Jump to content
 

KR Models King in N gauge


steam-driven boy
 Share

Recommended Posts

I was drawn to this topic as I am quite interested in obtaining a decent model of an immediate prewar GWR era King Class loco. The DJM/krmodels ventures seem to have drawn a massive number of comments so will add my own, if rather belatedly.

 

1. As an industrial designer and project manager who has worked on multi £m projects and tooled in various countries I do not agree that it is "normal" for Chinese factories to retain tool ownership if you pay the full price for the tool - some toolers insist on this and I shy away from them as you always need to obtain full IP and tooling rights to ensure clarity of ownership and ability to transfer/remove the tooling if you run into any supply/quality issues. So, you CAN go that route if you want cheapness, but have little control over what happens to the tool or moulding/product rights, so would not recommend this unless you already have a very good relationship with a tooling and production company with a reliable history. Basically you do have a choice if discretely assigning a contract. If however you go to a 1 stop shop with tooling through to production there maybe more strings but 100% tool ownership is obviously the "gold standard" and one I always follow for my own work.

2. As someone has to do the product CAD, then the tooling CAD (usually quite different entities) the relationship between these two parties has to be very good and reciprocal to get all the final edits in place on time and to quoted cost, with the added issue of the product manufacturer in the loop this can become a 3 way problem

3. I won't comment on DJM as I don't know the guy but sounds rather like the Norton Motorcycle debacle on a much smaller scale, but still as a consequence, i gather that in at least some cases pre-payments were received and no product delivered,  so there is problem with the business models in that there is no protection for the "investor". This is not news for speculative investment arrangements, but when offering a specific outcome - eg product vs a deposit (whatever %) tends to imply this is a pre-purchase deposit that should be clearly stated whether it is refundable in case the project does not go ahead. In this case it appears in effect to have been a speculative investment in the company/man as much as a deposit vs a specific deliverable (whatever was said at the time) so "caveat emptor" really applies and pre-payment is not something I would ever do by choice (easy to say after the event I know) without a signficant (excuse the pun) track history.

4. Although Crowd Funding occasionally works, the actual rate of success of PRODUCTS as opposed to services or other activities is LOW and probably just as low as new UK startup company success rates, eg around 10% at most. For this reason and reading the T's&C's of the various Crowd Funding sites where usually their fees come out of the investment upfront  there is even less cash to enable the project to succeed, I would generally steer well clear of any crowd funded model project altogether. Let's face it, if there was a big demand for a model it would probably be recognised by the current RTR manufacturers and put into production, though do understand that some models will never be very popular so some alternative means must be found if you want to buy one OTS. However, in this case, how can the monies be raised?

5. Budgets for production of mixed tech products must be carefully costed. This is difficult to do and requires a lot of forecasting and contingency as there are so many areas of expertise required to get a market-ready product completed. Often CAD designers are not skilled at project management, manufacturer selection, price negotiation, OTS/custom component sourcing - eg electric motors, quality systems methods and requirements, jig and tool manufacture for assembly, test and training etc etc, so one-man-bands who can do a bit of CAD are fools to themselves and others if they think they can deliver a full working product at a fixed price, quality and timescale.  Without a believable financial plan and project plan the budget required and hence a realistic fund raising target is a "finger in the wind" and just not likely to deliver. Hence, I think at least some "honest but deluded" people think they can deliver a product but run into unknown territory and so are massively underfunded at critical phases of the project. On top of this of course are the scammers who think the public don't know the above so go ahead and take the money anyway.

6. So, we need good designers, good toolers, good project managers, component suppliers, assembly houses, QA and test engineers and all the other skilled personnel that bring about reliable consumer products including the costing engineers and financial guys. Yes, it is hard and complex.

