Plastic Locomotive Kits - A discussion and views to the future

[sem34090]

In an attempt to drag this concept out of the ongoing RTR vs Kits topic...

 

To what extent do the good members of this forum feel that a new, possibly small, range of plastic loco kits may be beneficial to the hobby?

 

Here are some of my postings from the aforementioned topic:

 

 

 I know of several modellers, some my age, some considerably younger, who have completely ruled out ever building loco kits, and ridicule me for trying to bash stuff about onto RTR chassis, or backdating a loco to pre-grouping condition. Some of these modellers have got great satisfaction out of wagon kits and military kits (plastic), but don't see the logic of whitemetal and brass kits when they cost more than an RTR loco. Some of them have attempted Dapol loco kits, but never considered making them functioning due to the poor quality of the mouldings  produced by the (almost) 60 year old tools when compared with a modern plastic kit. I am fortunate enough to have a couple of original Kitmaste products stashed away (Currently working on a City using a Mainline Dean Goods Tender) which are capable of producing some nice models with very crisp mouldings, because the tools were new.

 

I think there is a market for plastic loco kits, along the lines of the old Kitmaster ones, or (even better) along the lines of the ratio ones that I can never seem to find details of, but gather that they were intended to produce running models. Whether these latter were capable of that, I don't know, but I think plastic kits for locos would help to encourage some of us down here at the 'young' end of the market to start building kits. Perhaps after building a few plastic locos, and getting them running, I would consider moving on to whitemetal. The Dapol ones appear to still be selling, even though all of the locos still in production have been produced in RTR form at some stage, as have a good few of the wagons. Indeed, there have been occasions when some of the kits have been sold out in my local model shop! The kit which, to me, appears to sell out most frequently is the L&YR 0F, and I think that's for several reasons:

 

1.) It's cheap.

2.) It's not all too hard to make into a push-along model (Although this is getting harder as time goes on)

3.) It's simple to construct.

4.) It can be adapted to many purposes.

5.) It's 'Cute'.

6.) Narrow Gauge modellers can make use of it.

 

So, if a new plastic kit was to be produced, I'd suggest it being something small, popular and adaptable.

 

As such, how about an LBSCR Class A1? And maybe an A1x too?

My logic?

1.) It's small.

2.) It's Cute.

3.) There are numerous things it could be bashed into.

4.) Simple motionwork makes it a fairly easy running conversion.

5.) It would be a fairly simple model to construct.

6.) It's popular - Even a possible 'Thomas' Market there.

7.) Can be 3D Scanned for accuracy.

8.) There's already CAD in existence that could be adapted.

9.) Narrow Gauge modellers could make use of it.

10.) The current RTR model is basic and inaccurate.

11.) Variants could be produced to increase sales.

 

Just a thought...

 

I know many people my age who have had great satisfaction from building plastic kits, including wagon kits, who would never consider shelling out on a loco kit.

 

It's all very well saying 'If you want to build it enough then you'll buy it' but I can't afford to buy them, and when some kits require huge amounts of work to get them to a buildable state (and I know many don't but the point is still valid) many either can't afford it or are unwilling to pay that kind of money for something they are unlikely to be able to build without having had prior experience.

 

I am constantly looking on ebay, and what starts cheap that I find normally goes up no end, and what ends cheap I always seem to miss.

 

A few decent, reasonably priced, plastic kits equivalent to the standard that military modellers enjoy, would be fantastic, so I reiterate my idea:

 

Do F***** Scotsman, Kitmaster never got round to it, but an Airfix kit for that would sell.

Do a small loco (Terrier, preferably)

Do another popular loco in collaboration with the NRM (A4? Gladstone? The latter would be fantastic, what with the demise of Gem ruling out all chance of a kit until I get around to it.)

 

[tomparryharry]

In an attempt to drag this concept out of the ongoing RTR vs Kits topic...

 

To what extent do the good members of this forum feel that a new, possibly small, range of plastic loco kits may be beneficial to the hobby?

 

Here are some of my postings from the aforementioned topic:

Ratio did do a kit of some Midland/LMS locomotives. My first one was a bit of a failure. Nowadays, I'd have another go, but I'd be better prepared now. Romfords,  etc, instead of the plastic ones. They do come up on e-bay, and fetch good money, so I'm told.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[uax6]

I would say that a range of bodyline kits would be the way forward, all designed to sit on top of a rtr chassis that is plentiful, in much the same way as the old BEC, Wills etc kits did.

 

Now there is of course a drawback with small locos in plastic, and that is weight. For a small tank engine to run well it needs to be heavy, this aids pick-up as well as traction, so the plastic body would need to be designed to accommodate lots of lead....

