprayed with an aerosol without any preparation other than straightforward cleaning is what people would want

 

While the extensive RTR "Wishlists" and annual polls on RMweb give the impression that "modellers" desperately need and want particular models, they aren't willing to have a go at building one from the kits that have been available for many years. So hoping that you can motivate them into making something that will have a noticeably different level of finish to what they have become used to, is more than optimistic. A look at some of the threads will show that, as well as a fear of soldering irons, it is the belief that they can't paint and line a loco is the most commonly offered reason for not trying to build a model from a kit. 

 

Jol

 

Spot on with the comments I will elaborate below rather than duplicate a reply

Some people really don't get it do they?

 

I really want an LBSCR B4. I could do with one for my next layout project.

 

I am not, however, able to spend £129 on a (lower-priced than many) brass kit. I do not have that sort of disposable income. That isn't unwillingness, that's the reality for myself and quite a few other younger modellers. 

 

3D printing isn't the only answer, possibly it's not the answer at all, but given I have limited funds it seems to me the best way to go about getting the models I want at a price I can actually manage. If I had enough money to buy a couple of brass loco kits and see how they turn out then I would try that: £129 is competitive with RTR, maybe less so after running gear, but (If I had money to burn) I would seriously consider the kit. The risk for me is that would be roughly 6 months of constant saving for a kit I may be unable to build. Even a (very tempting!) LRM coach kit would be about a month or two, though that may go on the Christmas list as I've heard some very good things about LRM.

 

Brass will generally produce a model of higher quality, but the price is out of reach for many modellers of my age. We can't even afford brand new RTR now, unless it is discounted. I was fortunate to have someone Pre-Order a Hattons Andrew Barclay for my birthday, but beyond that second-hand locos (both kitbuilt and RTR, I'm currently preferring the former) are all we can manage.

 

I am wondering actually who does not get it,  your title quotes economics- quality-variety

 

Firstly I do not see how your  economics argument stacks up

 

Looking at FUD printed kits they seem to be in the same price region of either comparable whitemetal or etched kits. To me whilst the price of WSF models is far cheaper as Jol has said the quality is not there. Buying a cheaper print will only give you an item which fails to live up to expectations and possibly will end up in the bin, where is the economic sense to this.

 

Given the state of the 3D printing market on a price verses cost, with the excellent cad skills you obviously have print off paper templates of the parts, either spend £10 on some plasticard or better still £20 on some brass or nickle sheet and fabricate your bodies. I am certain with the skills you possess you could turn your hand to making excellent  models

 

If you are looking for quality then it seems you will have to go down the route FUD which shatters your economic argument, the other option is to arrange the print in WSF as a selection of parts which can be individually worked/prepared then assembled, providing that is parts can be stuck together

 

The economics argument continues to fail after spending £40 on a print you then either have to use an older unsuitable chassis or an expensive new one

 

As for your continued claims of not being able to afford a new etched or whitemetal kit, I repeat buy one of the many always available second hand kits many of which include the wheels motor and gears at a price of a WSF printed body

 

You undoubtedly have some great skills and I am certain can turn your hand to most things, keep pushing the boundaries, don't accept second best. Good luck

[hayfield]

Basically - while there is a market for top end Brass/white metal kits, there is also a market for cheaper, easier kits for newcomers. I don't think this should be discouraged.

 

People starting with cheaper kits will - as they get older - doubtlessly move to more expensive detailed Brass ones.

 

Trouble is sometimes cheaper ends up dearer when the quality of either the design or the parts fail to live up to expectations. This is the point

[jjnewitt]

Some people really don't get it do they?

 

I really want an LBSCR B4. I could do with one for my next layout project.

 

 

Then why didn't you get out the plasic sheet and a suitably sized tube and spend a few evenings creating one? You'd have got something for even less money (!) and it probably would have looked better. You could have 3D printed the details of you wanted or oculdn;t find them elsewhere.

 

I really don't get the obsession over 3D printing loco bodies. The result is generally pretty poor (especially in materials that make it cheap) and would seem to be a backwards step from more traditional methods. I'm not convinced that 3D printing in it's current form can get a lot better, except perhaps DLP printing and then only really if they find a way to animate it (think film rather than a slide show). It all strikes me a bit as betamax technology. The prints Modelu can do are very good (though in certain situations still need 'finishing') but it's only really suited to small detailing parts in 4mm.