 

I am probably more risk averse than many because I have seen these sort of problems over several decades and have had to resolve them at director, manager, technical design and production level stages with smaller and large companies. 3 main issues can  always arise and require mitigation:

 

a) Budgets too low because  of poor forecasting/planning OR not enough cash AT THE RIGHT TIME so delays occur.

b) Tech & supply problems that were assumed to be simple but are actually "show stoppers" that can delay/stop or affect funding and delivery dates and/or product reliability, durability or performance

c) Poor quality - initial or rolling - where the supplier does not get it right for a plethora of reasons - usually the product is more difficult to make right than anticipated. This can be a design issue whereby the manufacturing method has not been considered, yields are too low because of fiddly construction/assembly methods, poorly designed or issues with bought in OTS parts, OTS parts obsolescence, component shortages etc  or just sloppy work by sub-cons  etc. Quality issues arising due to poor understanding, documenting and application of test and QA methodology and equipment.

 

Amazing really that any complex detailed products actually get to market, but there are actually a lot of very good people and companies out there that know what they are doing, but this strength in depth comes at a price. A kitchen sink designer may think the job is done when they have a bit of good looking CAD on-screen. Actually this may not even be manufacturable let alone be their springboard to worldly riches so any offers to punters before the other 99% of the work is done really is a leap of faith.

 

Comments about Shapeways or similar print houses are relevant here because many models available in their shop look good in CAD but are not anywhere near as good in the flesh. Often they are designed to be made using porous or crude detail 3D print materials/techniques, use the wrong plastics for the application (too brittle or too spongey etc) or require so much rework you might as well have scratch built. I have used Shapeways and others  for some of my n gauge models and found that as they batch build these components they may choose the wrong build orientation so get excessive stepping, have sub-contracted the 3D print due to bottlenecks on the machine you need  and not got good results, having much poorer than advertised build quality etc. However, Shapeways  are very receptive to discussion and do replace/refund when this happens. However, QC is not always as good as it should be and also images of ACTUAL models as printed before rework should reflect  what you are likely to receive from the shop than just the CAD model itself. Obviously, high res SLA may be the best quality that we all need for (in my case) 2mm scale but many select FDM on price....... this is generally NOT the same quality as SLA or IM so we must expect to rework these-printed parts - hopefully if all has gone well there will be some excellent parts/models available via 3D printing, but OTS/RTR model detail/finishing has now got so professional it is hard to match this with a simple 3D printed part without at least some rework and finishing.

 

 

The upshot is that a detailed complex 2mm scale locomotive IS expensive to produce and relies on a wide range of skill sets from concept through to delivery. As much of production relies on "economy of scale" to use the best production techniques to keep prices down to the customer, low volume niche product production should be expected to be expensive and require significant funding, If a company wants to make such products it must have deep pockets. If the money is not there and/or the market not big enough to repay the upfront costs there will be entrepreneurs enticing you with their pipe dream projects.

 

Best wishes to krmodels in bringing at least some of these ideas to market - I hope it all works out, but admit I will be sitting back and waiting to see running examples before sinking any cash into an n gauge King Class. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

 

50 minutes ago, RogerBfastlane said:

4. Although Crowd Funding occasionally works, the actual rate of success of PRODUCTS as opposed to services or other activities is LOW and probably just as low as new UK startup company success rates, eg around 10% at most. For this reason and reading the T's&C's of the various Crowd Funding sites where usually their fees come out of the investment upfront  there is even less cash to enable the project to succeed, I would generally steer well clear of any crowd funded model project altogether. Let's face it, if there was a big demand for a model it would probably be recognised by the current RTR manufacturers and put into production, though do understand that some models will never be very popular so some alternative means must be found if you want to buy one OTS. However, in this case, how can the monies be raised?

 

 

 

Hello Roger,

 

I appreciate there is no reason you would have heard of Revolution Trains, as so far none of our models has been geared toward the pre-war GWR enthusiast, however purely for the sake of context we have now delivered 8 different crowd-funded models, including complete 11-car powered trains, and have a further 7 in production or development in both N and 00. 

