The future of loco kit building

[S.A.C Martin]

Well there's a gap in the market. Ten years ago the excellent Pocket Money range from Jim McGeown gave you a very good way in, with clear instructions and some very useful general kit building hints. The man was a victim of his own success and finally dropped them to concentrate on 7mm. If you can get one - they fetch daft prices on Ebay - there's no better starting point.

I did have a go myself at trying to make a very simple beginner's locomotive kit a few years back: Project Sentinel.

 

The stumbling block for me back then was the 3D Cadwork combined with the limitations of 3D printing. I'd like to think I'm now much better at it than I was then, and a bit more savvy; so I'll give it another go when I have the time.

 

I do think that there's a train of thought which says that we expect modellers to dive in at the deep end for everything. It just doesn't happen if you have no form of support network to help you develop, and with parents/tutors/friends must also come viable projects which build confidence and skills (as Castle has intimated above).

[MJI]

Well I have three pests.

 

Daughter who is academic, two boys, twins, one is academic, one is more practical if he can be bothered.

 

Daughter did a couple of Airfix kits then stopped.

 

Boys, well one started some helecopters, the other likes building but not playing Warhammer machines.

 

Going to try them on balsa planes over Christmas.

 

I am academic and reasonably practical, I can solder, weld, change a cambelt, fit LPG, build a kit, but not so great at painting

[Kenton]

But if the ultimate aim is to always get the most accurate model of X prototype, I'm afraid in some cases RTR conversions come out closer to the real thing in many respects.

 

But is it? Some of aspire of course to build that perfect kit but it is certainly not the aim of every kit I build. If it was I would be agonizing over every rivet and probably not get anything done. I can safely sa I have never done a RTR conversion and can honestly say I hope I never will.

 

That is not to say that I cannot admire the work of others and the many hours spent changing what I see as a perfect model into one that they see as a perfect model. It is just that I cannot see any gratification for me. It therefore falls into the same bin as the complete scratchbuild. A dedication to obtaining a particular model above anything, but rarely ends up as good as the kit. That doesn't matter as long as the modeller gets enjoyment out of his hobby.

 

The future? As I indicated above long term I don't think I really care, 15-20years and I don't expect to be modelling and if everything is 3D CAD, lazer sculpted out of some new wonderous material, it will make no difference to me. In the meantime there are enough kits to keep me busy ... and probably everyone starting this hobby at the moment. It is, after all, only one small part of the hobby as a whole.

[coachmann]

My view is that the cottage industries that don't adapt to the changing world, and particularly in the service and component sales, should die out. If they cannot provide kits of a decent quality with written instructions, why should they survive alongside those who provide a better service?

 

 

This view has parallels with Thatchers 1980s and I for one feel uncomfortable with putting people out of work. Asking why industries should survive alongside those that provide a better service is a question that should be put to those who obviously consider that indecent quality kits are better than no kits at all. Cottage industries won't go bust when their owners have day jobs, but some could decide they can't be ar$ed when folk demoralise them.

[S.A.C Martin]

This view has parallels with Thatchers 1980s when our manufacturing/steel/motor/ coal industries were being closed down. Asking why industries should survive alongside those that provide a better service is a question that should be put to those of a charitable nature who obviously think indecent quality kits are better than no kits at all. Cottage industries won't go bust when their owners have day jobs, but some could decide they can't be ar$ed when folk demoralise them.

 

A bit harsh Larry...it's not the same as Thatcherism at all.

 

The question that was put to us what is the future of kit building, and the train of thought was that future generations of modelling are not being taught the skills which older generations were. If that's the case, who will have the skill set to build the kits available now? If the future indicates a change in the attitudes of modellers to kits because of a lack of education (which is more than hinted at by many in this thread), then kit manufacturers will have to offer better kits and service to continue to survive.

 

It is a basic fact of life that Kit manufacturers need to adapt to a changing world (and in some cases, have done so) - and that includes changing the nature of their kits to the skills available to their newest customers. If one kit manufacturer makes a better fitting kit and provides a better service than another, then they will prosper and others which do not will fall by the wayside. This is borne out to some extent by the changing of hands of kits and their toolings over the last few decades, surely?