 

With the incresing furvour surronding ever detail of incresingly good RTR relases I find it odd that people would accept something that is obviously a massive step down in quality.

 

Justin

[Jol Wilkinson]

As Dave has said, yes, some of us do get it.

 

You, as many of us have before at some time during our life, can't afford what you might want for your layout . So you have chosen to design and get 3D printed the models you want. 

 

Some of us don't believe that 3D printing will satisfactorily, at present, provide all you need for a reliable, easy to assemble, loco chassis. So the cost argument may be flawed if you have to outsource "better" items. You are satisfied, as are some others, with a surface finish that many model builders would regard as totally unsatisfactory, even when an hour or two has been spent "improving" it and which is also markedly inferior to RTR standards. So any suggestion that it may draw non model makers into having a go is very optimistic.

 

I can't speak for others, but over many years I have spent money on kits that were badly conceived (e.g. white metal coupling rods), badly produced (poor fitting cast w/m parts, oval boilers, etc.), poorly researched and designed, etc. I've seen the development of accurate and well thought out etched kits which are not appreciably more expensive than cast kits. I've seen the introduction of moulded plastic loco kits, and motorising packs for them and their demise. I've seen people buy kits at the cheaper end of the market (e.g. Jidenco) and then give up any idea of building their own models because they couldn't assemble what would test the most experienced. In the same way that those other technologies were sometimes poorly or inappropriately used, so the same can be said for 3D printing.

 

So while your objective of producing 3D printed kits for models you can't otherwise afford is laudable, I genuinely don't believe that 3D printing will - at present - make any appreciable difference to whether those that don't currently make their own model will start to do so. Yes, there will be others like you that adopt 3D printing as learning keyboard skills seems easier than soldering, painting, etc. but the overall finish of the printed model is either not really that good at the low price end, and too expensive otherwise by your own economic criteria. The future of 3D printed models lies in the hands of the developers of the process and until it becomes a "production" process on a par with etching, casting or plastic moulding, it will only realistically  be suitable for small, low cost detailing bits such as produced by Modeluu or where the finish (wagon buffer bodies) is not critical.

 

As other have said, good for you in doing what you are doing for your own needs, as others are doing. However, please don't assume that those who aren't convinced about the value of 3D printed models at this time - and whose views are based on experiences over many years - are in the wrong.

[PenrithBeacon]

There is yet another choice, that of scratch building using plastic sheet. Apart from a wagon or two a long time ago this isn't something I have tried but it can be made to work. And it's cheap.

[PenrithBeacon]

Bill Bedford's approach the 3D Printing is to use the technique for the first ie prototype and then resin cast the production run. This seems to work very well, but it does require more commitment from the kit developer than only doing the 3D design work.

[Edwardian]

As Dave has said, yes, some of us do get it.

 

You, as many of us have before at some time during our life, can't afford what you might want for your layout . So you have chosen to design and get 3D printed the models you want. 

 

Some of us don't believe that 3D printing will satisfactorily, at present, provide all you need for a reliable, easy to assemble, loco chassis. So the cost argument may be flawed if you have to outsource "better" items. You are satisfied, as are some others, with a surface finish that many model builders would regard as totally unsatisfactory, even when an hour or two has been spent "improving" it and which is also markedly inferior to RTR standards. So any suggestion that it may draw non model makers into having a go is very optimistic.

 

I can't speak for others, but over many years I have spent money on kits that were badly conceived (e.g. white metal coupling rods), badly produced (poor fitting cast w/m parts, oval boilers, etc.), poorly researched and designed, etc. I've seen the development of accurate and well thought out etched kits which are not appreciably more expensive than cast kits. I've seen the introduction of moulded plastic loco kits, and motorising packs for them and their demise. I've seen people buy kits at the cheaper end of the market (e.g. Jidenco) and then give up any idea of building their own models because they couldn't assemble what would test the most experienced. In the same way that those other technologies were sometimes poorly or inappropriately used, so the same can be said for 3D printing.

 

So while your objective of producing 3D printed kits for models you can't otherwise afford is laudable, I genuinely don't believe that 3D printing will - at present - make any appreciable difference to whether those that don't currently make their own model will start to do so. Yes, there will be others like you that adopt 3D printing as learning keyboard skills seems easier than soldering, painting, etc. but the overall finish of the printed model is either not really that good at the low price end, and too expensive otherwise by your own economic criteria. The future of 3D printed models lies in the hands of the developers of the process and until it becomes a "production" process on a par with etching, casting or plastic moulding, it will only realistically  be suitable for small, low cost detailing bits such as produced by Modeluu or where the finish (wagon buffer bodies) is not critical.