 

We have had to cancel one project due to not reaching required minimum levels of interest (Class 21/29 diesel in N) but despite that I'd argue that crowdfunding can work successfully for railway modellers.

 

I wish KR Models well with this project.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

Edited by Ben A
  • Like 9
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Ben A said:

 

 

Hello Roger,

 

I appreciate there is no reason you would have heard of Revolution Trains, as so far none of our models has been geared toward the pre-war GWR enthusiast, however purely for the sake of context we have now delivered 8 different crowd-funded models, including complete 11-car powered trains, and have a further 7 in production or development in both N and 00. 

 

We have had to cancel one project due to not reaching required minimum levels of interest (Class 21/29 diesel in N) but despite that I'd argue that crowdfunding can work successfully for railway modellers.

 

I wish KR Models well with this project.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

 

Although I agree with your post Ben I think Roger was pointing at Crowdfunding platforms like Kickstarter, that said I have had over 95% delivery rate on kickstarter so would dispute his 10% success rate. Revolution has succeed for many reasons and one may well be moving away from kickstarter and its perceived issues in model railways. Yet Kickstarter is still very popular in wargaming for example but then targets are generally a lot lower.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Kickstarter, 37% of projects get funded (for the rest, Kickstarter returns money to backers) and of those 91% get delivered.

 

IIIRC the main reason that Revolution didn't use a crowdfunding platform like Kickstarter is that it's expensive - they take 5% of funds raised and the payment provider another 3-5%. A DIY crowdfunding is cheaper but offers less security to backers.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

 

Hi all,

 

I don't really want to hijack this thread, but what happened was that Revolution tried a Kickstarter campaign that failed.  However, the margin was so narrow that Rapido Trains agreed to launch the project with the numbers we had and, if necessary, make up the shortfall themselves as they were confident that during the course of production the remaining orders would come in.  They were, of course, correct and by final production we were well over that initial target.

 

However, while Roger may have been talking about Kickstarter he didn't mention it and his comments could be read as a general suggestion that crowd-funding and model railways are poor bedfellows.  I feel Revolution has shown that is not necessarily the case.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

  • Like 5
  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Revolution has an outstanding record and is a great example of how to do business. I hope KRM will end up in the same category, and I think there is a good chance that they will. At the moment though they do not have a track record so far as I am aware. Yes the 00 GT3 appears to have been manufactured but they haven’t reached their buyers yet. We saw photos of assembly work in early August but no update since. They should be on the high seas by now and indeed they may actually be just a few weeks away from the UK - I don’t know. For me the moment folk start to receive their GT3s will be the point when KRM start to gain a reputation which hopefully will be good. Up until then it is all just talk and photos.

 

I’m not going to express interest in a King until the GT3s reach the sweaty palms of their prospective owners.

Edited by Chris M
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@RogerBfastlane   I think that your extensive commentary would have been better placed on the crowdfunding topic rather than a KRModels thread for a specific locomotive. Most of your comments would be of interest in that topic. As a buyer of RevolutioN Trains products I have to say that such well-run run multi -gauge model railway businesses are not so easy to find, though I would agree that Accurascale are in the same league. Top notch customer engagement throughout - with two more new RevolutioN products being delivered currently, which were announced in November 2019 (KUA) from one set of tooling, and September 2018 (IPA) with at least 6 sets of tooling.

 

 

Edited by Mike Harvey
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 27/09/2020 at 13:12, RogerBfastlane said:

3. I won't comment on DJM

 

 

On 27/09/2020 at 13:12, RogerBfastlane said:

i gather that in at least some cases pre-payments were received and no product delivered,  so there is problem with the business models in that there is no protection for the "investor".

 

There seldom is protection for investors.

 

On 27/09/2020 at 13:12, RogerBfastlane said:

This is not news for speculative investment arrangements, but when offering a specific outcome - eg product vs a deposit (whatever %) tends to imply this is a pre-purchase deposit that should be clearly stated whether it is refundable in case the project does not go ahead.

