More model ideas

[Black 5 Bear]

A Standard 2MT 2.6.2 tank would prove popular as Bachmann seem to have put the body retool on the back burner. 

 

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, G-BOAF said:

I would say the LMS 8 and 5s are among the 'weakest' of the post 2000 Hornby models. I don't know how much of the 8 is actually the same as its tender drive predecessor

 

 

The post 2000 main range* 8F was completely new tooling, including the tender - though quite why the new tooling perpetuated the weird step in on the bottom of the tender is a mystery.

 

As would be expected things have moved on in the 20 odd years since it was released - finer plastic details, decoder socket in the tender, fully painted / separately fitted cab detail, etc.

 

You could say it (and the Black 5) were the 47s of their time in as much as you have a large class - superficially all 'the same' but with a massive amount of variation over the years - and as with the 47 is quite likely someone will take it on in future.

 

 

* Some of the old tooling (e.g. a ringfield tender chassis minus the actual motor and gears) did eventually end up being reused in a budget / Railroad version IIRC

 

 

[phil-b259]

2 minutes ago, Black 5 Bear said:

A Standard 2MT 2.6.2 tank would prove popular as Bachmann seem to have put the body retool on the back burner. 

 

 

Only problem is how do you know Bachmann are not already working on this in the background?

 

You need to remember that Bachmann's new mode of operation is to NOT announce things (including a retooled body) in advance of it being on its way from the factory.

 

In the recent video Bachmann themselves made it clear that although they cannot do anything about products announced before 2019 as they work through the backlog then you will get the situation of the public 'in progress' list shrinking and eventually containing nothing.

 

As has been pointed out MANY times before direct duplication between manufacturers is usually avoided precisely because it lowers rather than increases shareholder profits. With Bachmann having re-tooled the chasis there is a pretty good chance the body will be tackled by them at some point with the first anyone knows about it being the loco on the high seas from China.

[Black 5 Bear]

2 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Only problem is how do you know Bachmann are not already working on this in the background?

 

You need to remember that Bachmann's new mode of operation is to NOT announce things (including a retooled body) in advance of it being on its way from the factory.

 

In the recent video Bachmann themselves made it clear that although they cannot do anything about products announced before 2019 as they work through the backlog then you will get the situation of the public 'in progress' list shrinking and eventually containing nothing.

 

As has been pointed out MANY times before direct duplication between manufacturers is usually avoided precisely because it lowers rather than increases shareholder profits. With Bachmann having re-tooled the chasis there is a pretty good chance the body will be tackled by them at some point with the first anyone knows about it being the loco on the high seas from China.

Fair comment and as you quite rightly say, we have no idea what is in the pipeline from Bachmann.

Whoever takes up the mantle, a 2MT produced to modern standards would be a very popular choice....

[Wickham Green too]

11 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

..........  Bachmann's new mode of operation is to NOT announce things ... in advance of it being on its way from the factory. ............. direct duplication between manufacturers is usually avoided precisely because it lowers ... profits. ..........

But if nobody's announcing things until they're on the boat, how on earth are duplications to be avoided ?

( I've long thought that the trade needs an 'ombudsman' who can be trusted with advance information and can say "Someone - who shall remain nameless - is already working on that." at the appropriate moment. ............. I wouldn't charge much of a fee ! )

[No Decorum]

16 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

But if nobody's announcing things until they're on the boat, how on earth are duplications to be avoided ?

( I've long thought that the trade needs an 'ombudsman' who can be trusted with advance information and can say "Someone - who shall remain nameless - is already working on that." at the appropriate moment. ............. I wouldn't charge much of a fee ! )

However, many manufacturers choose to duplicate. Many years ago, Hornby decided to produce a Thompson B1 and a Standard 4 4-6-0, even though there  was one on the market. Bachmann chose to upgrade its model in response. Hornby chose to model an 08, even though a perfectly good one was available. DJ decided to go ahead with the Class 71 in the full knowledge that someone (which turned out to be Hornby) had measured the preserved example. Heljan must have known that Bachmann would follow its 24 with a 25, as would SLW, yet still chose to produce a triplicate. I could go on. It seems a bit mad at times.

[phil-b259]

27 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

But if nobody's announcing things until they're on the boat, how on earth are duplications to be avoided ?

( I've long thought that the trade needs an 'ombudsman' who can be trusted with advance information and can say "Someone - who shall remain nameless - is already working on that." at the appropriate moment. ............. I wouldn't charge much of a fee ! )

 

They can't grantee it - which is why model railway manufacturing is a tricky business to be in, particularly for start ups.