 

I get the feeling my view point is entirely unwelcome so I'll give it a rest now.

[coachmann]

A bit of bad timing there Mr. Martin........While I was busy condencing what I had said, you were busy posting a response. It is not a basic fact of life that kit manufacturers need to adapt. Many are cottage industries as you have said, and their owners might consider it is not worth tarting the existing kits up. Or they may be paying the previous owner on instalments and have no money left over to invest in improvements. If I wanted certain pre-group locos I would buy kits and try to improve them, but I might not have that choice if your viewpoint prevailed.

 

I take your point about better kits sidelining others. It's how the market works. But I'm not being harsh, I'm simply fighting fire with fire....

[BG John]

I'm fairly practical, having grown up in a family of engineers, so picked up some general knowledge from the family, plus doing metalwork and technical drawing at school. None of it was specific to model railways, except the bits my Dad helped me with that I wanted. My Mum was always cooking, and when I escaped from home I started cooking with very little practical experience, because I'd seen her doing it and it wasn't alien to me. If people growing up today don't see their parents doing stuff, and don't learn it at school, I can see a problem, with life as well as railway modelling.

 

I've built a fair number of rolling stock kits, not managed to get far with my scratchbuilding attempts, and have only got one whitemetal loco kit working successfully. I must add the final details one day! I could have done more, as I have the physical skills, but never learned time management, or to finish something before starting something else, from my parents!

 

When I was growing up, I read about scratchbuilding using tinplate, cardboard and other simple materials, because that's what was available. That moved on to more sophosticated materials with many components available as castings, and I guess is now moving towards 3D printing from artwork created by the builder. Maybe one day there will be a backlash, and sales of card and shellac will take off!

 

Kits started off with whitemetal castings, with a few mass produced plastic ones, then moved on to more plastic mouldings, then etched brass. Now 3D printing is starting there too. The quality has varied enormously, ranging from accurate and easy to assemble, to absolute rubbish, and the skill level from easy for beginners to experts only.

 

What's been available as kits and to the scratchbuilder, has been the best available at the time. Surely we're entering a time where new materials and methods are becoming available, and maybe new ways of producing kits and components. Maybe the time of the one man kit manufacturer, sitting in his workshop making castings, drawing plans for etchings, and then being expected to have the time and skills to write instructions, be a marketing expert and able to provide good support is nearly over.

 

Modern technology allows groups of people to work together, doing the things they're good at. Someone could be designing for 3D printing, someone else doing artwork where etching is best, someone else does the test builds and writes the instructions, and someone else sells the finished products. All without leaving home, or even ever meeting each other! I don't think there's much money in it, so why not work together in groups, doing the bits each person is good at and enjoy, and producing kits and components they have a use for, and use the income generated to offset the costs of getting what they want, plus a little for their time. The finished kit, or scratchbuilding component could be of much higher quality, and easier to assemble, if a number of specialists were involved in making it. I've no idea how this would affect the selling price, but might consider brushing up on my cost accounting skills to help find out!

[S.A.C Martin]

Fair play to you Larry. I see what you mean now. My only question then is whether we are looking at this as an inclusive - everyone can have a go - or exclusive - I.e not everyone wants the same thing ergo not everyone is catered for.

 

That being the case; certainly, if demand is there for X loco obscure, then if a current kit is the only way to get it, then you buy it.

 

But as I intimated earlier to Kenton; if a particular prototype can be made a different way, which is going to be more appealing to the beginner or cash strapped modeller; a full kit or a partial one which produces the same or better results?

 

I don't think there's one answer to this but am happy to concede my view doesn't take into account the individuality of railway modelling.

[Coach bogie]

I am still building to the point where there is only a handful of rtr on my layout.

