Wright writes.....

[Captain Kernow]

However, I really am surprised that folk cannot do this kind of thing for themselves. Removing the original numbers (with a scalpel) takes care, but the replacement numbers cover any slight marks and the five digits are all in one piece on the transfer.

 

Why should this kind of half-hour job appear to be beyond so many modellers? A tricky question; no doubt one which will 'outrage' some. 

It used to be so easy, back in the day when Bachmann transfers would come off by gently rubbing them with a cotton bud soaked in enamel thinners. These days a different printing process seems to be in use, which means 'something stronger' is required, which might be T-Cut (I have used that, if I recall correctly) or scraping with a scalpel, which in some ways seems a little 'harsh' to me, as I'd prefer a 'chemical'-based process, albeit one which avoids damaging the paintwork underneath.

 

Mind you, I recall weathering some Bachmann Mark 1 coaches years ago, when the older type of transfers were on them. The process involved removing most of the weathering 'solution' (much-thinned enamel-based weathering mix) with dampened cotton buds and I had to be very careful not to lose the lining in the process!

[Tony Wright]

Tony,

 

I agree with you but I do think some people simply lack confidence in their own ability to do a reasonable job and they fear damaging the model and thus reducing is potential value if sold.

 

I am often surprised at how often people on this forum refer to selling their models on and if you renumber or rename a model it no longer corresponds to its catalogue number and therefore is of no interest to collectors and this could reduce its potential value. I agree with Arun Sharma in thinking that most RTR models stay unaltered throughout their lives.

 

I model in EM and thus when I convert stock to EM and rename and renumber it I immediately reduce the value of that stock but as I’ve no intention of selling it, it does not bother me.

 

Sandra

Sandra,

 

There is always the fear of spoiling a model by attempting to alter it, but no modelling exercise comes without 'risk'. I remember being soundly scolded by my mother for 'ruining' the Tri-ang loco I'd been given for Christmas many decades ago. By the 27th of December it had been renumbered to one of the BR 2-6-2Ts I'd seen (82004 didn't seem to appear at Chester) by altering numbers from a Kitmaster transfer sheet and hand-painting. Not only that, I'd started carving off handrails resulting in some bleeding taking place. It's stout box had also been employed in a foundation for some scenic work. What an ungrateful, reckless child I was! 

 

I do accept that there is a big difference in spoiling what's basically a scale model at source and some dumb kid messing up a toy - not least the huge difference in price (inflation taken into account), but some in the hobby seem to put up huge barriers to prevent them from actually doing any modelling for themselves. 

 

I also find it rather daft when RTR models which have been substantially improved, fail to reach the same price as 'collectible' equivalents where they're just as supplied. Many moons ago, I two-railed (by re-wheeling ) a Hornby-Dublo CITY OF LIVERPOOL for a mate. Not only that, I fitted scale 'plates to it (from Kings Cross, where they had to be cut out) and finally weathered it. He was miffed that it was no longer worth anything like a 'mint' example when he came to resell it, despite its having nearer-scale wheels and looking much more 'natural'. 

 

Last week some friends came to run the railway. Though they're 'mature', life has rather got in the way of their modelling down the years. Two would like to have a go at building locos (for the first time). All agreed that investing in something that could well cost in excess of twice the price of an RTR equivalent was a risk, because there would be no guarantee that it would 'work'. My offer to assist them will be taken up (and also to assist in building wagons) because there is a desire to make things for themselves. I pointed out that the real 'value' in any model might well not be the end result, but from the lessons leaned on the way. If ever a Tri-ang 2-6-2T turns up, painted blobby lined green, with a different number, wobbly (but wire) handrails and long-dried blood somewhere on it, you'll know its origins. I also dread anyone coming up to me at a show, shoving an ancient loco under my nose and saying 'I believe you built this!'

 

I've been informed that I can lack sensitivity towards some folk's feelings by what I say, and that their being irate can be understood (hence some recent comments). I don't really take exception to being told that I really should paint all my own models and that having trackwork built for me is little different from running RTR (though I will present my reasons for such things). No, I just get on doing my own thing, offering practical advice on model-making where I can and always encouraging folk to have a go for themselves. I'm told I seem to 'know a lot' about railway modelling (which, I hope, doesn't make me a know-all). My response is to say 'knowing' implies learning, and most lessons learned are the result of mistakes. And I've made thousands and thousands of those! How can anyone learn when they won't even try? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[65179]

I'm not sure about their being Mk.1s, Andrew.

