Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Wright writes.....


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
30 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening John,

 

I wouldn't generally recommend the finish on Hornby locomotives or other rolling stock.

Perhaps, but apart from assorted dodgy shades of green it's better than 90% of what I've ever done and 75% of the kit-builds I've encountered. Particularly in the lining department.

 

John

 

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Perhaps, but apart from assorted dodgy shades of green it's better than 90% of what I've ever done and 75% of the kit-builds I've encountered. Particularly in the lining department.

 

John

 

 

I think that this repaint by Tim Easter, using commercially available transfers puts the Hornby finish to shame. Shame on you Hornby. I assume Tim isn't one of those name people, the use of transfers would indicate this is not a pro job, at least by some definitions I have heard recounted on this thread.

 

I seem to be unable to link to the thread, my lack of RM web knowledge, the image just copies in. The thread relates to the Hornby Thompson Pacific and is probably in the Hornby section.

 

Edited by Headstock
Worked out how to link.
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Norton961 said:

Regarding “poles” to identify future projects it’s fraught with dangers, people might say they want a particular model, but when it appears, it does not sell. I remember Martin Finney doing some polling to discover what ex GWR model to do next and the 2-4-0 Barnum came top by a long way. After it was produced it was the worst seller in the range! 
The strange thing is that odd balls seem to sell, one of SEF best sellers is the ex GER Decopod and models of other odd balls such as GT3 are in the offing.

 

David

I wish Martin had produced a Barnum. He was considering it at the time of his retirement and Brassmasters are also considering doing a kit. At present, the only kit for a Barnum is via the secondhand market and a Mallard/blacksmith kit which though groundbreaking in its day was a real devil to build and in some ways would possibly be considered rather basic in comparison with etched kits that came along later.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

In my relatively short experience as a kit designer I quickly came to the conclusion that it's impossible to predict what will sell. Polls and expressions of interest give no reliable clues either, some of our worst selling kits are ones which have been repeatedly asked for. The worst example was the HO version of our LMS Jackshaft kit, specifically requested by Italian modellers, sales to Italy so far - 1. Admittedly this doesn't always happen, the Spanish HO version of our Taurus kit is one of our best sellers.

The best selling kit in our range (4mm and 7mm) is still one that conventional wisdom says won't sell at all - the North Eastern ES1 Bo-Bo electric.

  • Like 5
  • Informative/Useful 7
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 5
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Norton961 said:

Regarding “poles” to identify future projects it’s fraught with dangers, people might say they want a particular model, but when it appears, it does not sell. I remember Martin Finney doing some polling to discover what ex GWR model to do next and the 2-4-0 Barnum came top by a long way. After it was produced it was the worst seller in the range! 
The strange thing is that odd balls seem to sell, one of SEF best sellers is the ex GER Decopod and models of other odd balls such as GT3 are in the offing.

 

David

The "oddballs" by their very nature, received (and continue to receive, justifiably or not) rather more attention than would ever be attracted by a small class of twenty locomotives built for minor work, as obsolete as the engines they were built to replace, just newer, and extinct before WW2.

 

I'd venture that they never even visited quite a few of the areas portrayed in layouts constructed by GWR modellers. I doubt I'd even know they existed but for a series of articles "Building a Barnum" published in the Railway Modeller soon after I started reading it in the mid-1960s....

 

John

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, dibateg said:

Apologies if I have posted this before, I honestly can't remember. I'm a lot more suspicious these days when building locos and never assume that anything is right, so refer to photos in preference to drawings. Had I still got my 4mm B1s, I would have had to do something about that motion bracket... Anyway I think I got this DJH/Piercy B1 right. Don't say anything now as it is away being painted by Paul Moore!

P1050870.JPG.cc19d3b1df04297aecf232ed2046c3b9.JPG

 

Regards

Tony)

Lovely Tony. Which one is it going to be? (61209, 61281 or maybe 61264 possibly?)

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

  • RMweb Premium
8 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

That does rather emphasis the point of people not being willing or able to actually do some modelling.

Taking two of the top three the J39 is provided by Bachmann with an easy chassis swap with a Bachmann J11 and the Buckjumper can be produced in several varieties by using a 3D printed body on a readily available Hornby chassis. 

If that is beyond the skill of the average modeler than what hope is there?

Bernard

Hello Berhard, I think that perhaps there's a perceived difference in the knowledge and skills required to build a kit, compared to swapping bodies and chassis. With a kit, you have instructions, someone to guide you, you know you're following a sequence that will produce the desired result (well, in theory, anyway!), plus others who may have built it that you can ask: with body-swapping and similar things, you're on your own! Maybe some people find that kind of thing more intimidating.

I've done one loco body-swap and I made it work, but it took quite a lot of work. I think, overall, it probably took as much work as a small kit:rolleyes:.