 

The challenge as I see it is the lack of 'interesting' starter kits. I appreciate that DJH have two in their range but they are hardly prototypes that would interest a large audience. I miss the K's range. They had their problems but you could always get something running. I, like many was introduced to kit building by K's. My first it was sold to me by Ken Keyser with the promise that if I broke any part, send it to him personally and it would be replaced - what a sales pitch to someone just entering his teens. It worked.

 

I have convinced two friends in the last five years, that they could kit build a loco by finding them cheap K's kits. One built an LNWR coal tank and the other an LMS Stanier prairie. They will both tell you that the experience taught them much about engines, chassis construction etc and gave them the confidence to build something more complex.

 

As the modeller strives for more detail etc, the hobby appears to be losing entry level opportunities in both rtr and kit building.

 

Just a thought

 

Mike Wiltshire

[halfwit]

I don't think that the skills required to build a kit will dissappear, but they might evolve as new tools and techniques become available. Take for example soldering, once upon a time this meant a heavy, clumsy iron heated up on a gas ring, now we use nice lightweight irons hooked up to the mains. Once when one type of solder was used for everything we now have several different temperature solders available, in wire paste and paint form. Fluxes have evolved a well, no longer is Bakers Fluid the norm. With an RSU we don't even need to have hot irons laying around (at least one member of this forum uses an RSU exclusively).

 

As for learning these skills, I feel that those who want to learn will learn, either by trial and error, reading books or web pages or from another modeller. Or more probably from a combination of those.

 

The desire to build something yourself, either to fill a gap in your loco stud, for example, or just for the joy of building, is something that I feel will always be with us.

[Paul Cram]

I don't think kit building will die out whilst the RTR manufacturers continue to ignore P4 and to a lesser extent EM. There is a need for chassis kits at the very least when modelling in those guages. There are also a large number of protoypes that are not catered for by the RTR segment which are provided by kits. I have no particular need of RTR as by and large they do not cater for me. It was interesting that at Peterborough most of the trade was RTR and kits were thin on the ground. Consequently I only made one purchase that was not a book.

[coachmann]

When we talk about technology moving on, I wonder if the attraction of 3D loco "kits" is that they are not kits at all and that they might be innexpensive to boot.

 

Lateral thinking at play here, but if I could produce a super 3D loco body to fit a RTR chassis, with a smooth-as-glass surface finish, wire handrails and in plain black, I would have saved modellers a lot of work I would be thinking! That's got to be worth a few bob and so it would be priced accordingly....

[GC Jack]

I continue to build kits that are available in RTR, for a number of reasons really:

 

1. I prefer metal locos to plastic (somehow to me they capture the sense of mass of the prototype)

 

2: I like building them!

 

3: They have superior haulage capacity.

 

4: They tend to run like the prototype

 

5: I've got lots to build!

 

6: I can't afford most RTR

 

7: They are all mine!!

 

Jack

[Kenton]

There are now a fair few duplicates of kits out there - it seems to me especially of the GWR flavour - perhaps it is time for some rationalisation? Just letting the poorer kits die a dignified death and encourage replacement with new or improved missing designs.

[N15class]

I am in the I want to and enjoy building models and have done since I was about 6.Starting with really badly made airfix, and out of scale houses in cardboard.

With railway models I have not bought a RTR model since I was 20. Now I model 7mm scale it is the case that there are not the RTR models anyway.

Even if there where the RTR around for the railway I model I would still kit and scratch build, because as said so many times before, there is geat satisfaction in knowing that you built it, there will never be another one the same.

I feel there will always be enough people want to construct models to have kits around.

I feel very sorry for the younger generation and the lack of practical subjects being taught at school. It seems that anything that is likely to make ones hands dirty is frowned upon in the education circles. I have seen this with my own children. They also seem to of been taught that what ever it is that they want should happen now, and anything that needs planing and developing is a waste of their time.

Here in Brazil it is quite different there is not so much model making going on, the kids who have enough money to do so arnt bothered, and those with the ability have more important things to spend their money on, but they seem more apt at making their bike work, building their own kite to fly etc.