 

I've blown the picture right up (though it rapidly deteriorates) and the footboard positions seem more Thompson than Mk.1 to me. The roof profile is also different from the (definite) Mk. 1 car ahead of them.

 

Who knows? But what a wonderful mixture.

 

I think you're right, as well, in my having shown this shot before, but there are always new readers to this thread.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

I'd have plumped for immediately pre- or post-WWII LMS stock for the last 3 coaches beyond the Mk1. To my eyes they look shorter than than the Mk1. A D2159 CK with it's more Mk1 roof profile might explain the relative lack of change of roof profile...

 

...or they are all Mk1s and I'm not accounting for perspective properly.

 

Simon

[micklner]

I've just finished renumbering/renaming this Hornby Brit for a friend. 

 

Britannia 70048.jpg

 

It started off as 70050 FIRTH OF CLYDE, so the big tender is correct. I rather think the device on the tender should be the later one for 1958, but altering that was not on the brief. The transfers and 'plates are from Fox.

 

My friend is more than capable of completing the alterations, but he asked me if I'd like to do it as part of my demonstrating at shows. Not having set-up for applying transfers, I've done it at home. 

 

There are firms which offer such a service, and good on them - for, it would seem, their services are needed. However, I really am surprised that folk cannot do this kind of thing for themselves. Removing the original numbers (with a scalpel) takes care, but the replacement numbers cover any slight marks and the five digits are all in one piece on the transfer. The nameplates are affixed with tiny dabs of Evo Stik, applied to the backs of the 'plates and the deflectors, and left to dry for a minute or two - then brought together. The same is so for the front 'plate.

 

Why should this kind of half-hour job appear to be beyond so many modellers? A tricky question; no doubt one which will 'outrage' some. 

Very simple answers , there are many other obvious reasons as well .

 

Fear of :-

 

Ruining a very expensive model

 

Being unable to buy another if they did either due to non availability or they don't have any money to buy another

 

They simply don't want to, and are quite happy to run the item as it is .

 

Losing said money if converted and no one would buy it in the future (if there are plenty available ).

Edited January 20, 2019 by micklner

[grahame]

 

. . . . are quite happy to run the item as it is .

 

 

Hmmm, then why are there so many 'wish list' threads and moans about manufacturers not making the particular loco (number, name, livery, etc) that is wanted? 

 

G.

[Headstock]

No clerestories in these shots on the ECML from the early '50s I'm afraid, but what a remarkable selection.......................

 

old carriages 01.jpg

 

An empty stock train, north of Thirsk in 1953. The newest and oldest carriages in this train would appear to be coupled together.

 

old carriages 02.jpg

 

An express heading north at Wood Green in 1952. Several of these cars would still appear to be in teak/brown.

 

Anyone like to identify what's what in both shots?

 

The leading bogie van in photo number one is an LMS diag 1714 full brake. Clive is correct in his thoughts about them being conversions from L&YR ambulance staff cars.

 

I'm still not totally convinced about the Thompsons.

[Jol Wilkinson]

Hmmm, then why are there so many 'wish list' threads and moans about manufacturers not making the particular loco (number, name, livery, etc) that is wanted? 

 

G.

Because some people are never satisfied. It's too dear, wrong version, wrong colour, wrong number, etc. etc.

[mullie]

I 'ruined' nearly all the locos I was given as a boy by repainting and renumbering them, I made loads of mistakes but that is how I learnt. Forty years on I'm still making mistakes but who cares, this is my hobby and I get enormous pleasure from it.

 

After a period working on the scenics, my small EM test piece is operational again, despite the freezing temperature in the garage I had enormous pleasure shunting a few wagons this afternoon. Everything on the layout has been built or adapted by me.

 

Martyn

Edited January 20, 2019 by mullie

[cctransuk]

They simply don't want to, and are quite happy to run the item as it is .

 

 

If you read back a little, you will see that Tony's comment was with reference to purchasers of models who commission others to change the markings, or who complain that their chosen loco is not available direct from the manufacturer.

 

Therefore, by definition, they NOT "quite happy to run the item as it is" .

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Tom F]

An example (I think) of using RTR as a good starting point.

 

Another 16T finished for Cwm Prysor and Bala. It's been repainted (I'm not a fan of Bachmann grey) before several hours of weathering.