 

One thing often overlooked at present about DJM given the bad feelings those you lost money have is that he did deliver a crowd funded project - the Class 71.

 

The second, and more important, item overlooked is that essentially people weren't giving refundable deposits - once the project started (scanning the real thing, getting CAD done) that money was being spent.  Thus even if a product never got to tooling, or production, there was still money spent on the project that the crowd funding paid for.

 

 

On 27/09/2020 at 13:12, RogerBfastlane said:

4. Although Crowd Funding occasionally works, the actual rate of success of PRODUCTS as opposed to services or other activities is LOW and probably just as low as new UK startup company success rates, eg around 10% at most. 

 

So in other words speculation and guesses.

 

On 27/09/2020 at 13:12, RogerBfastlane said:

I would generally steer well clear of any crowd funded model project altogether.

 

Certainly you choice, but it does beg the question as to why if you (as stated) steer well clear of crowd funding you are bothering to post a rather negative post with no experience in the crowd funding process.

 

On 27/09/2020 at 13:12, RogerBfastlane said:

Let's face it, if there was a big demand for a model it would probably be recognised by the current RTR manufacturers and put into production, though do understand that some models will never be very popular so some alternative means must be found if you want to buy one OTS. However, in this case, how can the monies be raised?

 

The traditional RTR manufacturers have a bunch of overheads that increase their costs, which then influences what they view as a viable product.

 

Whether it be an individual or retailer directly dealing with China changes the equations as much of that overhead gets eliminated, and crowd funding can be an important part of that equation given the difficulty otherwise in coming up with a significant sum of money.

 

On 27/09/2020 at 13:12, RogerBfastlane said:

5. Budgets for production of mixed tech products must be carefully costed. This is difficult to do and requires a lot of forecasting and contingency as there are so many areas of expertise required to get a market-ready product completed. Often CAD designers are not skilled at project management, manufacturer selection, price negotiation, OTS/custom component sourcing - eg electric motors, quality systems methods and requirements, jig and tool manufacture for assembly, test and training etc etc, so one-man-bands who can do a bit of CAD are fools to themselves and others if they think they can deliver a full working product at a fixed price, quality and timescale.  Without a believable financial plan and project plan the budget required and hence a realistic fund raising target is a "finger in the wind" and just not likely to deliver. Hence, I think at least some "honest but deluded" people think they can deliver a product but run into unknown territory and so are massively underfunded at critical phases of the project.

6. So, we need good designers, good toolers, good project managers, component suppliers, assembly houses, QA and test engineers and all the other skilled personnel that bring about reliable consumer products including the costing engineers and financial guys. Yes, it is hard and complex.

 

Yes and No.

 

Yes, hard if you intend to to it all yourself and start from scratch.

 

No, if instead you go to China and use an existing company that already does all those things for you.  And there are numerous companies in China offering just such a service to the model railway world.

 

On 27/09/2020 at 13:12, RogerBfastlane said:

Comments about Shapeways or similar print houses are relevant here

 

No they aren't - this isn't about someone going to Shapeways to 3D print an item.  This is about standard injection molded RTR products as produced by many companies in the UK via their Chinese factories/partners.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

 

I saw KR Models at TINGS this past weekend, but whenever I looked over their stand was empty.

 

I'm assuming the were pushing the King to us N Gaugers (Not my bag, hence why I didn't talk to them) + my arms are probably too long for them 

Did anyone else talk to them and get any info from them??

 

Cheers

 

Neal.

 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Calnefoxile said:

 

I saw KR Models at TINGS this past weekend, but whenever I looked over their stand was empty.

 

I'm assuming the were pushing the King to us N Gaugers (Not my bag, hence why I didn't talk to them) + my arms are probably too long for them 

Did anyone else talk to them and get any info from them??

 

Cheers

 

Neal.

 

The stand was empty because KR Models were not there or because no-one was talking to KR Models?

 

If the former, why did they bother attending and if the latter, I guess that's why we don't have an N gauge King in development or any other of KR Models N gauge proposals.