[Horsetan]

I continue to build kits that are available in RTR, for a number of reasons really:

 

1. I prefer metal locos to plastic (somehow to me they capture the sense of mass of the prototype)

 

2: I like building them!

 

3: They have superior haulage capacity.

 

4: They tend to run like the prototype

 

5: I've got lots to build!

 

6: I can't afford most RTR

 

7: They are all mine!!

 

Jack

 

Particularly agree with 2,5,6 and 7.

 

Anyway, with my Strategic Reserve of Kits, there'll always be a future for kitbuilding........even after I depart this world.

[Mucky Duck]

I don't think kit building will die out whilst the RTR manufacturers continue to ignore P4 and to a lesser extent EM. There is a need for chassis kits at the very least when modelling in those guages. There are also a large number of protoypes that are not catered for by the RTR segment which are provided by kits. I have no particular need of RTR as by and large they do not cater for me. It was interesting that at Peterborough most of the trade was RTR and kits were thin on the ground. Consequently I only made one purchase that was not a book.

 

You've hit upon a point that strikes a chord with me. When I returned to the hobby after decades I was stunned at the detail level of RTR models and embarked upon a loco buying frenzy, only to discover that no matter how improved RTR manufacturers may be, they still can get it wrong (Hornby's Stanier tender?) and plastic needs work to look like sheet metal - so I started to modify RTR locos and gained immense satisfaction from that (strange though that may appear, to some).

 

More importantly (to me) is that the gauge is wrong and since discovering and learning about EM & P4 (and the fact that modifying those RTR locos gave me the encouragement to try kit-building) I now see that a combination of RTR (bodies) and chassis kits (and parts) from producers such as Dave Bradwell, Brassmasters and Comet as being my way forward. If one offsets the sale of an RTR chassis against the cost of a chassis kit, I think it's worth it.

 

However, a good point was made earlier about kit instructions. A few years ago I did buy a Crownline Ivatt 4MT but the instructions (lack of) scared me off and I sold it pretty quickly. Maybe now I'd be brave enough to tackle it.

 

 

I continue to build kits that are available in RTR, for a number of reasons really:

 

1. I prefer metal locos to plastic (somehow to me they capture the sense of mass of the prototype)

 

2: I like building them!

 

3: They have superior haulage capacity.

 

4: They tend to run like the prototype

 

5: I've got lots to build!

 

6: I can't afford most RTR

 

7: They are all mine!!

 

Jack

 

I agree with most of your points but I have to say that point no.1 is not necessarily true. RTR straight from the box, maybe but with a bit of work on thinning visible edges and some decent paintwork, it can be difficult to spot the difference. I doubt that the above mentioned kit producers would be willing to put their chassis under RTR bodies that weren't up to the job with a little fettling.

[Barry Ten]

I started with the intention of building loco kits about 12 years ago, because there were so many prototypes that were not available in RTR form and did not look like they would ever be likely to be available, either. Remember all the cost effectiveness arguments about why an RTR 7F would never happen? They all seemed very plausible at the time but of course that was a different world.

 

I went to a model show in the Netherlands and chatted to a friendly layout builder (the owner of Somweir Junction) about his locos. He recommended starting with a simple 0-6-0 - good advice, I think. I then chatted to the owner of the West Coast Kit center and got much the same advice, only with the additional suggestion that I'd probably find a tender loco easier than a tank, as a first build, the logic being, I think, that I could use American style pickup if all else failed. I bought a DJH C2X and then armed myself with the loco building books of Iain Rice, Tony Wright and so on.

 

As a lone modeller, I still found it incredibly difficult! I got the basic chassis and body assembled, but sorting out gear meshing, pickups and so on was an unending struggle. I finished the model in 2001 but could not get it running smoothly. I would take it out of the box every few months and try a tweak, but nothing made much difference - in fact the running seemed to get worse. That was where a lot of the instructions and advice manuals tended to let me down, I think - they'd say something like "ensure running is smooth, if not rectify" but there was often little guidance about the specific remedies to try. I had no idea where to start - was my chassis square, was the running too stiff, was the problem in the gearbox, the motor, the pickups, the wheel concentricity, what? Unlike a wagon kit, where there are only a couple of variables that need to be adjusted if running isn't good, a loco has so many things that could be wrong.