 

That said, as with any business, there are things you can do to minimise the risk - paying close attention to what key people have said (or more importantly not said) where they have been, etc can give clues. Similarly a consideration of what rival manufacturers have (or don't have) in their range, the detail level they use on new models (noting we have roughly 3 levels now, basic standard and ultra high detail) how much backlog they may have or indeed whether the proposed model can be used as a basis for something else can all be useful in helping guide decisions over which project to invest in next.

 

 

[phil-b259]

16 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

However, many manufacturers choose to duplicate. Many years ago, Hornby decided to produce a Thompson B1 and a Standard 4 4-6-0, even though there  was one on the market. Bachmann chose to upgrade its model in response. Hornby chose to model an 08, even though a perfectly good one was available. DJ decided to go ahead with the Class 71 in the full knowledge that someone (which turned out to be Hornby) had measured the preserved example. Heljan must have known that Bachmann would follow its 24 with a 25, as would SLW, yet still chose to produce a triplicate. I could go on. It seems a bit mad at times.

 

Indeed - but by and large these are not direct duplication!

 

What we have seen is that you usually get a difference in detail level and price, the best example being Hornby, Bachmann and Hattons all producing class 66s. That sort of duplication is not so ruinous to a manufacturer as they still have a clear advantage in one or more areas.

 

We are seeing the same happen with the 9F - Hornbys new model having a much better detail level than Bachmanns current offering - and the same happened with the 08 in the past.

 

IIRC it was much the same story with the B1s where Bachmann initially did a 'half upgrade' and only retooled the mechanism and not the body.

 

What is clear is that diesels are far more likely in duplication terms because there are so few types (particularly long lasting ones) in comparison to steam locos - but even here there is what might be termed an 'arms race' going on as each manufacturer tries to outdo each other.

[Class 158 productions]

8 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Indeed - but by and large these are not direct duplication!

 

What we have seen is that you usually get a difference in detail level and price, the best example being Hornby, Bachmann and Hattons all producing class 66s. That sort of duplication is not so ruinous to a manufacturer as they still have a clear advantage in one or more areas.

I agree and I feel that this form of duplication is beneficial. People who can’t afford or don’t want the highest detail can still have a model railway with stock they want. I feel something like the 25 is excessive. 3 manufacturers all trying to do a superdetail model. Although at least with the 25 there’s so many variations. In areas where we see little or no duplication the prices also rise. Bachmann 40s v Bachmann 45s in price or the Hornby HST. Some competition is good but too much just gets boring. 

[TomScrut]

2 hours ago, Class 158 productions said:

I agree and I feel that this form of duplication is beneficial.

 

Definitely. As you say it's interesting to compare the prices of stuff with direct competition vs those without. Like when Bachmann took £20 or £30 out of the 66 when the Hattons one came along. Obviously there is competition anyway, for example some people would always rather have 2 Hornby 59s instead of a new Bachmann 47 and so there is always the bang for buck comparison regardless of how good or expensive something gets. I tend to be willing to pay the buck for an adequate bang, innuendo not intended.

[Black 5 Bear]

18 hours ago, G-BOAF said:

I would say the LMS 8 and 5s are among the 'weakest' of the post 2000 Hornby models. I don't know how much of the 8 is actually the same as its tender drive predecessor, but the thick cab roof is awful. I say this as someone who has a lovely 48773 model but would welcome an upgrade (complete with yellow cab stripes as retired/preserved).

 

Given their sheer numbers, and the ability to also model overseas examples of the 8Fs (niche limited edition for the middle east), together with War Department options, they will be very versatile models.

Also the tenders will be the same between both classes, so saving on tooling costs.

 

Both are models that will lend themselves to smallish but numerous runs that Accurascale seems to be targeting, and have a HUGE geographical range and time span.

 "I would say the LMS 8 and 5s are among the 'weakest' of the post 2000 Hornby models".

Agree wholeheartedly with your comments  regarding these locos, which most people will agree are well past their production life.

Not to mention the unsightly, visible and toy like mechanism below the boiler on the 8F.

It's time this model was retired or relegated to the Railroad range and an up to date model offered by whoever may choose to produce it.

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by Black 5 Bear
Typo

[G-BOAF]

1 hour ago, Black 5 Bear said:

 "I would say the LMS 8 and 5s are among the 'weakest' of the post 2000 Hornby models".

Agree wholeheartedly with you comments  regarding these locos, which most people will agree are well past their production life.

Not to mention the unsightly, visible and toy like mechanism below the boiler on the 8F.

It's time this model was retired or relegated to the Railroad range and an up to date model offered by whoever may choose to produce it.

 

Too expensive and complex to be in railroad (which has an adequate model for its purposes). You would need a retool of the models (similar to the Railroad A4s) to work in Railroad.