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

  • RMweb Premium

I'm probably not one who should throw stones about kit building seeing I still produce bodges.... But I think one of the problems that I come across in the secondhand kits that I have acquired over time is the lack of prep-work before assembling the bits. 

If you don't put the leg work in before you start building, the end result you get tends to be a disappointment. I often find parts that haven't had the flash removed from the joining surfaces, or the etching tabs filed off. Poorly cast bits often require filling during sub-assembly stages, but often don't get it at all!

I still struggle with the chassis part of the builds, I'm not quite sure why, and as a consequence find building locos un-rewarding, but having said that, now I can solder w/metal kits together I get a bit more joy from them, but its always the chassis part that kills the build for me. Being left to work out for yourself why it doesn't run very well is should destroying, and often leads to the kit going back in the box for it think about its bad behaviour for several years!

Thankfully a recent visit to Sir didn't end up with me being totally embarrassed...

 

Andy G

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, MJI said:

As usual the Swindon cross country

 DMU polled highly and was ignored.

AGAIN

 

Will there ever be an RTR model of one?

 

DMUs are an odd one; Lima produced a Class 117 which only really operated on the Paddington Suburban network, instead of the Class 116 that operated in the South Wales valleys, Birmingham and Glasgow.  Now there's another Class 117 from Bachmann....

 

As for polls, surely they are only indicative of the wishes of the people who shout the loudest?  As @Michael Edgesaid above, what people say they'll buy and what they actually buy, are often two very different things.  No doubt those who demand such-and-such a model have a long list of excuses why, once it's available, they no longer want one; it's 0.5mm too short, it's not the exact number they want, it needs to be half the price, etc., etc.

 

Rob

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies chaps, the Martin Finney kit that was top of his poll and then sold badly was not a Barnum but a Stella. 
As a founder of Brassmasters we always struggled to determine what the next model should be and how it would sell, it never worked out as we thought! But as we only produced models that we wanted and were interested in in made the selection easier.

 

David

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
44 minutes ago, Chas Levin said:

Hello Berhard, I think that perhaps there's a perceived difference in the knowledge and skills required to build a kit, compared to swapping bodies and chassis. With a kit, you have instructions, someone to guide you, you know you're following a sequence that will produce the desired result (well, in theory, anyway!), plus others who may have built it that you can ask: with body-swapping and similar things, you're on your own! Maybe some people find that kind of thing more intimidating.

I've done one loco body-swap and I made it work, but it took quite a lot of work. I think, overall, it probably took as much work as a small kit:rolleyes:.

 

There is also the cost issue for many.  I remember my first body swap at a time before the internet and companies selling spares, so the swap involved purchasing two complete and new locomotives in order to get one locomotive at twice the cost of a standard item.

 

I don't regret it even now nearly 40 years later.  I still have a loco that has not yet 

been produced by the rtr market or indeed the kit market.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Norton961 said:

Apologies chaps, the Martin Finney kit that was top of his poll and then sold badly was not a Barnum but a Stella. 
As a founder of Brassmasters we always struggled to determine what the next model should be and how it would sell, it never worked out as we thought! But as we only produced models that we wanted and were interested in in made the selection easier.

 

David

Maybe it is you I've spoken to in the past regarding the Barnum. I hope you do produce a kit (as well as the 388 Armstrong), though understand the reasonings if you decided not to proceed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

There is also the cost issue for many.  I remember my first body swap at a time before the internet and companies selling spares, so the swap involved purchasing two complete and new locomotives in order to get one locomotive at twice the cost of a standard item.

 

I don't regret it even now nearly 40 years later.  I still have a loco that has not yet 

been produced by the rtr market or indeed the kit market.

Hello Andy, there's also the satisfaction of saving an old friend: the body-swap I did (purists please look away now) was because I was so fond of my old Hornby A4 Seagull, but I couldn't bear it's continual poor running even after a lot of work on the drive (not always the case: I do have one Hornby tender drive A4 that actually runs beautfully!), so I put the Seagull body onto a Hornby loco drive Falcon, with an empty tender of course. The ways in which the two bodies are fixed to the two chassis are very different and it called for some interesting solutions: it became one of those 'let's just see if I can' projects, but like you, I get great satisfaction see it running, in spite of the very dated look of the body!

What loco did you produce with your swap?

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Chas Levin said:

Hello Andy, 

..............

What loco did you produce with your swap?

Not really of interest to the majority of posters on this bit of the forum but it was a Paris Lyon Mediterranean (PLM)  141C (2-8-2) produced from  jouef Pacific (donor body) and a 141 R - with spoked wheels (donor chassis).    REE have recently started to produce these as rtr but not as the original PLM version.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My first loco kit was a perseverance chassis for the Mainline J72. I used the perseverance jigs and it works well enough with a portescap motor. Only other tools were files and a soldering iron which I already had for building other kits.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, Northmoor said:

DMUs are an odd one; Lima produced a Class 117 which only really operated on the Paddington Suburban network, instead of the Class 116 that operated in the South Wales valleys, Birmingham and Glasgow.  Now there's another Class 117 from Bachmann....