 

I would say that the A1 and A1x is not a good choice. Firstly they are available on ebay dirt cheap, and they will be difficult to get lead into. My K's kit (much mutilated) runs nicely as its heavy, my Hornby one is appalling, and that's with the addition of as much lead as I can get into it. Mind you Branchlines already do a chassis kit for one.....

 

What would be the best would be to look at the one thing that the rtr people have avoided, and that the huge range of pre-grouping 0-6-0 tender engines.

 

Andy G

[Marly51]

I like producing dioramas, which do not always require a motorised locomotive and would be interested if there was a wider range of plastic locomotive kits available. If these kits were also designed with the possibility of being motorised, even better. Just mastered soldering for trackwork, so I think it will be a long time before I even consider tackling a metal kit.

 

Marlyn

[sem34090]

I was thinking popular rather than sensible!

 

Pre-Grouping 0-6-0's would be a dream come true! And 4-4-0's for that matter!

[bertiedog]

The problem is the cost of moulds, compared to potential sales, too costly a risk, unless support by a large company with diverse other products.

 

3d printing may eventually be the answer when the detail and finish rival a moulded plastic item.

 

Kitmaster managed the moulds as they had other activities, and expanded in a rush, not accounting for the costs that bankrupted them.

Airfix survived as a producer because of a huge range, but then the costs of Uk production got to high.

 

So the future depends on the 3d process improving or CNC mould cutting being combined with 3d.

 

It may be a few years though before really fine crisp detailed models can be produced.

 

The best intermediate solution is a basic 3d carcass. with added etched metal details and fine mouldings attached to the basic body

 

Stephen.

Edited March 8, 2018 by bertiedog

[uax6]

I was thinking popular rather than sensible!

 

Pre-Grouping 0-6-0's would be a dream come true! And 4-4-0's for that matter!

 

Terriers, popular? I'm not so sure about that.....

 

Andy G

[sem34090]

You really do enjoy winding up LBSCR nutters don't you! 

 

The terriers are more popular than many pre-grouping 0-6-0's...

 

And I still have kids pointing at my ones and saying to their Parents/Parent/Guardian that they look like Stepney (Though they are actually Waddon, Fulham and Piccadilly), and he's not even in the CGI series! 

 

Of course a kit for a Caley 812 would've had a similar market until very recently, but that will no longer benefit from a kit market, so it would seem.

[Horsetan]

The problem is the cost of moulds, compared to potential sales, too costly a risk, unless support by a large company with diverse other products.....

 

See also Revell, who eventually took over the HO loco kits of Esci and Italieri.

[uax6]

You really do enjoy winding up LBSCR nutters don't you! 

 

The terriers are more popular than many pre-grouping 0-6-0's...

 

And I still have kids pointing at my ones and saying to their Parents/Parent/Guardian that they look like Stepney (Though they are actually Waddon, Fulham and Piccadilly), and he's not even in the CGI series! 

 

Of course a kit for a Caley 812 would've had a similar market until very recently, but that will no longer benefit from a kit market, so it would seem.

 

Its not that, but you have to be economic about it, why produce another terrier? Go for something that will be useable to lots of folk, and not just something you would like.

 

Mind you, I doubt you could make any money out of any of them. If you fancy it, how about bunging your money to Dave at SEF and help nim re-work one of the Nu-cast kits? Most need modern chassis' developing, and new rubber mould for the castings, and there are some nice kits in that haul... (but sadly the wagon kits are missing, presumably along with the carriage kits too.)

 

Andy G

[DCB]

3 D printed bodies to fit RTR chassis should be do able, a small company making bodies to order, bank the cash before making the product.

 

Just a basic shell for a specific RTR chassis leaving the the modeller to add handrails paint transfers etc like the resin cast ones but more betterer.

 

Are there any cheap 3D printers on eBay?

[sem34090]

I am working on 3D printed stuff, but was just wondering what people thought of more traditional injection moulded kits, as common in other types of modelling, being re-introduced to railways. The old Kitmaster kits still seem to be selling, so I think there may still be a market there.

 

For my stuff, see the links in my signature.

[ian]

One small snag to the R-T-R chassis idea - if you want a modern chassis then they only come with a body attached. People complain about the cost of locos as it is without having to throw the body away...

[sem34090]

Ah, but if you're willing to look around the second-hand market then that can change...

 

Especially if you look towards offering the same design for a couple of chassis, or for a chassis that can be acquired cheaply.