I'm going to need many more....

Edited January 20, 2019 by 9793

[john new]

Sandra,

 

There is always the fear of spoiling a model by attempting to alter it, but no modelling exercise comes without 'risk'. I remember being soundly scolded by my mother for 'ruining' the Tri-ang loco I'd been given for Christmas many decades ago. By the 27th of December it had been renumbered to one of the BR 2-6-2Ts I'd seen (82004 didn't seem to appear at Chester) by altering numbers from a Kitmaster transfer sheet and hand-painting. Not only that, I'd started carving off handrails resulting in some bleeding taking place. It's stout box had also been employed in a foundation for some scenic work. What an ungrateful, reckless child I was!

 

I do accept that there is a big difference in spoiling what's basically a scale model at source and some dumb kid messing up a toy - not least the huge difference in price (inflation taken into account), but some in the hobby seem to put up huge barriers to prevent them from actually doing any modelling for themselves.

 

I also find it rather daft when RTR models which have been substantially improved, fail to reach the same price as 'collectible' equivalents where they're just as supplied. Many moons ago, I two-railed (by re-wheeling ) a Hornby-Dublo CITY OF LIVERPOOL for a mate. Not only that, I fitted scale 'plates to it (from Kings Cross, where they had to be cut out) and finally weathered it. He was miffed that it was no longer worth anything like a 'mint' example when he came to resell it, despite its having nearer-scale wheels and looking much more 'natural'.

 

Last week some friends came to run the railway. Though they're 'mature', life has rather got in the way of their modelling down the years. Two would like to have a go at building locos (for the first time). All agreed that investing in something that could well cost in excess of twice the price of an RTR equivalent was a risk, because there would be no guarantee that it would 'work'. My offer to assist them will be taken up (and also to assist in building wagons) because there is a desire to make things for themselves. I pointed out that the real 'value' in any model might well not be the end result, but from the lessons leaned on the way. If ever a Tri-ang 2-6-2T turns up, painted blobby lined green, with a different number, wobbly (but wire) handrails and long-dried blood somewhere on it, you'll know its origins. I also dread anyone coming up to me at a show, shoving an ancient loco under my nose and saying 'I believe you built this!'

 

I've been informed that I can lack sensitivity towards some folk's feelings by what I say, and that their being irate can be understood (hence some recent comments). I don't really take exception to being told that I really should paint all my own models and that having trackwork built for me is little different from running RTR (though I will present my reasons for such things). No, I just get on doing my own thing, offering practical advice on model-making where I can and always encouraging folk to have a go for themselves. I'm told I seem to 'know a lot' about railway modelling (which, I hope, doesn't make me a know-all). My response is to say 'knowing' implies learning, and most lessons learned are the result of mistakes. And I've made thousands and thousands of those! How can anyone learn when they won't even try?

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

 

Having been prodded by this thread into pulling out of the box my first (and so far only) attempt at a brass chassis that got put away a few years ago because it never ran I have at least got it running today. Poor pick up design and noisy. However, I will persevere.

 

Reason for my post (and I got torn to bits for saying this on the old forum) is that the improved RTR stuff is to the detriment of mid-range have a go modelling. As an example we've lost all the half-way house Wills body kits to go onto r-t-r chassis, that got people moving beyond first base, taught painting etc. I regularly draw a parallel with soccer, as I see it the loss of things like the old-style Wills kits, combined with improved r-t-p scenics and r-t-r stock, has wiped out much of the middle ground. It's rather like as if in soccer Sunday league is still popular for low-skill players but all the divisions beyond say County leagues and the lowest EFL (Div 2 as now called/Div 4 as was) have gone so better than average but not brilliantly skilled players would have no progression as not good enough for the top four leagues. Top skilled modellers, and Tony is one, still exist but the steadily opening void between them and beginners is lower down. The progression from beginner to expert has become more difficult as, from my perspective, the kits etc., which twenty years ago existed, targetted at the improving beginner/mid-skilled modeller have gone. The clamour for better accuracy killed them off.

 

Back to my poorly running kit, a motorised Dapol rail-bus, I will persevere with it because I have it but if looking at the scenario today why would a current modeller buy the kit? Reason I say that is because better than I will ever get this one painted , even if I get it to run properly, have been done r-t-r. Same with Drewery shunters , I want two more which will probably never be issued r-t-r in the Derwent Valley Rly liveries I want. Kit or r-t-r options both available. The r-t-r/repainted option is quicker and guaranteed to run, even if taking the kit build route will be more satisfying.