 

As other have said, good for you in doing what you are doing for your own needs, as others are doing. However, please don't assume that those who aren't convinced about the value of 3D printed models at this time - and whose views are based on experiences over many years - are in the wrong.

 

I take a horses for courses view.  CAD and 3D printing is great, for instance, for producing boiler fittings that involve complex curves.  A member of the parish kindly designed a dome for me where there was no similar component available.

 

With loco bodies and coaches, there a tension between an acceptable finish and an acceptable price.  I think Mike Trice's flat-pack GN 6-wheel coaches do a pretty good job of striking that balance, but I find that most of what interests me in the 3D print market is either not of a good enough finish or is too expensive or, in some cases, both!

 

I think one needs to take a critical view of where, and where not, it is likely to offer an advantage.

 

I look forward to seeing some 'old school' brass-work at London Road in York.  

[Legend]

Basically - while there is a market for top end Brass/white metal kits, there is also a market for cheaper, easier kits for newcomers. I don't think this should be discouraged.

 

People starting with cheaper kits will - as they get older - doubtlessly move to more expensive detailed Brass ones.

I agree they are different markets . I'm not so sure as people get older they will move to Brass. I think we have two different genres here . Plastic(or 3D printing) is an extension of the basic RTR market giving people the ability to get locomotives not available RTR. But this is a whole different level to Brass and Whitemetal kits which will remain the preserve of those that have ability and means to construct. Quite separate markets

[Jol Wilkinson]

I take a horses for courses view.  CAD and 3D printing is great, for instance, for producing boiler fittings that involve complex curves.  A member of the parish kindly designed a dome for me where there was no similar component available.

 

With loco bodies and coaches, there a tension between an acceptable finish and an acceptable price.  I think Mike Trice's flat-pack GN 6-wheel coaches do a pretty good job of striking that balance, but I find that most of what interests me in the 3D print market is either not of a good enough finish or is too expensive or, in some cases, both!

 

I think one needs to take a critical view of where, and where not, it is likely to offer an advantage.

 

I look forward to seeing some 'old school' brass-work at London Road in York.  

 

There will also be some "old school" laser cut things, resin cast models (including some from 3D printed patterns) 3D printed components and other objects of possible interest to members of the Luddite college of model making.

[Jol Wilkinson]

Bill Bedford's approach the 3D Printing is to use the technique for the first ie prototype and then resin cast the production run. This seems to work very well, but it does require more commitment from the kit developer than only doing the 3D design work.

 

He now also 3D prints some of his own wagon bodies using (I believe) a SLS printer. On his his website the LNWR D2 and D3 wagons shows visible evidence of the print process on the wagon sides, but whether this is still apparent under a coat of mat grey paint I don't know.

 

http://mousa.biz/fourmm/wagons/lnwr_wagons4.html

 

The LNWR D1 wagon kits a bought when introduced were resin cast from 3D prints. These has a rough surface finish compared to the comparable Ratio kit, although this was partially masked by matt paint and isn't noticeable from layout viewing distance.

[hayfield]

I agree they are different markets . I'm not so sure as people get older they will move to Brass. I think we have two different genres here . Plastic(or 3D printing) is an extension of the basic RTR market giving people the ability to get locomotives not available RTR. But this is a whole different level to Brass and Whitemetal kits which will remain the preserve of those that have ability and means to construct. Quite separate markets

 

 

There is nothing difficult in building simple whitemetal or brass kits other than you need an odd additional tool, which has many other uses on the layout, some flux and a couple of different types of solder, all of which last for ages

 

I am just about to start to solder together a cheap and simple 009 tram kit. £10 and needs 4 solder joints and can be built if required with resin cored solder used for wiring.

 

I have a few 4 mm scale whitemetal wagons in the to be built pile, cost less than a fiver. Can be glued or soldered

 

Neither require many tools or special skills to build 

[JSpencer]

Trouble is sometimes cheaper ends up dearer when the quality of either the design or the parts fail to live up to expectations. This is the point

 

That brings us back to design of the kit in the first place. There are equally some expensive kits out there which don't build brilliantly either.

 

If I tank model tanks, you have fast build Armourfast and Plastic Soldier company (amongst others) doing cheap and simple tank kits with a few parts (10 to 20) that you can go off and build either as-is of detail up to high standards. Here are a some of mine, built as and detailed up.

