What do you think will or should be the next development in detailing of RTR models?

[newbryford]

2 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

Surround Sound so a layout sounds like the 'actual' Countryside your model is based in and then the Train has/Trains have appropriate sounds as it/they run/s through it, instead of just the loco making a tinny sound that is rather weak and boring (as on most steam models). Available for DC and DCC and adapt able by the lay-person rather than some clever Puter geek (many of whom are fine people as I have met them). 

Apart from that, actual mini passengers and figures that can move around when required.

Pip E Dream

 

It's already on the way.

Broadway Limited's  "Rolling Thunder"

[Michael Hodgson]

1 hour ago, jonhall said:

I think we will see generic locos, and increasingly 'near enough' models of obscure prototypes.

 

We've got them already - see the Ebay Madness thread.

[PMP]

22 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

I would be careful putting those Far Eastern brass models on a pedestal of being fantastic models and what we should be striving for.

 

They weren't as good as people remember. The average Mainline model was far better. 

 

https://www.vectis.co.uk/lot/samhongsa-korea-oo-gauge-0-6-0-unpainted-brass-body_768392

 

I think I'll stick with my K's one.

 

 

Jason

So what’s actually wrong with the most accurate 57xx variant to date? 

 

It’s dimensionally/shape correct and detail correct for all GW livery, and 9710 in BR days. 

The average Mainline 57 was far far worse than these. This is a late 80’s model and runs like the proverbial swiss watch. That of course may be down to independent spring axles, a floating gearbox and a top quality motor all assembled to a very very high quality.

Mainline was good far better than the Hornby K’s Wills alternative, but was compromised by several areas, the mammarian dome, and a chassis prone to failure and poor running quality. One of the reasons the Perceverance pannier chassis’ sold so well.

 

These 97’s were well ahead of their time and are up there with the best of today’s standards 

[Kris]

Hopefully we will see a reduction in the quantity of 1st radius curves to allow for better detailing on stock. 

Other detailing that would be good to be seen would be the inclusion of drivers as required. 

[The Johnster]

ISTR that the Samhongsa Brass locos were available as CKD type kits, and one sees quite poorly assembled examples on the 'Bay sometimes.  The 45xx and 4575 have very crude smokebox doors, whitemetal I think, with poorly cast hinge/bracket and dart detail, but are excellent in other regards.  The Mainline pannier was not bad for it's day, and the Bachmann replacement, along with the 8750, 45xx, and 4575, are about as good as one can reasonably expect from volume produced RTR IMHO, but the Japanese/Korean brass hand built models beat them for fine detail and thickness of the cab/bunker sides.  AFAIK Samhongsa were the only producer of an RTR 97xx, and I doubt anyone would seriously put the K's kit up as a comparison.  Also TTBOMK, which is by no means exhaustive though some might find it exhausting on this subject, they were the only company to ever offer fully sprung UK outline RTR locomotives.

[Legend]

2 hours ago, Kris said:

Hopefully we will see a reduction in the quantity of 1st radius curves to allow for better detailing on stock. 

Other detailing that would be good to be seen would be the inclusion of drivers as required. 

I think first radius is already dead . Second radius seems the one to go for . Reference discussions on Cavalex 56 . I certainly have second radius  points and I suspect many others are the same . I d want compatibility with that 

[PMP]

49 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

ISTR that the Samhongsa Brass locos were available as CKD type kits, and one sees quite poorly assembled examples on the 'Bay sometimes.  The 45xx and 4575 have very crude smokebox doors, whitemetal I think, with poorly cast hinge/bracket and dart detail, but are excellent in other regards.  The Mainline pannier was not bad for it's day, and the Bachmann replacement, along with the 8750, 45xx, and 4575, are about as good as one can reasonably expect from volume produced RTR IMHO, but the Japanese/Korean brass hand built models beat them for fine detail and thickness of the cab/bunker sides.  AFAIK Samhongsa were the only producer of an RTR 97xx, and I doubt anyone would seriously put the K's kit up as a comparison.  Also TTBOMK, which is by no means exhaustive though some might find it exhausting on this subject, they were the only company to ever offer fully sprung UK outline RTR locomotives.

Samhongsa were limited production models, none were available as kits.

They also didn’t make a 44/45xx that was another Korean producer D0ng Jin

 

They too had all sprung chassis and all brass construction.