Edited January 20, 2019 by john new

[Headstock]

Sandra,

 

There is always the fear of spoiling a model by attempting to alter it, but no modelling exercise comes without 'risk'. I remember being soundly scolded by my mother for 'ruining' the Tri-ang loco I'd been given for Christmas many decades ago. By the 27th of December it had been renumbered to one of the BR 2-6-2Ts I'd seen (82004 didn't seem to appear at Chester) by altering numbers from a Kitmaster transfer sheet and hand-painting. Not only that, I'd started carving off handrails resulting in some bleeding taking place. It's stout box had also been employed in a foundation for some scenic work. What an ungrateful, reckless child I was! 

 

I do accept that there is a big difference in spoiling what's basically a scale model at source and some dumb kid messing up a toy - not least the huge difference in price (inflation taken into account), but some in the hobby seem to put up huge barriers to prevent them from actually doing any modelling for themselves. 

 

I also find it rather daft when RTR models which have been substantially improved, fail to reach the same price as 'collectible' equivalents where they're just as supplied. Many moons ago, I two-railed (by re-wheeling ) a Hornby-Dublo CITY OF LIVERPOOL for a mate. Not only that, I fitted scale 'plates to it (from Kings Cross, where they had to be cut out) and finally weathered it. He was miffed that it was no longer worth anything like a 'mint' example when he came to resell it, despite its having nearer-scale wheels and looking much more 'natural'. 

 

Last week some friends came to run the railway. Though they're 'mature', life has rather got in the way of their modelling down the years. Two would like to have a go at building locos (for the first time). All agreed that investing in something that could well cost in excess of twice the price of an RTR equivalent was a risk, because there would be no guarantee that it would 'work'. My offer to assist them will be taken up (and also to assist in building wagons) because there is a desire to make things for themselves. I pointed out that the real 'value' in any model might well not be the end result, but from the lessons leaned on the way. If ever a Tri-ang 2-6-2T turns up, painted blobby lined green, with a different number, wobbly (but wire) handrails and long-dried blood somewhere on it, you'll know its origins. I also dread anyone coming up to me at a show, shoving an ancient loco under my nose and saying 'I believe you built this!'

 

I've been informed that I can lack sensitivity towards some folk's feelings by what I say, and that their being irate can be understood (hence some recent comments). I don't really take exception to being told that I really should paint all my own models and that having trackwork built for me is little different from running RTR (though I will present my reasons for such things). No, I just get on doing my own thing, offering practical advice on model-making where I can and always encouraging folk to have a go for themselves. I'm told I seem to 'know a lot' about railway modelling (which, I hope, doesn't make me a know-all). My response is to say 'knowing' implies learning, and most lessons learned are the result of mistakes. And I've made thousands and thousands of those! How can anyone learn when they won't even try? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

I keep coming back to the recent BRM questionnaire, the one that revealed a whopping 80% of people describing themselves as railway modellers do not have a layout. Based on that one figure alone, I would not be surprise at all if a slim majority of people in the Hobby are in fact collectors. Whether they would self identified as such is another question, I'm not suggesting that all 80% could be so described, however, there is a lot of stuff being bought out there with apparently little or no opportunity to run it.

[AndyID]

I remember being soundly scolded by my mother for 'ruining' the Tri-ang loco I'd been given for Christmas many decades ago. By the 27th of December it had been renumbered to one of the BR 2-6-2Ts I'd seen (82004 didn't seem to appear at Chester) by altering numbers from a Kitmaster transfer sheet and hand-painting. Not only that, I'd started carving off handrails resulting in some bleeding taking place.

 

I butchered my 2-6-2's chassis and stuck it under a Kitmaster 2-6-0 body. Mother had no idea what I was up to. She never came down to the cellar.