 

You then have Dragon kits which are expensive and with over a 100 parts. With trains, the high end exists but the low end still requires work.

 

 

 

 

 

Even this resin O1 kit has set me back about £120, mostly due to using a modern RTR chassis close to dimensions of the prototype (the jinty chassis specified is like sticking a bigger C class chassis under an O1 and would never look right) :

 

[Clearwater]

Worth noting that during the duration of this thread, there have been several eBay auctions where unstarted or part started white metal kits have been sold for sub £50. Eg:

 

There was also a Wills king with Comet chassis sold for a similar price mark. Shows that with a bit of patience, you can pick up complete/nearly complete kits or rebuild jobs at a good price. Also, conventional auctions seem to offer value as well. I’d reckon going to the second hand stalls at smaller shows would yield good deals as well.

 

I must admit that I do see a future for 3D printing but suspect that it is better suited for simpler shapes, ie for detail to be added, rather than an rtp style of attach to chassis and off you go. That could be part of a “mixed media” approach where the appropriate material is used for the appropriate part.

 

David

[Edwardian]

 

Even this resin O1 kit has set me back about £120, mostly due to using a modern RTR chassis close to dimensions of the prototype (the jinty chassis specified is like sticking a bigger C class chassis under an O1 and would never look right) :

 

IMG_5070.JPG

 

Nice work on the tanks.

 

That Jinty chassis caused me doubts about the O1 resin kit.  What RTR chassis did you use?

Edited March 20, 2018 by Edwardian

[sem34090]

I was watching all of those ebay auctions, but I always seem to end up unlucky on ebay and missed out on all of them, probably due to my cautious bidding.

[chris p bacon]

I was watching all of those ebay auctions, but I always seem to end up unlucky on ebay and missed out on all of them, probably due to my cautious bidding.

 

Just bid an amount you're happy to pay, I get about 50/50 of the ones I'd like but not too worried about. Of the ones I really want I think a lot more about the bid amount and get about 80%.

 

Do you belong to a club ? we always have stuff being offered to us to sell.

[rue_d_etropal]

One thing you can guarantee at members selling tables at exhibitions are some either unstarted, unfinished or badly built kit locos /coaches/wagons. Many people simply can not build kits designed for better modellers.It is not economics, but ability. People want something, only option is a kit(or scatchbuild), so they buy(not often that cheap) kit, then realise they can not build the model to the standard they want. Even if they could, then add in the cost of their time.

 

R2R has very high start up costs.Before Hornby took over Airfix, Airfix had done a kit for Wallace and Grommit. The two kits used up their complete new development budget for the year. No wonder it takes a long tome to ge new models released.

 

Showing a picture of a loco superbly built from an etched brass kit , does not paint the full picture. Locos are relatively easy to break down into flat kit parts(with a few cast or even 3D printed). Take the roof on some coaches. Even the curviture can be tricky, but what if the ends are bowed, or even streamlined. I have even found those tricky on the computer, with so many different curves in different axies. How some of these were originially designed is a wonder, more likely by trial and errror. I have been asked about the possibility of producing a 3D printed roof separately when I eventually get round to designing one of the early GWR streamlined  railcars. I am willing to help people in the hobby, so I don't charge for my time, just a commission on sales, but if a commercial company producing a part kit using etched brass, but requiring the modeller to produce the complex shaped roof because it can not be done using etched brass, then I would expect to be paid for my time. In fact I find it surpring that the company has not actually got the roof done using either 3D printing, or resin cast. For me the roof will probably be the most complex part of the design and may be designed with the rest of the body, not a separate item. I have tried both ways so it depends on how the design goes. Even when the roof is a separate design item, it is joined to the body in the design phase, as the join line between roof and body is most visible .

 

Most of us involved in designing models for 3D printing are probably undervaluing what we actually do, but if we added the real cost of our time to the cost of the 3D printed model, it would be even more expensive. In effect we are subsidising the hobby to get some of the models other commercial outfits can not do.

 

For anyone still doubting 3D printing, look in latest copy of Continental Modeller where there is an article about building a French Crampton loco in HO, which has a 3D printed body. Not sure how much it costs, but they can supply chassis either unbuilt or built. Those who could build a complex kit would probably say they could do similar from a kit, but for everyone who could not, then add in the cost of a professionl model builder, and then talk about economics.

Edited March 20, 2018 by rue_d_etropal