 

A shame either way.

Edited by woodenhead
Missing question mark
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
14 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

The stand was empty because KR Models were not there or because no-one was talking to KR Models.

 

If the former, why did they bother attending and if the latter, I guess that's why we don't have an N gauge King in development or any other of KR Models N gauge proposals.

 

A shame either way.

An interesting new marketing approach that I have not seen before. I wish them well with it.

Edited by BR Blue
Spelling as usual
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

The stand was empty because KR Models were not there or because no-one was talking to KR Models.

 

If the former, why did they bother attending and if the latter, I guess that's why we don't have an N gauge King in development or any other of KR Models N gauge proposals.

 

A shame either way.

They most definitely were there in Stand number 1.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Calnefoxile said:

They most definitely were there in Stand number 1.......

With my question mark added, so it was simply because no-one was talking to them then?

 

That's a concern, they are clearly not gelling with the N gauge market if no-one is speaking to them, they had a tough gestation with their first OO locomotive, perhaps that has impacted with regards N gauge but if no-one engages with them it's not going to improve the situation.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
28 minutes ago, Calnefoxile said:

 

I saw KR Models at TINGS this past weekend, but whenever I looked over their stand was empty.

 

I'm assuming the were pushing the King to us N Gaugers (Not my bag, hence why I didn't talk to them) + my arms are probably too long for them 

Did anyone else talk to them and get any info from them??

 

Cheers

 

Neal.

 

 

I had a long chat with Michael on Sunday, and he was there all day. Details of the King and prospective GT3 on the stand.

 

He never looked swamped with people though - presumably with nothing on the stand to sell, very few people were interested. TBH, if you want models, you need to engage with the manufacturers. KR turned up at the show, if people chose not to chat, then it sends a definite message.

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Perhaps they could start with making their website easier to navigate. Clicking on "Products" and then "N Gauge" brings up a page stating:

 

Quote

There are currently no products listed in this category. Please check back soon.

 

Once you do find the Expressions of Interest page the King isn't marked up as being in N Gauge (unlike the Fell and GT3).

 

There's also inconsistency in what information is being asked for to register an interest. The Fell and King just needs an email address, whilst the GT3 needs a full address before you can submit your interest.

 

Steven B.

Edited by Steven B
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The few times I sauntered past the stand (on the Saturday) there were very few people there. Enthusiasts do need to engage with manufacturers, make their preferences known, take away the fliers and register their expressions of interest in the proposed products if they want one. And pay a deposit if one is required.

 

However, there has now been several unsuccessful stabs at getting sufficient interest in the King and there was, an admittedly older RTR one, available from Farish which will have at least partially sated demand. And I've read and heard comments that the King project is now rather tainted (whatever that means). Will KRS be able to break though what appears to be a difficult barrier for N gauge steam enthusiasts - that of pre-ordering something in sufficient numbers that is proposed and has not been made? 

 

Nonetheless, I wonder if there has been an uptake in interest and registrations on the website as a result of the show. Perhaps KR could comment on how it is going.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 2 months later...

Seems I have opened a can of worms. I agree that this may have been a wordy response re the GWR King project and could have potentially been better aired under a more general crowdfunding subject.

 

As mentioned, there ARE some good results from crowdfunding, but longer term tech hardware start-up ventures do rarely succeed as businesses and  the success rates do run generically at around 10%. Standalone tech crowdfunded ventures (as may be expected) apparently fare no better than this (why should they?)  I would comment (re some responses)  that any successes quoted at raising the target funding does not necessarily translate to delivering the project in full by any means for the very reasons I have mentioned . It is a hard road to complete to budget whatever the funding source and for the customer/investor/funder, only 100% success is really acceptable if you actually want that RTR specific model that you have invested in. 