[Lecorbusier]

Reason for my post (and I got torn to bits for saying this on the old forum) is that the improved RTR stuff is to the detriment of mid-range have a go modelling. As an example we've lost all the half-way house Wills body kits to go onto r-t-r chassis, that got people moving beyond first base, taught painting etc. I regularly draw a parallel with soccer, as I see it the loss of things like the old-style Wills kits, combined with improved r-t-p scenics and r-t-r stock, has wiped out much of the middle ground. It's rather like as if in soccer Sunday league is still popular for low-skill players but all the divisions beyond say County leagues and the lowest EFL (Div 2 as now called/Div 4 as was) have gone so better than average but not brilliantly skilled players would have no progression as not good enough for the top four leagues. Top skilled modellers, and Tony is one, still exist but the steadily opening void between them and beginners is lower down. The progression from beginner to expert has become more difficult as, from my perspective, the kits etc., which twenty years ago existed, targetted at the improving beginner/mid-skilled modeller have gone. The clamour for better accuracy killed them off.

 

As a recent kit builder with limited experience I think basic 0-6-0 tender and tank engines with inside motion still offer this. My entry was an old DJH Barney kit ... re-made 3 times. DJH and South Eastern still produce such kits. Simple rigid chassis construction as demonstrated on Tony's Right Track videos demystifies the process of this element. Given that these two manufacturers produce very accurate and well thought out kits .. you could argue that they are simpler than earlier offerings to build. Just a personal observation ... but then I have no idea where I would stand in the league football analogy.

 

What I do think is a great help is to have a friendly mentor or failing that (my situation) a friendly virtual mentor via a DVD/Video/Youtube.

[john new]

As a recent kit builder with limited experience I think basic 0-6-0 tender and tank engines with inside motion still offer this. My entry was an old DJH Barney kit ... re-made 3 times. DJH and South Eastern still produce such kits. Simple rigid chassis construction as demonstrated on Tony's Right Track videos demystifies the process of this element. Given that these two manufacturers produce very accurate and well thought out kits .. you could argue that they are simpler than earlier offerings to build. Just a personal observation ... but then I have no idea where I would stand in the league football analogy.

 

What I do think is a great help is to have a friendly mentor or failing that (my situation) a friendly virtual mentor via a DVD/Video/Youtube.

Having had a few years out after getting burnt out building https://www.island-publishing.co.uk/son%20of%20card_challenge_07.htm against an exhibition deadline (and not getting it satisfactorily finshed) may well have another go at brass. I did get the scratch built traverser done for Pebbles End with everything parallel so I've more confidence now than when I did the railbus. The just started shunting plank will need some bespoke items not available r-t-r long-term and I've got my mojo back currently. Will look at those S Eastern kits. Edited January 20, 2019 by john new

[Tony Wright]

I butchered my 2-6-2's chassis and stuck it under a Kitmaster 2-6-0 body. Mother had no idea what I was up to. She never came down to the cellar.

I did the same with another Tri-ang 2-6-2T and Kitmaster 2-6-0, Andy. 

 

The hardest part was hack-sawing off the big plate at the rear of the Tri-ang chassis. That and then drilling holes in it for fixing the 2-6-0's cab to it. My brother might still have it (after over 55 years). I'll ask him. 

 

That got covered in blood as well! 

 

Other dreadful conversions consisted of making a Jubilee from a Tri-ang Princess and motorising some Kitmaster 2-6-2Ts using RTR mechanisms. It's a good job I heal up quickly!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Andy Hayter]

Sandra,

 

There is always the fear of spoiling a model by attempting to alter it, but no modelling exercise comes without 'risk'. I remember being soundly scolded by my mother for 'ruining' the Tri-ang loco I'd been given for Christmas many decades ago. By the 27th of December it had been renumbered to one of the BR 2-6-2Ts I'd seen (82004 didn't seem to appear at Chester) by altering numbers from a Kitmaster transfer sheet and hand-painting. Not only that, I'd started carving off handrails resulting in some bleeding taking place. It's stout box had also been employed in a foundation for some scenic work. What an ungrateful, reckless child I was! 

 

I do accept that there is a big difference in spoiling what's basically a scale model at source and some dumb kid messing up a toy - not least the huge difference in price (inflation taken into account), but some in the hobby seem to put up huge barriers to prevent them from actually doing any modelling for themselves. 

 

I also find it rather daft when RTR models which have been substantially improved, fail to reach the same price as 'collectible' equivalents where they're just as supplied. Many moons ago, I two-railed (by re-wheeling ) a Hornby-Dublo CITY OF LIVERPOOL for a mate. Not only that, I fitted scale 'plates to it (from Kings Cross, where they had to be cut out) and finally weathered it. He was miffed that it was no longer worth anything like a 'mint' example when he came to resell it, despite its having nearer-scale wheels and looking much more 'natural'. 