[Flyingscotsmanfan]

Or, and hear me out on this one, a simple plastic chassis kit with metal wheels, bushes, motor and premise pickup plates and no soldering needed to make up to a working model. Obviously make this as a separate kit to the plastic body to help spread the cost over two purchases of required.

Edited March 8, 2018 by Flyingscotsmanfan

[Ravenser]

I am working on 3D printed stuff, but was just wondering what people thought of more traditional injection moulded kits, as common in other types of modelling, being re-introduced to railways. The old Kitmaster kits still seem to be selling, so I think there may still be a market there.

 

For my stuff, see the links in my signature.

 

Sorry to pour cold water on this, but -

 

Plastic injection moulding is a production method which involves very expensive tooling running on large expensive machines. The actual production cost per unit is pretty low - but the tooling cost requires amortization over a very large number of units otherwise it becomes prohibitive. Thus it works well for things you can knock out in the tens of thousands. Triang made over half a million of the Princess Elizabeth Pacific

 

Cast whitemetal involves making vulcanised rubber moulds from hand-made metal master patterns, then casting on a centrifugal caster . I believe that you need a few hundred units before you break even and cover the cost of the patterns and moulds. After a thousand or more units, the moulds are getting worn and you need to make a new one , which might take another hundred units to recover cost and make a moderate profit. But making this kind of masters is a dying art. You can't find the pattern makers any more.

 

Etched brass is a technology that is cost effective on runs of about 50 , given the costs of preparing the photo-tools for a loco kit. On a second run you're into profit....

 

Cast resin will get about 70 units out of a mould - it's slow and messy and laborious

 

Rapid prototyping /3D printing can be effective down to 1 unit, if you value your time preparing the CAD at zero, do it through Shapeways and can live with the price. And the level of ridging. The finish is currently substantially worse than all the alternatives

 

The 3mm Society have produced quite a lot of plastic wagon kits in collaboration with Cambrian and Parkside. But they reckon that they have to order a run of at least 1000 of a kit. And note that the underframe is a separate tooling - they have maybe 5-7 underframe tools, then  tool up bodies to fit on them. (Parkside and Cambrian work the same way in 4mm) . Given the small size of the wagons compared to 4mm they may be able to fit the body parts for 2 wagons (say open + van) on the same sized mould as a 4mm wagon. You only need 2 sides, 2 ends and a roof on a body tool...

 

And remember that the 3mm Society only sell to members - so they do not have to pay VAT. That's a 20% saving. And they don't have to make a living from this - so long as they recover their cost and just get into the black that's ok. It's a service to members. And they have no financing costs - tools are funded out of accumulated reserves/legacies, and as the kit sells the money goes back into the pot.

 

Even they are questioning whether they can go on adding kits. If a kit goes into a second run then in theory that's where they will make their money. But you have to sell all 1000 of the first run, plus enough of the second run to recover production costs , before you get to that point. In practice they have found that even 3-5 years in they are still sitting on several hundred of the first run in many cases...

 

And people can sometimes buy 5-6 of the same wagon kit.

 

I'd suggest that a 4mm loco kit, which would be much more complex than a few flat sides and ends, would need a run/sales of 5000-10000 units to recover its costs on any commercial basis

 

The second way to look at this is that it's been tried before, several times, in much better circumstances. It's made no impact or has failed commercially.

 

Kitmaster, as noted , produced a substantial range of locomotive and coach kits in short order. They were marketed to the general kit market at the time when plastic kits were a part of every teenage boy's life, and the kits were very well regarded. Kitmaster failed commercially, and went bust. Over 50 years on, you can still pick the unbuilt kits fairly easily on ebay or through the Kitmaster Collectors Society. That suggests they saturated the market - and then some.

 

More critically, very few working models appeared on layouts as a result, even though various motorisation products were sold by various people. The ex Airfix Schools, 4MT 2-6-0, 9F, L&Y Pug, City of Truro, Battle of Britain, GW Prairie, original Deltic  and J94 originated with Kitmaster

 

Despite half a century of production and the availability of chassis kits from several sources, it was always pretty rare to see working locos on a layout derived from them. Modern etched chassis kits for the Mogul and City of Truro are still available from Branchlines. But models of either type were like hen's teeth before Bachmann did them RTR, Airfix did the Park Royal railbus under their own steam , and Branchlines do a chassis. You didn't see very many on layouts before Heljan came along...

 

Knightwing did a little diesel shunter of unknown provenance . You can motorise it with a Tenshodo or a Beetle - I've done one:

 

You very rarely see them. They also did a 4 and 6 wheel Sentinel . Branchlines again do a chassis. I don't recall seeing any built. Hornby have sold thousands of the RTR version.