Edited October 23, 2021 by PMP

[Phil Parker]

26 minutes ago, Legend said:

I think first radius is already dead . Second radius seems the one to go for . Reference discussions on Cavalex 56 . I certainly have second radius  points and I suspect many others are the same . I d want compatibility with that 

 

There's plenty of first radius out there, and many who will ignore the note on the box saying 2nd radius only. I remember a post on the APT-E thread where someone loudly challenged Rapido to make a model that would cope with those tight curves AND not look any different. Oddly, they chose not to try and design a model that warped the laws of physics.

 

When Peco stop making first radius track because they aren't selling it, and Hornby stop putting it in train sets, it's dead. Until then, there will be a market to trains that will go around it. Maybe not the same as the finescale one most people on here are in, but it exists nonetheless.

[andyman7]

8 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

But which sell out? The Railroad models, or the highly detailed models made by Bachmann. I think we know the answer. Bachmann will sell out and the Railroad models will be in the bargain bins for £50.

 

 

7 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

Your assumption is that the same number of each range is produced. While I don't have any numbers, I bet there are more Railroad 47s then High-fi Bachmann ones. You'll also need to look long term - that Railroad model has been around for a very long while and shifted many units. Let's have another look in 10 years.

I can assure you that as 'Dad' to a boy that likes Railroad models, there are quite a few that sell out pretty quickly and they don't tend to end up in the Bargain Bins.

[westernviscount]

Working doors on passenger stock, particularly sliding doors will likely happen id say. 

 

My enjoyment of such developments will, like many im sure have to be vicariously through watching them at exhibitions as new RTR gets further out of reach for some of us. 

 

To be honest, the older I get the less I care about "developments" in the hobby. New RTR is for other people. 

[phil-b259]

10 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

They are sold as models, not toys before we go down the "What about children playing with them" rabbit hole.

 

 

Wrong!

 

They are most definitely sold as 'toys' as far as the regulatory / tax / financial bodies are concerned.

 

What the end user does with said 'toys' does not of course trouble the authorities so the fact that the majority probably don't get much use or are bought by collectors for display etc doesn't matter as this is not among the criteria used to officially define 'a toy'.

 

They may be described as 'scale models' in all the marketing stuff directed at consumers but that doesn't alter the FACTS about what Hornby, etc are retailing as far as officialdom goes.

 

Why is this important? well unlike 'toys' models do not necessarily count as 'tariff free' under WTO rules for starters and I'm sure there are other issues lurking for the unwary...

[Denbridge]

I'd like to see manufacturers model valve gear and rods properly and get rid of the horrid hex head retaining screws while they are at it

[Michael Hodgson]

1 hour ago, westernviscount said:

Working doors on passenger stock, particularly sliding doors will likely happen id say. 

 

... and passengers who alight from and board the trains through those working doors.

 

We've already got people making moving road vehicles and push-bikes, albeit following a very fixed buried track.

 

[ikcdab]

The thing in want to see..drivers and firemen. I really can't understand why my footplates don't come populated.

Goes for coaches too.

Ian C

[The Johnster]

2 hours ago, PMP said:

Samhongsa were limited production models, none were available as kits.

They also didn’t make a 44/45xx that was another Korean producer D0ng Jin

 

They too had all sprung chassis and all brass construction.

I stand corrected and informed, sir.

[YesTor]

'Controversial' perhaps  *cough* ,   but how about getting some of the fundamentals right, such as:

 

1. Correct shape bodyshells
2. Correct shades for liveries
3. Logos/numbers etc in the correct places
4. Lights that work as intended

 

Basic stuff really, but still in 2021 there are so many new models set for release that cannot even claim to meet the above criteria.  If a manufacturer cannot get the basics right then any further detail/embellishments/gimmicks and the like are futile.  I won't mention any specific manufacturers names regarding the above, but as they say, if the cap fits...   

 

With regard to detailing, and I'm not sure that injection-moulded plastic can be pushed much further beyond what we see already - both in terms of fidelity and strength/practicality?  Similar with metal-formed parts - etching, casting can only go so far, I suppose?  Where I think we might witness a big change in what types of models we see on the shelves is if/when 3D printing becomes a viable option for mass production.  Speed of printing and the development and innovation in new, more robust materials will open up the possibilities for even more refined, whilst at the same time more resilient, detailing options.  As soon as we see this applied on a larger scale then I think it will be quite a fast revolution/transition from injection-moulded/cast models to finished printed models.

 

Al

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by YesTor

[Kris]

8 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

There's plenty of first radius out there, and many who will ignore the note on the box saying 2nd radius only. I remember a post on the APT-E thread where someone loudly challenged Rapido to make a model that would cope with those tight curves AND not look any different. Oddly, they chose not to try and design a model that warped the laws of physics.