 

Last week some friends came to run the railway. Though they're 'mature', life has rather got in the way of their modelling down the years. Two would like to have a go at building locos (for the first time). All agreed that investing in something that could well cost in excess of twice the price of an RTR equivalent was a risk, because there would be no guarantee that it would 'work'. My offer to assist them will be taken up (and also to assist in building wagons) because there is a desire to make things for themselves. I pointed out that the real 'value' in any model might well not be the end result, but from the lessons leaned on the way. If ever a Tri-ang 2-6-2T turns up, painted blobby lined green, with a different number, wobbly (but wire) handrails and long-dried blood somewhere on it, you'll know its origins. I also dread anyone coming up to me at a show, shoving an ancient loco under my nose and saying 'I believe you built this!'

 

I've been informed that I can lack sensitivity towards some folk's feelings by what I say, and that their being irate can be understood (hence some recent comments). I don't really take exception to being told that I really should paint all my own models and that having trackwork built for me is little different from running RTR (though I will present my reasons for such things). No, I just get on doing my own thing, offering practical advice on model-making where I can and always encouraging folk to have a go for themselves. I'm told I seem to 'know a lot' about railway modelling (which, I hope, doesn't make me a know-all). My response is to say 'knowing' implies learning, and most lessons learned are the result of mistakes. And I've made thousands and thousands of those! How can anyone learn when they won't even try? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Sadly Tony what you describe is what I see as  british disease.  I have bought x for so much and it must now be worth more.

 

This is most prevalent with property purchases.. how much did you buy it for?  How much did you spend? What is it worth now? syndrome.

 

This has moved on to our models.  You can almost hear the Antiques Roadshow critique - "What as shame it is no longer in original condition."

 

My models are for my use.  I have no plans to sell, but if I do I accept they will be worth what someone will pay on the day.  In the mean time they will give me pleasure in the time "improving" or "converting" them and in their use on my layouts.  I suspect that when they are sold I will have no interest whatsoever in the value - you cannot take it with you.

 

Here in France, no one has asked how much I paid for my house, how much I spent on improving it nor what it is worth - even if I knew.  Likewise  the only time I have been asked how much a model would cost  was when a 12 year old asked at an exhibition how much it would cost to buy a locomotive.  I explained the number of hours of work and said if it were for sale it would be in excess of €500 - not because I had any expectation of ever selling it at any price, but to explain the value (rather than sales price) of models.  Lesson immediately accepted by the questioner.  

Edited January 20, 2019 by Andy Hayter

[Re6/6]

I keep coming back to the recent BRM questionnaire, the one that revealed a whopping 80% of people describing themselves as railway modellers do not have a layout. Based on that one figure alone, I would not be surprise at all if a slim majority of people in the Hobby are in fact collectors. Whether they would self identified as such is another question, I'm not suggesting that all 80% could be so described, however, there is a lot of stuff being bought out there with apparently little or no opportunity to run it.

Some years ago I was talking to a well known model magazine editor about how nice it would be if manufacturers were to allow a very small additional space between the frames for re-wheeling by those of us of the 'wider persuasion'. It was pointed out that 'we' were a very small section (maybe 5%) of the hobby and actually around 70% of all new locos were never taken out of their boxes so why would they bother to make any allowance at the design stage!

 

As an aside, I'm eternally grateful to Kernow for actually making allowance on the new Bulleid diesel. So good was it, I converted it to P4 in about half an hour! The only issue was the pony trucks which had the annoying habit of popping off the track on even shallow curves. The wheels were clipped into a lightweight plastic carrier so I scratchbuilt two new heavier ones out of brass and fitted EM wheels with the flange width turned down on the rear, set to gauge and hey presto...perfect!

Edited January 20, 2019 by Re6/6

[Tony Wright]

If you read back a little, you will see that Tony's comment was with reference to purchasers of models who commission others to change the markings, or who complain that their chosen loco is not available direct from the manufacturer.

 

Therefore, by definition, they NOT "quite happy to run the item as it is" .

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

I think you're right, John,

 

With regard to some who are 'unhappy' with what they can get by just opening a box, presumably they're in a minority? Either that, or they're happy but would like something different as well.