 

Also, when looking at the listings for types of business success at crowdfunding Cos  the majority are NOT for hardware tech. I do not need (or wish) to start a crowdfunded project to know the risks (as someone suggested) as I have nearly 50 years of experience of design and manufacturing across several tech industries in the UK, US, EU and Far East, including managing full planning and funding issues, so do admire the protagonists when getting good results (whatever the funding source) as it is tricky even with the weight of larger corporations behind you, let alone as an SME or group of individuals.  

 

I do see a fair amount of Revolution Trains activities (amongst others) in the N gauge Journal and I congratulate them on their successes - obviously guys who seem to be getting this essentially right.

 

I agree that businesses that run their own crowdfunding projects are different than, say, "Kickstarter" and similar funding platforms and did mention that the quite large fees taken upfront by these platforms can reduce available monies for the project regardless of the nature of the development, so also agree that private business dedicated crowdfunding (eg effectively pre-orders/deposits)  can lead to different results and SOME do get it right, but think all would accept that when funding by using pre-orders it can be very hard to amass enough interest to fund a seamless development through to production and delivery to deadline and target cost. If you get your numbers wrong you can burn cash with the best will in the world and have little to none left available to finish the project or refund if it fails to hit any of the critical commercial or tech targets.
 

I do wish the best to any group that can deliver a good more modern n gauge model of the GWR Kings and am still a little surprised that the larger companies have seemingly ignored this class of loco. All down to sales numbers/costs/pricing I guess, in which case it may be doubly difficult for a smaller group to deliver such a RTR model. Squaring THAT circle is what it is all about. Covid, Brexit delays and now spiralling materials costs are making a perfect storm in the manufacturing world, but hope that some semblance of normality will return and delayed new models will be brought to market soon.   

 

 As mentioned, this is just my point of view regarding the issues surrounding these more speculative, low volume ventures. The fact that some succeed - rather against the odds and often by sheer hard work, does not encourage me to voluntarily engage with them re an n gauge  King Class due to the mentioned - often imponderable - variables, but have seen some good products delivered, so, never say never?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did get a long chat with Michael at Doncaster show and basically the number of expressions of interest has been so low that there is no way at present they can afford to take the consequential loss on the project.  He didn't rule out a model at some point BUT certainly not in the near future.

 

We touched on the thorny subject of DJM,  and KR are doing everything they can to avoid overreaching themselves in the way DJM did.  The King seems to be a casualty of that.

 

Les

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 hours ago, Les1952 said:

I did get a long chat with Michael at Doncaster show and basically the number of expressions of interest has been so low that there is no way at present they can afford to take the consequential loss on the project.

Well, it would possibly help if they advertised that expressions of interest are still needed, perhaps in media that will be seen by N modellers - the N Gauge Society journal for a start?  Like Hattons with their Garratt they seem to think that just mentioning it on their website is enough: which given that KR have no profile in the N market isn’t enough.

 

Given the popularity of the GWR, who doubts that a model of its premier express loco wouldn’t sell (especially as two are preserved in mainline condition) *if* it was a model that people could see and touch without having to pay upfront sight unseen trusting that it would be accurate <cough> Fell <cough>.  Or even if we saw that KR had enough faith in their product to invest their own time and money in working up detailed CADs or preferably an EP.  I didn’t fill in any expression of interest forms for a Clayton class 17, but when it appeared out of the blue I bought one instantly, as did many others.

 

KR do seem to  want to transfer shedloads of risk (including research) onto their customers from the get-go.  Which says to me that they are under-capitalised and over-stretched. After DJM I’ve got better things to do with my money than have it tied up in vapourware: I will spend it on models that I can see and handle, or on models from suppliers who have enough faith in their products and enough market research ability to commit their own money upfront to move them from idea to EP.

 

Moving away from KR to the bigger picture, should China move any closer to actively supporting the Putin regime, the consequent economic sanctions and geopolitical realignments will make the “Evergiven” Suez disruption to goods commissioned from factories in China look like a walk in the park. And perhaps that’s no bad thing.  I’m uncomfortable with the amount of money I spend on model railway stuff going to prop up the economy of an authoritarian genocidal regime which despises the West and everything democracy stands for.  Yes, I’m a hypocrite - I keep buying the stuff, for now. But it increasingly doesn’t sit right.