 

The mechanism below the boiler/firefox is very much a standout that does not happen today (indeed the last model so inflicted was the Bachmann C Class, which detracts from what is otherwise a really lovely model). Simple solution of having the boiler mounted in the boiler, on a metal bottom half of the boiler, and the gearbox running through the firebox (indeed potentially much of the motor could also be in the firebox with a drive shaft out the rear end to a drive chain near the backhead)

 

Of the post 2000 models I think the A4s and A3s have aged well and will be difficult to beat (except maybe for frame detail on the chassis block). Ditto the Class 60, 08/09, the Scotts and Patriots (with the excpetion of the tender shelf). Merchant Navy was excellent but has some weaknesses (in boiler seam and hollow tooth of firefox). Original Light Pacifics could do with a chassis lift and some body tweaks but are acceptable, and tender on both is excellent. Duchess and Princess have already been redone. I would say the '2000 era' runs up to around 2008/2009, with the Castles, 28XX etc from this second era (and really too soon to be superceded), that ended with 'design clever', beyond which we are in the 'present day'.

 

Getting O/T.

Edited August 30, 2021 by G-BOAF

[Madreddog]

NLR tank would be nice. Four different liveries to choose from (NLR, LNWR, LMS, BR) and a survivor to get scans from.

[TomScrut]

2 hours ago, G-BOAF said:

Ditto the Class 60

 

I think the 67 is good too, the fuel tank is about the only thing wrong with it and it was for a practical purpose they did it?

 

Of course other than the rubbish lighting functionality which applies to everything Hornby makes.

[Mad McCann]

On 29/08/2021 at 21:26, phil-b259 said:

 

Only problem is how do you know Bachmann are not already working on this in the background?

 

You need to remember that Bachmann's new mode of operation is to NOT announce things (including a retooled body) in advance of it being on its way from the factory.

 

In the recent video Bachmann themselves made it clear that although they cannot do anything about products announced before 2019 as they work through the backlog then you will get the situation of the public 'in progress' list shrinking and eventually containing nothing.

 

As has been pointed out MANY times before direct duplication between manufacturers is usually avoided precisely because it lowers rather than increases shareholder profits. With Bachmann having re-tooled the chasis there is a pretty good chance the body will be tackled by them at some point with the first anyone knows about it being the loco on the high seas from China.

True, but it'll also be £50 more expensive than a hypothetical Accurascale version...

[farren]

How about the Redlands SDT a train I often sew in the 90’s, well setting outside on break when at work. I would like to have a set to run on a layout. Plenty of scope to weather for modellers. Lots of detail both on the the hopper wagons with the belts underneath and the delivery wagon sorry don’t know the official name. It might be memory but was there more then one? I seem to remember two but it was what 20+ years ago now. 

Edited August 30, 2021 by farren

[mdvle]

14 hours ago, No Decorum said:

However, many manufacturers choose to duplicate. Many years ago, Hornby decided to produce a Thompson B1 and a Standard 4 4-6-0, even though there  was one on the market. Bachmann chose to upgrade its model in response.

 

Many years ago your choices were also a lot more limited - you bought Bachmann or Hornby for the most part, with the occasional Dapol or Heljan.

 

The market is a lot more crowded now, with more new items, making duplication in most cases a lot more risky given the increased options for the hobby £.

 

But I also think we need to be clear that there really are 2 different types of duplication, one good and one bad.

 

The good - tooling up a new, better (more detail, more features, more accuracy) model.

 

The bad - competing high end new tooling where (with a few exceptions) the market can really only support one new tooled item.

 

The Class 47 was so numerous and likely still popular enough that 2 new models can probably still be profitable - on the other hand 2 new models of a Class 50 would probably be a problem.

Edited August 30, 2021 by mdvle

[TomScrut]

8 hours ago, mdvle said:

competing high end new tooling where (with a few exceptions) the market can really only support one new tooled item.

 

Yes, it is a risk that anyone takes when deciding to do the tooling too isn't it.

 

In modern traction world I expect the only ones the market will fully support multiple competing models (i.e. not the cheaper Hornby ones for example where I think the customer base is different) would be 08, 37, 47, 66 and the HST.

 

I expect that Bachmann's 55 will only be bought by those unaware of/unconfident with what is a relatively new brand in Accurascale once it is out. It will be interesting if they upgrade it.

 

It is a funny one though as Bachmann (as an example) are sitting on good tooling for the 70 and 90 and not really using it (having being a while since new announcements for either). Is that because the market won't support one tool for these locos? Given what 70s go for on eBay I doubt that is the case there at least.

[atom3624]

Totally agree with the LOOK of the Bachmann 70, but it's way underweight, and cannot pull the skin off a treacle toffee (bit more than a rice pudding!) !

I think as things get ever-more representative - read realistic - that a Class 37, 40, 47 etc., shouldn't be able to haul more than a Class 70.

Work is required here.

The chassis needs to be considerably heavier - if possible to create a comparative traction advantage, which it should have as the real thing's an absolute beast!