 

Judging by what Headstock (Andrew) tells us, might it be that by far the largest numbers in the hobby are just happy enough to buy this or that loco/stock RTR or building RTP? If many don't have layouts, then their purchases either remain in their boxes or are on static display. 

 

In my days as photographer at Warners, I used to photograph many 'collections', and not just railways but die-cast as well. Altering/improving/detailing/weathering a model was anathema to many - indeed, opening a box (and breaking its seal) would make the model's value plummet - have you ever tried taking pictures of models through reflective plastic? 

 

If 'collectors' keep the RTR/RTP hobby going, then we must be thankful, because it enables all to have access to some very good models. It would be a sad day, though, if it became universal not to improve/alter/detail/re-number/re-name a loco because it would devalue it. In collectible terms, perhaps yes, but in personal model-making terms its value would be 'priceless' to me. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Lecorbusier]

Sadly Tony what you describe is what I see as  british disease.  I have bought x for so much and it must now be worth more.

 

This is most prevalent with property purchases.. how much did you buy it for?  How much did you spend? What is it worth now? syndrome.

 

This has moved on to our models.  You can almost hear the Antiques Roadshow critique - "What as shame it is no longer in original condition."

Its odd isn't it .... because we will happily buy a car and write off exorbitant sums of money!

[Lecorbusier]

Having had a few years out after getting burnt out building https://www.island-publishing.co.uk/son%20of%20card_challenge_07.htm against an exhibition deadline (and not getting it satisfactorily finshed) may well have another go at brass. I did get the scratch built traverser done for Pebbles End with everything parallel so I've more confidence now than when I did the railbus. The just started shunting plank will need some bespoke items not available r-t-r long-term and I've got my mojo back currently. Will look at those S Eastern kits.

Just in case you are not familiar with Tony's videos I will link here again ... apologies if this is all familiar to you - I still re-watch them.

 

[Clive Mortimore]

Because some people are never satisfied. It's too dear, wrong version, wrong colour, wrong number, etc. etc.

Hi Jol

 

I am not buying the new Deltic no matter how whizzo it is, because they are not doing the one I want in the livery I want. Mind you I don't really need another Deltic for a layout that a Deltic is not on the duty roster. I still have two Bachmann's to renumber, a GB Locomotives one to re-number and three stretched Limas to finish off, so not buying one is not a great loss to me. Had St Paddy been on the list as one in two tone green with a Finsbury Park yellow panel, then the dosh would be in their hands.

Edited January 20, 2019 by Clive Mortimore

[newbryford]

As with others, I am lucky in that I had plenty to practise with as a kid/novice modeller.

It also helped that Airfix Series 1 kits were readily available at my local newsagent!

 

As for modifying and reselling, my best result may have been an Airfix Mk2 bought for £7.50. Detailed and repainted and later sold for £75.........

 

I sold it, as the prototype that it was based upon had had a refurb and I wanted the newer version. So another coach was taken from my cheaply acquired stockpile.......

 

I'm currently in the process of attacking weathering a rake of 14 tank wagons that set me back a few quid. (Revolution TEAs that to present date has been my single most expensive wagon purchase)). Most of them are in the EWS livery which cost a pound more than others because of licence fee issues and I'm even removing the EWS branding on at least 3 of them - as per current day operations.

 

This is the real thing. Photo courtesy of Jack Taylor.

 

 

Even now, with gentle handling, at least 3 have suffered detail bits falling off so I do have some respect for those that don't want to touch today's high fidelity products.

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

 

[Chamby]

I have come to the conclusion that the inherent value of my rolling stock is rather less than I paid for it, whether I fiddle about with it or not. Trading stuff in would typically give you between 25-35% of its retail price, even relatively new stuff. If you regard your RTR stuff as only having its second hand value, the psychological barrier to modifying it is so much easier to overcome.

 

When I buy RTR stuff, with the odd, very rare exception, I would be a muppet if I ever saw it as a financial investment. It is an investment in my model railway hobby, the value of which I regard as being personal rather than monetary.

 

So, if I want to modify RTR products to improve the character of my personal model railway, it is an easy choice. If it means that its resale value diminishes by 10 or even 20%, it is no big deal. I’ll probably be dead when most of it comes to be sold on, anyway!

 

Phil.

[newbryford]

I think there's another reason for some folks not wanting to do modelling and cock it up and it's a steadily rising "disease" IMO.

 

Fear of failure.

 

Cheers,

Mick