 

Richard T

 

 

 

Edited by RichardT
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 hours ago, Les1952 said:

I did get a long chat with Michael at Doncaster show and basically the number of expressions of interest has been so low that there is no way at present they can afford to take the consequential loss on the project.

Well, it would possibly help if they advertised that expressions of interest are still needed, perhaps in media that will be seen by N modellers - the N Gauge Society journal for a start?  Like Hattons with their Garratt they seem to think that just mentioning it on their website is enough: which given that KR have no profile in the N market isn’t enough.

 

Given the popularity of the GWR, who doubts that a model of its premier express loco wouldn’t sell (especially as two are preserved in mainline condition) *if* it was a model that people could see and touch without having to pay upfront sight unseen trusting that it would be accurate <cough> Fell <cough>.  Or even if we saw that KR had enough faith in their product to invest their own time and money in working up detailed CADs or preferably an EP.  I didn’t fill in any expression of interest forms for a Clayton class 17, but when it appeared out of the blue I bought one instantly, as did many others.

 

KR do seem to  want to transfer shedloads of risk (including research) onto their customers from the get-go.  Which says to me that they are under-capitalised and over-stretched. After DJM I’ve got better things to do with my money than have it tied up in vapourware: I will spend it on models that I can see and handle, or on models from suppliers who have enough faith in their products and enough market research ability to commit their own money upfront to move them from idea to EP.

 

Moving away from KR to the bigger picture, should China move any closer to actively supporting the Putin regime, the consequent economic sanctions and geopolitical realignments will make the “Evergiven” Suez disruption to goods commissioned from factories in China look like a walk in the park. And perhaps that’s no bad thing.  I’m uncomfortable with the amount of money I spend on model railway stuff going to prop up the economy of an authoritarian genocidal regime which despises the West and everything democracy stands for.  Yes, I’m a hypocrite - I keep buying the stuff, for now. But it increasingly doesn’t sit right.

 

Richard T

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RichardT said:

Well, it would possibly help if they advertised that expressions of interest are still needed, perhaps in media that will be seen by N modellers - the N Gauge Society journal for a start?  Like Hattons with their Garratt they seem to think that just mentioning it on their website is enough: which given that KR have no profile in the N market isn’t enough.

 

 

The potential N gauge KR King and Hattons Garratt have been discussed and mentioned extensively over many months (years?) on more than just the respective company websites. The commercial model railway press (magazines etc), many on-line forums (including RMweb) and facebook groups have carried the news and ISTR it even being mentioned in the NGS Journal. And, of course, a simple search using a search engine like Google would have found it without the need to stumble across it on a website. Even then, over a long period of time, there has still been insufficient EOIs.

 

I suspect that a RTR King in N is probably a non-starter or certainly will struggle to garner sufficient interest (orders/EOIs). To a large extent its development is tainted with a connection to DJM that may well put people off. I also get the impression that another GWR large loco is probably another too far in a current large line up of similar looking RTR GWR locos (perhaps a LNER, LMS or SR loco would be better received). And there was once produced a RTR N gauge King (which although now NLA, dated and not up to modern standards) will have at least sated some demand and with some not willing to upgrade/replace.   

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Western modellers have been well served in N gauge by Dapol though the range is currently missing any Prairies and a Mogul would be nice too.  On the LMS Farish have supplied the main motive power for the WCML less a Princess Royal and a Patriot and on the ECML the spoils have been shared between Farish and Dapol evenly.

 

That leaves the Southern where there has been a complete lack of much beyond a MN, a Mogul and M7, a Q1 and a Terrier, rolling stockwise there are Bulleids and Maunsells as well as Mk1s, so perhaps a 4-6-0 or some more 0-6-0 engines from the Southern would be a popular choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...