 

In 2006 I took the loco along to one of the Missenden workshops. Under Tony Wright's guidance, the main problem was quickly diagnosed - dodgy pickups. The chassis turned out to be assembled square and the running was free (verified by releasing the grub screw and pushing it along - why hadn't I thought of that?). However it wasn't until I dropped in a DJH gearbox that the running became really satisfactory. It turned out (I eventually worked out) that I had damaged the motor bearings when cutting off one of the spindles with slitting disk.

 

With the C2X built, I completed a King chassis, then an outside framed 4-4-0, then a 1366 pannier with outside cylinders, and finally a Castle. Each one ran a bit better than the last and I really felt I was getting somewhere, ready to tackle a 2-8-0 or a loco with outside walschaerts. However I built the Castle three years ago and since then I haven't started another chassis. I have a couple sitting around in boxes - an s15 and a DJH 7F - but with hindsight I would not have acquired the 7F, and there have been rumours about an RTR s15 for a couple of years ago. The only other big loco classes that were a must have for me - the 52 and 72xx tanks - are imminent from Hornby, so that's another project I don't need to build up to.

 

Obviously, as has been said, there can be a lot of satisfaction in completing a kit - I still get a kick out of seeing my King glide around the layout, running a damn sight better than it ever did with a Lima mechanism - but the sheer necessity, as in you cannot model this line without this loco, is not there for me now. Bachmann's 7F not only runs superbly, it looks much better than the DJH versions - and is probably on a par with the Gibson.

 

I do have a lot of sympathy for the kit manufacturers but at the same time I doubt that I'll ever build more than a handful of locos now. On the other hand, not having to spend months making big GWR tanks or 7Fs means more time to spend building rolling stock, which I do enjoy.

[Horsetan]

....A few years ago I did buy a Crownline Ivatt 4MT but the instructions (lack of) scared me off and I sold it pretty quickly. ....

 

Now that's a pity. I could have bought that from you......

[N15class]

Now that's a pity. I could have bought that from you......

I scratch built one before crownline brought theirs out.

[Metropolitan]

Kenton has a point but I think folk need to look at the price of Markit's wheels not to mention motors and gearboxes. After writing a cheque for etchings, I am not about to write another one for several hundred £££'s just to pack a dozen or so "complete" kits. Not only tha, but putting Markits wheels, motor, grearboxes, couplings etc etc in the kit considerably pushes up the price, yet there is nothing in it for me....I will only make a profit on my etchings, but no doubt Mr.Markits would be dead chuffed at my purchases!

 

We modellers didn't feel put out in the age of the loco kit when we had to source motors and wheels etc so why should folk now?

 

 

Coach. The question I think this debate has to answer is:

 

1) Why has kit building gone into such a decline? Many on this thread have outlined their reasons for preferring to build rather than buy an RTR box. The blame is placed wholy on RTR but I do not believe this to be the only cause.

2) Is there a way to revive the market?

 

It may be that those still left producing kits are of a certain type and have resigned themselves to being a niche supplier of finescale products. Ridiculously super-overcomplicated masterpieces seem to be mainly all that is left. And the trouble with them is that they are too fiddling and hard to build, take forever to build and even when you do they don't work. New kits all seem to be designed primarily for P4/EM with some 00 frame spacers lobbed in as an afterthought. But the mass market in this country is for 00? And the kit manufacturers moan and grumble about how few kits they sell!!!!

 

It's a pipe dream of mine that some new entrepreneur would take a look fresh at the opportunities to perfect the old K's business model and produce a range of excellent, modern, simple and easy to build kits with everything you need in the box in 00 gauge. If, having produced a product that was attractive enough to sell in 1000's instead of 10's, then the price would become affordable?

 

PS: Why are Markits wheels and High Level gearboxes so expensive?- Because there is no real competition of the same quality and ease of use. Which takes us full circle!..