 

The two Ratio loco kits disappeared from the range very quickly - the only part of the 1970s Ratio range that isn't still in production. That tells me they were a commercial failure - I've heard it was difficult to get them working. Pity - I quite fancy a MR 2-4-0

 

Silver Fox did a range of resin bodies - shunters and unsuccessful/prototype diesels. Done a couple myself:

 

They didn't take the world by storm, and in due course Heljan covered this territory with RTR

 

And finally we had GBL. Finished painted plastic bodies for a fiver or so. Nationwide distribution on a big print run That created a modest splash of interest , but no more. I've got as Jinty , and a Hornby chassis to stuff under it. Not to mention a GC Director...

 

I think you can see where this is going

[Tiptonian]

With of the cost of moulds, it will never happen because it is not viable, just like RTR industrial tank engines, retailer driven commissions and Peco 00 scale-sleepered track........          

[PatB]

Given the huge (and unliikely to decrease any time soon) cost of tooling up for injection moulding, and the exponentially improving prospects in 3D printing, I think you've provided your own answer as to the most viable technology for economical kit production.

 

As for kits/bodies designed for r-t-r chassis, I like the idea but it does either limit the range of what you can produce or takes us back to the 60s/70s practice of compromising scale dimensions so that every 0-6-0 (for example) will fit either a Dublo R1 or Triang Jinty chassis. As someone who follows the impressionist school of modelling I don't have too much of a problem with this (within reason), but have modellers in general become too discerning to accept such compromise to make such a kit viable? I don't know the answer to that one.

 

Resin has been mentioned. You could look at what Smallbrook Studios are doing in 0-16.5 (basic but affordable kits to fit r-t-r chassis), and some small manufacturers in Australia offer in, particularly, Sn3.5. The Australian kits, especially, appear to be of excellent quality and "sharpness" and make up into really nice models. Not particularly cheap though. Others are better qualified than me to comment on Smallbrook's products.

[bertiedog]

Kitmaster, (Rosebud) were a very odd company, the expansion into railway based products seems to have been a whim of the owner, and done without reference to costs. I think (no reference) they had a grant or Goverment development money provided on the move to the new factory at Roands. I knew one of the mould makers who later retired back to Kent where the company started. He said the speed of the work startled him, no way was proper costing done, and the money began to run out . At the end of the mould making they were working on Lner A4 and Flying Scotsman as well as TT products.

 

Sales had been buoyed up by sales through Woolworths but after a big start they soon reached saturation level, and the profits never appeared.

 

In the average model shop, Kitmaster in the unusual cardboard boxes where expensive compared to bagged Airfix etc. Only imported US made kits cost more. Our local well stocked model shop found them slow sellers.

 

The retail cost was high, Airfix worked as volumes were huge and price popular level. The lack of Chinese production of railway themed kits seem to indicate that there is no mass market to provide sales, even with low wages and cheap production costs.

 

Dapol manage by slowly extracting the life out of the old moulds, even the coaches have returned. Damaged moulds have vanished, mainly from rust acquired in storage whilst the company was in bankruptcy, before Airfix bought the machines and moulds, stored in the open under tarpaulins!

 

So although Dapol and others have tried injection moulded Locos, the high costs make it near impossible.

 

3D printing is the only answer, but current standards are just too crude, look at any Airfix moulding from the 50's, it far superior in every way., but 3D is getting better all the rime..

 

Stephen

 

 

[Steamport Southport]

 

 

Knightwing did a little diesel shunter of unknown provenance . You can motorise it with a Tenshodo or a Beetle - I've done one:

Knightwing.JPG

 

You very rarely see them. They also did a 4 and 6 wheel Sentinel . Branchlines again do a chassis. I don't recall seeing any built. Hornby have sold thousands of the RTR version.

 

 

 

One of the reasons hardly anyone finds any information on them is it's German. 

 

A Jung RK 20B Diesel Hydraulic.

 

 

 

Jason

[relaxinghobby]

If injection moulds are to expensive a propersition for a small model railway market how about kits made in a cheaper way?

For instance laser cut plasticard kits using a slot and tab approach.

Wagons and vans with flat sides would be easiest, curved and round shapes like coach and diesel loco tumble home less easy,

round shapes like steam boilers, domes and chimneys less easy.

But a flat pack plastic kit, of laser cut parts, cheap and reproducable?

[Bernard Lamb]

See also Revell, who eventually took over the HO loco kits of Esci and Italieri.

 

Who concentrated on German standard classes at a time when good RTR models were not available.

