Jump to content
 

Manufacturers 'sharing' running numbers (wagons) - Why?


Recommended Posts

 

This is on the borderline of being a 'general musing', so apologies if this is in the wrong area!

 

Is anyone aware of the reason that manufactures often like to reuse the same running number for wagons?

 

In many cases a single individual wagon has formed the basis for multiple models across manufacturers, sometimes after a gap of several years (or decades) too. With dozens or even hundreds of prototype wagons in an owner's fleet, why not pick a different number each time? With such different lettering it can't be a case of tooling being passed around.

 

...Is it just some sort of running joke?!

 

A few examples below for fun:

All.png.32b1d0a63988c9e00e33edec235784f3.png

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

May well be that there are photographs of wagons in those liveries that they worked from with that particular fleet number. Also remember that local coal merchants often only had a few wagons, some times only one or two, but often added 10 or a 100 to the actual fleet number to appear to be a larger business, as per Arthur Wharton perhaps. I don't know the history of the firm, but did they really have over 3,000 wagons?  

Phil T.

  • Agree 7
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

No, it's not a running joke. In fact, it's a very sad joke indeed.  Manufacturers  can't be bothered, after all, why should they?  Sure, they make some absolutely exquisite  stuff,  but if they can get away with it, they will. 

 

Actually, that's a bit unfair. Things like coaches & locomotives cost a lot terms of investment. To sort of balance that,  wagons are cheap, and the profit is much better.  A locomotive will have a short production run, about 10,000, whereas  a wagon mould might be in production for weeks, and make several hundred thousand.  The wagon 'blanks goes to a WiP stores  (Work in Progress ) until there's a call for a particular type. 

 

One particular manufacturer  has just released a china clay wagon.  The moulds are pure 1970's tooling.  Can't even fit Kadees without surgery.  Mind you, it's still only £28-odd....

 

On the whole, people don't mind paying for a good quality product. But when you're seeing 1970's standard  models at 21st century prices, it is a bit sad. 

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

There was a time when very few PO wagons were offered by the trade.  Then there was a period when the existing mass-produced opens were offered with a long series of new liveries as limited editions for collectors.  If you look at the first example, they are different wagons - one has fixed ends, the other has an opening door - one of them must be wrong.

 

Looks to me like a lazy approach to research.

It's not just about the prototype - you should look at what your competitors are offering/have offered.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is sheer utter laziness. If you look at each pair of wagons in the example, few are structurally identical if any, yet the paintwork is. They ave just opted not to chnage the paintwork because they couldnt be arsed, and stuff the customer.

Edited by RobinofLoxley
correction
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the interesting replies. A couple of good points from Phil:

 

57 minutes ago, Phil Traxson said:

 ...there are photographs of wagons in those liveries that they worked from with that particular fleet number

 

...Yeah I can kind of see why manufacturers may want to play it safe by not modelling a number that they don't have photographic proof of. Especially when considering so many numbers may not have even existed...

 

57 minutes ago, Phil Traxson said:

...but often added 10 or a 100 to the actual fleet number to appear to be a larger business

 

 

Overall though I'm still thinking it to be laziness or lack of research! Surely subtracting a few from the number on the last produced example in model form would please modellers as it would mean a little less renumbering?! But then again a large rake would need to be renumbered anyway if the modeller cared about such things, 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

OK, I'll look at this from a different point of view.

 

Is it reasonable to expect manufacturers to look at competitors products (perhaps buying them), just to check on which numbers have previously been produced? Probably not.

 

As has been stated, some previous models go back years, if not decades. Perhaps the newer model is 'better' than the previous version. Not saying it is, but why would a manufacturer refuse to produce a model, because Hornby/Lima/Mainline/ Bachmann/Dapol etc, did it years ago?

Edited by kevinlms
More info
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, kevinlms said:

why would a manufacturer refuse to produce a model, because Hornby/Lima/Mainline/ Bachmann/Dapol etc, did it years ago?

 

You might be missing the point of the question. If was more about why manufacturers don't use different running numbers ever time they produce a livery that has been produced before.

 

It's absolutely reasonable for manufactures to look at competitors products and produce the same liveries, but why not choose a different running number each time?

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 minutes ago, Rob Haigh said:

 

You might be missing the point of the question. If was more about why manufacturers don't use different running numbers ever time they produce a livery that has been produced before.

 

It's absolutely reasonable for manufactures to look at competitors products and produce the same liveries, but why not choose a different running number each time?