Al.

Edited August 31, 2021 by atom3624

[steve1]

Why does everything have to be loco centric? 

 

There are loads of wagons still unmodelled, plus coaches and Units.

 

steve

[TomScrut]

57 minutes ago, atom3624 said:

Totally agree with the LOOK of the Bachmann 70, but it's way underweight, and cannot pull the skin off a treacle toffee (bit more than a rice pudding!) !

 

Good point! Mine only tend to get on the easy to pull rakes. Not sure why they made it so light TBH, it's not even like they left a lot of space in there for speakers!

 

7 minutes ago, steve1 said:

There are loads of wagons still unmodelled, plus coaches and Units.

 

I agree, and I believe most of my suggestions in this thread have been wagons and units.

[Legend]

I know they've said theres steam locos on their development projects . But a 313/314/315/507/508 currently has no duplications . It plays to the guys strengths and cost wise they could probably bring it in at something reasonable compared to Bachmann .   Second choice 317/318/455 

 

Steam wise I still think a Standard 5 is the one to go for , but a Black 5 has merits . Lots of permutations . Yes its a Hornby model , but wouldnt you prefer an Accurascale one ? I think its getting to the stage where Accurascale are establishing brand loyalty  and are extremely well thought of . In contrast Hornby has recently delivered Merchant Navies and A2s which are poles apart on quality , probably because they come from different factories . So while Hornby delivers pot luck , with Accurascale you know you will get a quality product . And of course theres no faffing about with pre orders and wondering if the shop you've chosen will get full delivery

 

Really Accurascale have a lot going for them , so that even if there was duplication , their product would stand out.

Edited August 31, 2021 by Legend

[Steven B]

14 hours ago, farren said:

How about the Redlands SDT a train I often sew in the 90’s, well setting outside on break when at work. I would like to have a set to run on a layout. Plenty of scope to weather for modellers. Lots of detail both on the the hopper wagons with the belts underneath and the delivery wagon sorry don’t know the official name. It might be memory but was there more then one? I seem to remember two but it was what 20+ years ago now. 

 

Two twenty wagon trains (4x 10 wagon half sets and two discharge wagons) were built by Standard Wagon, entering service in 1988.  A second batch was built a year later (5x 8 wagon sets plus another discharge wagon). A third order placed in 1990 consisted of five more 8 wagon sets and another unloading wagon.

 

TOPS codes for the hoppers was initially PGA, but changed to PHA in 1990. The unloading wagons went from PXA to KJA at the same time. There were some detail differences between batches - the generators moved from then end of each wagon set to the middle for the second and third batches.

 

Steven B.

[mdvle]

4 hours ago, TomScrut said:

It is a funny one though as Bachmann (as an example) are sitting on good tooling for the 70 and 90 and not really using it (having being a while since new announcements for either). Is that because the market won't support one tool for these locos? Given what 70s go for on eBay I doubt that is the case there at least.

 

Part of it will be how much production capacity Bachmann can get and having to choose what to make based on what they think will sell best to use that capacity - and the other side to the decision making will be how to best compete with the other manufacturers in the market.

 

The other side though is Bachmann is still operating like they did before all the competition showed up and making models in quantities such that they have stock (sometimes for years).  You mention the Class 90, yet a search of 2 retailers shows they both still have Class 90 units in stock which means there is no reason for Bachmann to make anymore yet.

[TomScrut]

2 hours ago, mdvle said:

You mention the Class 90, yet a search of 2 retailers shows they both still have Class 90 units in stock which means there is no reason for Bachmann to make anymore yet.

 

Yes, although I wouldn't say that means there is no reason. Plenty of us will have 90s with no relevant one left to buy, but would snap their hands off at something from whatever era of interest. There is plenty of conjecture on the 90 thread that they maybe should have lost a BR livery and gone with EWS given the choice of liveries they picked ignores a big chunk of their years in service. I think the thing is at the moment is where manufacturers do a couple of liveries then they are limiting how many people will want more than one. I aren't sure how the MOQs work in this industry but I expect the main focal point would be around moldings and castings rather than paint jobs. Maybe they should have done twice as many liveries in the size run? I'd have had another had there been another relevant one. In fairness Bachmann may have started doing this, even doing HNRC 20s in multiple numbers, and the new 47 has quite a lot of options.

 

On a similar note it would be interesting to compare how long AS have 92s for, I expect the market will be a similar size but AS are doing a LOT more liveries but we do not know how the overall quantities compare. There is more than 1 92 livery on offer I'd be tempted by to go with the 92020 I already have on order.

 

I appreciate they do need to make a business decision about it, the point is more that if they aren't using it then somebody else might think it is worth a go. They'd then start churning them out again I expect!

Edited August 31, 2021 by TomScrut