Very much a niche market but even given that position a much larger potential market than for any UK type of locomotive.

I wonder how the sales figures stack up for Trumpeter. Allowing for a smaller demand in a larger scale they seem to have hit a sweet spot with a range of add on detail from etched suppliers.

Is there a potential high volume market for modern kits in the UK?

I very much doubt it.

Bernard

[justin1985]

You can't laser cut plasticard, but there are some wagon kits available in the style you suggest. At least in N Gauge. Mill Lane Sidings did a BR Ferry van and a few other kits in laser cut card, and Osborn's Models do a few GWR wagons, like the Beetle cattle van, in laser cut ply.

 

But then you're against the issue that you're replicating an etched kit in a material that is less suited to handling and less stable over time. Plus it's more expensive per unit, if you're making more than a handful.

 

When it comes to things as complex as locos, if you've got the cash to research and tool an injection moulded kit, you might as well instead tool an RTR loco. The cost isn't THAT much more, but you can sell the RTR loco for many times the price that a plastic kit would be able to command.

 

J

[Jol Wilkinson]

Ravenser's post (#16), together with other replies replies this thread and the other also started by sem34090;

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/131410-rtr-vs-kits-economics-variety-and-quality-a-discussion/page-4&do=findComment&comment=3079238

 

realistically show that previous attempts to produce moulded plastic starter loco kit have not been successful, either practically or commercially. 

 

3D printing may present a new opportunity, but isn't  going to be as straight forward as some here seem to believe, if it is to be successful and meet the criteria for a "true" starter kit. So what are those criteria?

1. Complete kit, including motor,  wheels, gears, gears couplings and transfers (leaving only paint and glue to complete)..
2. Comprehensive instructions (take Tamiya R/C kits as an example, you can download from the Tamiya website to take a look)
3. Readily available , through major retailers.
4. Non partisan prototype, e.g. not GWR, etc. but an industrial loco with potentially wider acceptance.
5. Uses appropriate materials for critical parts , e.g. brass axle bushes, metal coupling rods.
6. 3D printed parts should be produced to a standard that does not require "finishing" by the builder before painting. Spending one or two hours sanding parts is counter productive and may adversely affect the overall finish by removing/rounding off details.

3D printing gives the opportunity to take a fresh look a kit design. I would suggest that, for an 00 loco kit, it also actually requires a different approach to the chassis design. Simply copying etched chassis ideas isn't a good idea in this context. The frames (sides) will need to be thicker for strength, leaving less room for the mechanism. The motor will need to be above the frames, so why not design a chassis "block" that incorporates a set of shaft bearing holes for a gear train (rather like a High Level gearbox) and a mounting for the motor. Fairly simple to assemble and with built in alignment for the gears.

 

Now, all this has one drawback. It requires a multi media approach to the kit design and, in all probability a number of bought in products. So more suppliers, tooling costs, stock holding, etc. It isn't enough to sit at the keyboard and design a couple of 3D printed parts (body and chassis) and think you have created a starter kit. All you will have done is produced a couple of scratch builders aids. To produce a proper kit for inexperienced beginners will require time, expertise and, above all, investment. Those of us that have built the plastic kits for which motorising conversions were sold - in my case an Airfix Pug and a Ratio MR 4-4-0, both unsuccessfully - know the pitfalls that result from using inappropriate materials (e.g. plastic coupling rods) and cheap, inadequate parts). Doing it properly, using practical and readily available running gear components (e.g.) Markit wheels and crankpins, NWSL gears,) will add to the cost.

 

To distribute to a wider market - surely the object off producing a starter kit - you will need to go through the retailers to get the exposure (unless you want to set up your own web based business and work very hard promoting through RMweb, the magazines, shows, etc). They will want a 50% mark up (so they can show a discount!) which will push the retail price up. They will have to charge VAT, even if you don't (see HMRC for VAT information and rules), as the price of your inclusive starter kit has now probably well exceeded what people pay for a finished RTR model.

 

Seen from outside, kit design, production and retailing may seem like an easy thing. It isn't necessarily so, and the fact that the railway model kit business has developed as it has, is a product of people learning to design and produce kits, using the best available processes and techniques within the economic constraints of what the market can and will bear. To embark on producing a fundamentally different product both to existing kits and RTR, while not knowing how well it would be received and sell, is a very big step.

[Marly51]

Really interesting topic and enjoying reading all the posts. As an interest, railway modelling has so many more factors to contend with in our digitally focussed world today. I have great admiration for the individuals and small companies who are managing to keep going.

 

Marlyn