 

As for polls, surely they are only indicative of the wishes of the people who shout the loudest?  As @Michael Edgesaid above, what people say they'll buy and what they actually buy, are often two very different things.  No doubt those who demand such-and-such a model have a long list of excuses why, once it's available, they no longer want one; it's 0.5mm too short, it's not the exact number they want, it needs to be half the price, etc., etc.

 

Rob

 

 

And the Bachmann 101 is slightly wrong and also not suitable for many people as two car, so stocking with older models, I could do with some Lima 101 to produce a couple more 3 cars.

 

Anyway I will be doing some 120ing tomorrow

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

G'Day Folks

 

Body swops and hacks, right up my street, my latest involves a Dublo/Wrenn R1 chassis, Hornby wheels and a GBL Director, hacked and bashed........ A LNER B8 4-6-0 (a work in progress) Don't know what'll pull yet, haven't got it running yet.

 

Terry (AKA manna)

DSCF5799.jpg

DSCF5801.jpg

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Good evening :)
 

One thought I have on newcomers to the hobby versus, shall we say, seasoned veterans. Over the decades the detail and quality of kits has improved drastically - in the 1970s or even earlier, kits weren't particularly detailed and frequently used a RTR chassis. I won't say it was EASIER to build kits then, but I think it fair to say they were less complex and it was acceptable to be of lower detail that would pass muster today (a common phrase for older kits is they were good for their time).

 

So someone who has been building kits for many years has not only built up that experience, but likely started with relatively less detailed kits and as advances were made, found it fairly straightforward to up their game with their builds as they already had the basics mastered.

 

A newcomer doesn't have that luxury and unless they build a few older kits and accept the lower detail and accuracy for practice then they have to hit the ground running as it were.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 6
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chamby said:

We must not lose sight of the fact that there is a big hurdle to overcome to enter the world of kit building locomotives, that presents an enormous deterrent for newcomers.

 

Anyone embarking on their first kit build is faced with a very different proposition from an experienced builder.  The newcomer doesn’t have any of the tools required, doesn’t know any of the techniques necessary, and is faced with purchasing a kit that needs a gearbox and wheels to complete from different suppliers that may be hard to source from an unfamiliar  marketplace.  The kit will, likely, have inherent pitfalls for the uninitiated, requiring modifications using new and unfamiliar skills and techniques, and materials that they haven’t ever used before.  

 

This first model will cost not only the kit, but a load of expensive new tools, jigs and materials, it’s construction is a huge learning curve of unfamiliar techniques and skills.  So it will have cost the newcomer rather more than an experienced builder in money, time and effort - and be of considerably poorer quality than most of the contributors on this thread can achieve.  It will likely be a bit of a ‘dog’, something that would require rather a lot of ‘fettling’ should it one day find its way to Tony’s workbench!

 

Of course, the newcomer’s second build will hopefully be of better quality (and require less financial outlay), and the third even more so, etc. until proficiency is reached.

 

The point I am trying to make is that at the outset, it appears to be a very long and expensive journey for the newcomer to locomotive kit building, before they will reach a point where they can consistently achieve good results.  Discouragingly long, for most.

 

Add to this the fact that metalworking is no longer provided by our national curriculum, and that the end result will need a layout with minimum 3 foot radius curves to run on, it is not only a very daunting proposition, but very few will even be in a position to make full use of the end product.

 

Therefore, those among us who are experienced enough in this field to take a kit and build it competently, will always be very much in the minority simply because the journey to get there is so daunting at the outset, that few will actually embark on it!  

 

 

 

Good gravy Chamby,

 

Is that the broad church or we?

 

Having read through your litany of fear, I am left wondering how you ever managed to construct your own layout, without worrying yourself to death over the cost of tools, jigs and materials. I'm impressed that you manage to keep your mental health intact, coping with unfamiliar techniques and skills and god help us, the horror of different suppliers in an unfamiliar market place!

 

Get a grip dear Chamby, I think you may be a little too focused on some imaginary sweet spot over the finish line, seemingly oblivious that the journey is full of joy and wonder not fear. If cost is an issue, remember that when you compare it to the instant fix of buying objects, they quickly require another fix and another. The cost is not as great as you surmise, as you are paying for a long and bountiful journey not just the destination.
 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

laying track on the floor to test a new locomotive seems to me to be the way of the nursery

Just to play devil's advocate for a moment, if someone gets a brand-new train set or loco and doesn't already have a layout, then the floor is the obvious place to try it out. And, as the saying goes, if it'll run there, it'll run anywhere.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 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...