 

All folk seem to be quite happy to build their layouts so why don't they also build the most important part of all: The Stock? I don't quite know. Maybe if Hornby started to produce sectional complete RTR layouts the whole hobby would die? I suppose people regard their layouts as unique and individual. To me, the same thing applies to my stock.

[Guest oldlugger]

Who remembers kit manufacturers like Cotswold (taken over by Nu Cast I think, or in part at least)? These were very good white metal kits for the day and as I remember very expensive too. I remember Iain Rice praising the range in his white metal loco kit book. I can still remember the thrill of receiving a heavy parcel through the post containing such a kit, and then looking at the neatly packaged bits and pieces in tissue paper. Further, who ever visited the long redundant model railway shop in central London called "The Booking Hall"? At the time it was my local model shop and I used to love visiting it, mostly because the owner, Nigel, always had a large number of very nicely constructed OO and O gauge loco kits for sale on his shelves. There were lots of models exquisitely painted by Brian Badger (remember him? Apologies Brian if you are reading this!) and our very own Larry Goddard! It was largely through this shop that I got really interested in loco kits and building them. Since those days I've not had the same thrill from a model railway shop; there is something very special about seeing kit built locos on display together which RTR locos just don't have. Maybe it was because the locos in the shop represented classes not available in RTR at the time, like 0-8-0's, etc, and that RTR was pretty rudimentary then (1980's)? But I feel sure that if I was able to visit such a shop again, I would get the same feeling but in a more discerning way, having been working in P4 for a few years now (sorry to be gaugeist here). Do such shops still exist; selling railway books, a bit of RTR and lots of kit built locos and second hand stuff?

 

Cheers

Simon

[Guest oldlugger]

Coach. The question I think this debate has to answer is:

 

1) Why has kit building gone into such a decline? Many on this thread have outlined their reasons for preferring to build rather than buy an RTR box. The blame is placed wholy on RTR but I do not believe this to be the only cause.

2) Is there a way to revive the market?

 

It may be that those still left producing kits are of a certain type and have resigned themselves to being a niche supplier of finescale products. Ridiculously super-overcomplicated masterpieces seem to be mainly all that is left. And the trouble with them is that they are too fiddling and hard to build, take forever to build and even when you do they don't work. New kits all seem to be designed primarily for P4/EM with some 00 frame spacers lobbed in as an afterthought. But the mass market in this country is for 00? And the kit manufacturers moan and grumble about how few kits they sell!!!!

 

It's a pipe dream of mine that some new entrepreneur would take a look fresh at the opportunities to perfect the old K's business model and produce a range of excellent, modern, simple and easy to build kits with everything you need in the box in 00 gauge. If, having produced a product that was attractive enough to sell in 1000's instead of 10's, then the price would become affordable?

 

PS: Why are Markits wheels and High Level gearboxes so expensive?- Because there is no real competition of the same quality and ease of use. Which takes us full circle!..

 

Very true John. I also think that the very sad demise of Romford and their excellent and huge range of wheels has helped the loco kit decline. Whether you liked them or not, they were very user friendly and reliable and catered for all sorts of locos. Markits don't seem to have the same diversity in their range (part of the old Romford empire?). Gibson wheels look lovely but many find the self quatering a pain in the harris (I know there are plans to rectify this) and getting them to run true without wobbling.

 

Simon

[Metropolitan]

Very true John. I also think that the very sad demise of Romford and their excellent and huge range of wheels has helped the loco kit decline. Whether you liked them or not, they were very user friendly and reliable and catered for all sorts of locos. Markits don't seem to have the same diversity in their range (part of the old Romford empire?). Gibson wheels look lovely but many find the self quatering a pain in the harris (I know there are plans to rectify this) and getting them to run true without wobbling.

 

Simon

 

Actually Markits still make Romfords (which are cheap) and their range of prototypical wheels (which are dear) is vast.

[Metropolitan]

PPS: All 4mm loco/stock kits should have provision for and contain a Tension Lock!!