I didn't miss the point of the question, as I stated.

 

just to check on which numbers have previously been produced?

 

Manufacturers copy a photograph of a wagon and number they know to be correct. Even adding 1 to a number, may not be correct as others have stated. Small P.O. operators often just ordered additional wagons as required, possibly in 1's or 2's.

 

Manufacturers produce liveries that look good and to improve sales. The fact they use a wagon body, that they already have in stock and often bears little resemblance to the prototype (usually in length and material the chassis is made from - wood or steel etc, or door layout), is of course another discussion altogether.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 minutes ago, Rob Haigh said:

 

It's absolutely reasonable for manufactures to look at competitors products and produce the same liveries, but why not choose a different running number each time?

 

Because its a lot of extra work!

 

As has been said before, in the case of private owner wagons decent photographic evidence is generally hard to come by and most that exists tends to be promotional in nature featuring the same wagon.

 

Moreover unlike the national railway system where lots of documentary evidence has ended up in the national archives as a result of nationalisation, private sector information is much more likely to have been thrown away and is thus not available for model railway researchers.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RobinofLoxley said:

It is sheer utter laziness. If you look at each pair of wagons in the example, few are structurally identical if any, yet the paintwork is. They ave just opted not to chnage the paintwork because they couldnt be arsed, and stuff the customer.

 

..... or, as there is a photo of wagon number x, if you use an alternative number y - of which there isn't a photo - some clever-clogs will come along and say "That company never had a wagon number y".

 

John Isherwood.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

decent photographic evidence is generally hard to come by

 

Yeah I understand that, and it is a good point.

 

If so, I just thought it was interesting that they seem to generally feel limited to producing running numbers that they have photographic evidence for, but seem less bothered by using an inaccurate body/chassis for said prototype!

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Private owner wagons were produced by the supplying companies in an enormous variety of designs and configurations, even before liveries are considered, and from the pov of an RTR producer it is next to impossible to produce an accurate model, so in order to satisfy the very strong demand for such wagons they produce inaccurate generics but make an effort to get the livery right.  
 

As they usually work from the same photograph, often the only one available showing that livery and usually in monotone, they inevitably produce the wagon with an incorrect body and chassis but the same running number as the competition. Yes, it’s lazy, but they know their market and that the majority of the customers for such wagons don’t care much.  If you want to take a positive from the situation, consider that these wagons are profitable and thus increase the chances  of the company producing more accurate items elsewhere in the range...

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

some clever-clogs will come along and say "That company never had a wagon number y".

 

Yep I'm sure they would. But one of the manufacturers in the examples above were fine with using an inaccurate body type or chassis, as very few match!

 

If they can take liveries with the body/chassis type, why not with a running number which in my opinion would be more obvious when looking at a rake on a layout!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
18 minutes ago, Rob Haigh said:

 

Yeah I understand that, and it is a good point.

 

If so, I just thought it was interesting that they seem to generally feel limited to producing running numbers that they have photographic evidence for, but seem less bothered by using an inaccurate body/chassis for said prototype!

 

 

The magazines/websites are full of 'limited edition' models. Many are produced for clubs and preservation societies and might only be for 150 models. They aren't in a position to pay for an accurate model, so will approach a manufacturer for a batch of wagons, that match a photograph they supply, which will come from the manufacturers standard, but inaccurate range.

 

The prime purpose of the model is for fund raising, not for it being an accurate model.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I disagree with some of the feelings above.

There are hundreds, if not thousands of photographs of brand new individual PO wagons such as in the PO Wagons book series from Keith Turton and elsewhere.

I cannot see why manufacturers can't just pick a different wagon and release that.

Surely there wouldn't be any extra costs?

Fitting a livery to a particular wagon design however is more difficult due to the infinite variety of designs available

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I have no requirement for private owner wagons, for reasons which should be obvious I couldn't help noticing that 2-3 years ago both Hornby and Oxford Rail produced a 7-plank wagon decorated as Phillips George & Co No 251. My assumption was that a photo had been published and they both spotted it.

 

I may have no need for a PO wagon but I couldn't resist the Oxford Rail model for a tenner - and very nice it is too!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I've a couple of Oxford PO minerals on my 1950s layout, weathered to the extreme so you can't make out the actual livery but can see that there is one; this is perfectly prototypical for the period, and they are hard to resist at the price!

  • Like 2
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...