 

When Peco stop making first radius track because they aren't selling it, and Hornby stop putting it in train sets, it's dead. Until then, there will be a market to trains that will go around it. Maybe not the same as the finescale one most people on here are in, but it exists nonetheless.

I think that the biggest hope is that Hornby stop putting it in train sets* and stop using it in their track plans. Most new entrants to the hobby will first encounter the hobby at home in this way. If they don't have any first radius track they are less likely to use it. 

 

* I do know that first radius is only used in a limited number of sets. 

[APOLLO]

First radius curves and set track points are just the job for industrial / quarry / dockside layouts.

 

We could do with more operating accessories, coal loading / unloading shutes etc etc

 

Brit15

[Phil Parker]

2 hours ago, Kris said:

I think that the biggest hope is that Hornby stop putting it in train sets* and stop using it in their track plans. Most new entrants to the hobby will first encounter the hobby at home in this way. If they don't have any first radius track they are less likely to use it. 

 

* I do know that first radius is only used in a limited number of sets. 

 

And if the 2nd radius train set takes up too much pace to fit at home, what will they do then?

 

It's first radius for a reason.

[Nearholmer]

As a casual observer of what’s going on in 00, I’m surprised there is so much emphasis in this thread on detailing, and so little on operational quality, given that a lot of the “moaning threads” centre on distinctly iffy current collection and other fundamental flaws, and on bits falling off.

 

Most of the “modern traction” seems to run dependably well, but people do seem to have gripes about many steamers with running poorly, or having pathetic tractive effort.  
 

So, I think, on behalf of 00 users, I’d hope and wish for 100% pin-perfect running, and battery/wireless as a plug-in option on factory production.

(Woops! This is detailing thread, rather than a ‘make ‘em work properly’ thread isn’t? Sorry!)

 

 

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Allegheny1600]

My thoughts are that detailing these days is pretty much there.

Why add ever further details if it can only be observed by physically picking the model up and studying it with a magnifying glass?

As was said up thread, get the main shape correct first and foremost, the “face” of a loco being one of the main things that makes us want to buy it. Personally, I far preferred the face of the Hornby Western to the Lima or even Heljan versions although the Dapol one is the ultimate for me.

Once you have the face and body shape correct, make darn sure it runs well!

Forget about saving a few pence on a cheap motor, put a decent motor in that will work.

Then get a decent mechanism in - with properly ROUND and concentric wheels.

 

All of the developments discussed so far have been seen already in other countries and the only success story is the one where manufacturers follow the above points.

All instances where manufacturers deviate from these points, end in failure.

Edited October 24, 2021 by Allegheny1600
Spelling

[Halvarras]

1 hour ago, Allegheny1600 said:

Personally, I far preferred the face of the Hornby Western to the Lima

 

Providing Hornby had printed the silver windscreen frames centrally on the glazing - many were off-centre and this was difficult to correct.

 

I was disappointed that Lima hadn't glazed the Western in the same manner as the Warship.

[spamcan61]

3 hours ago, APOLLO said:

First radius curves and set track points are just the job for industrial / quarry / dockside layouts.

 

We could do with more operating accessories, coal loading / unloading shutes etc etc

 

Brit15

Pretty much every post 2000 OO model I've bought states 2nd radius minimum anyway, so I'm not seeing the first radius thing as an issue. Seems Rails have upped the ante to 3rd radius on the WR gas turbine so we'll see how that pans out.  Personally I'm in the better, more consistent running camp as opposed to yet more lily gilding, but that's clearly not the way the market is going.

[Allegheny1600]

Further thoughts on this subject that may be worth considering?

 

How about a “better” coupling?

 

 I place better in quotes because for some people, better may mean “more realistic” but for me, it’s actually “operationally better”

One of the best adoptions in recent times has been the NEM coupler pocket. Okay, some manufacturers of UK outline stock, took their time to get it right but now it’s generally okay, maybe?

Anyway, this little box allows one to swap and change their couplings at will but the usual coupler fitted is invariably the tension lock. How many people out there, try anything different?

Kadees, perhaps but that’s probably it.

Hornby have supplied their version of the Roco close coupler with some coaches and I think that to include such a small thing that must be ‘nths of a pence to make, so why not make it more readily available?

Instant close or at least, closer coupling of your stock and reliability if you want to propel stock.

How many times have you propelled a rake of mineral wagons into a goods yard for example and had them derail all over the place?

Uncoupling? Use the exact same method that you currently use for tension locks.

[Kris]

3 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

And if the 2nd radius train set takes up too much pace to fit at home, what will they do then?

 

It's first radius for a reason.

Go for n gauge, given the size of modern houses we might need to be taking more inspiration from the Japanese.