Kitmaster -is this possible, or just a daft idea?

[sncf231e]

13 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

Hi Fred, does the Revell 02163 model have the fine wheel profiles and detail as in your photos?  It seems to be a far better model than the Kitmaster version.

 

edit; also do the Revell Monogram and Con-cor snap-together models have working motion, as Kitmaster does?

 

Apologies if I have missed these details before.

Hello Rob,

 

The detail shown is original from the kit; I painted the golden version but the silver version is all original. It is quite some time that I made these so I don remember whether the motion was working (it is not now) if you build carefully, but I doubt. I do not have the Kitmaster version, so I cannot compare whether they used (partly) the same moulds.

Monogram/Revelll also made this BigBoy and the German Baureihe 41, which also have fixed motion the way I build these:

 

 

Regards

Fred
 

Edit: I found this text about Concor: Among the unique Chessie System HO-scale static steam locomotive models are the ones marketed by Monogram and later Con-Cor. Replicated in 1/87th size, this series provided static plastic HO steam locomotives. Under research currently for a feature in a future edition of HO Collector, the series of static steam releases included a 4-6-4 Hudson carrying road number 312 and sold as a Chessie System release. The kit provided all-plastic components molded in color, as well as decals. The kit returned from Monogram in its “Metal Master” collection with chrome plating and decals for the Chessie System on its tender. From Monogram, you’ll find these kits branded as “Snap Tite” releases. Con-Cor’s offerings branded them “Desktop Collectors Series.” In addition to Con-Cor and Monogram, Revell marketed these HO steam kits for a time too, and their origin, at least for the New York Central Hudson kit, may date to the early 1960s and Rosebud Kitmaster models imported from Europe by AHM.

Edited February 8, 2019 by sncf231e

[Il Grifone]

The Revell/Monogram kits have fine wheels which revolve (roughly) in the frame. However the motion is a one piece moulding, which results in a static model.

 

AFAIK the range consists of UP 'Big Boy', NYC Hudson (also available as ATSF and 'Chessie')  and German Pacific (Br 01 IIRC) and Mikado (Br41? as above). There is also a German diesel and 'Wagon Lit' coaches. Possibly there are others?

 

AS to 'Snap-Tite', this is strictly correct, but without cement or preferably solvent they fall apart again.

 

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/monogram-1105-hudson-steam-locomotive--179756

 

There are some more here - I missed out on the S3/6  Or are they still available?

 

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&biw=1304&bih=666&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=YpNdXOjxLvGM1fAPq722wAc&q=revell+locomotive+kits&oq=revell+locomotive+kits&gs_l=img.12..0.33530.35613..39388...0.0..0.181.652.4j2......0....1..gws-wiz-img.......0i7i30.fFFfha1v7tg

[sncf231e]

22 minutes ago, Il Grifone said:

'Wagon Lit' coaches. Possibly there are others?

 

AS to 'Snap-Tite', this is strictly correct, but without cement or preferably solvent they fall apart again.

 

The CIWL cars (a restaurant car and a Pullman car) had, also according to the instructions, to be glued together, except for the axle/wheels in the bogies. These two cars do resemble very much the Jouef cars of the same period and according to a "knowledgeable collector" these were based on the same moulds.

The kit

The Jouef car

 

Regards

Fred

[CHAZ D]

 

2 hours ago, sncf231e said:

The CIWL cars (a restaurant car and a Pullman car) had, also according to the instructions, to be glued together, except for the axle/wheels in the bogies. These two cars do resemble very much the Jouef cars of the same period and according to a "knowledgeable collector" these were based on the same moulds.

The kit

The Jouef car

Regards

Fred

 

I have two complete coach kits the one shown and the coach just peeking out on the right of the box picture. They seem to be very detailed and when I am Incapacitated soon after an operation they are two of many projects to do.

Edited February 8, 2019 by CHAZ D

[tomparryharry]

For those amongst you are that way inclined, have a quick perusal of Eeeh-Buy-Gum...

 

Some are cheap, some are not so cheap (well, for me, anyway).....

 

Ian.

[robmcg]

Well, I bought an un-assembled Kitmaster NYC Hudson just today on Ebay at UKP40 and yesterday bought an un-assembled Con-cor NYC Hudson on Ebay for UKP22 approx and should I wish to assemble one or both of them there is every prospect of a nice model.

 

Might be hard to assemble the Kitmaster one unless done very well, since after about 57 years they have become so rare in un-assembled form, but don't seem to have prices as high as say a Kitmaster Beyer Garratt..

 

There is a lot more detail in the Con-cor model, which may or may not be transferable to the Kitmaster model, it will be fun to find out.  

 

A photo I found on the web of the Kitmaster NYC Hudson.

 

 

A matter of taste about the white paint.

 

Here it is with that paint removed and details tidied-up, quite a nice model. Pic edited.

 

 

Here below is the Con-cor NY snap together model, pic derived from the one on the side of the box.

 

 

So plenty of quite inexpensive fun in store.

 

A couple of Broadway Limited NYC Hudsons, lovely models, sold for about UKP150-160 a few day ago and some sellers ask UKP300 or more.

 

Above all, it so reminds me of the enjoyment of models in 1962-6.

 

Any advice or information about the Kitmaster, Revell, Monogram, Con-Cor and Snap-Tite models of the NYC Hudson would be greatly appreciated.

 

Cheers

 

 

[robmcg]

8 hours ago, sncf231e said:

Hello Rob,

 

The detail shown is original from the kit; I painted the golden version but the silver version is all original. It is quite some time that I made these so I don remember whether the motion was working (it is not now) if you build carefully, but I doubt. I do not have the Kitmaster version, so I cannot compare whether they used (partly) the same moulds.

Monogram/Revelll also made this BigBoy and the German Baureihe 41, which also have fixed motion the way I build these:

 

 

Regards

Fred
 

Edit: I found this text about Concor: Among the unique Chessie System HO-scale static steam locomotive models are the ones marketed by Monogram and later Con-Cor. Replicated in 1/87th size, this series provided static plastic HO steam locomotives. Under research currently for a feature in a future edition of HO Collector, the series of static steam releases included a 4-6-4 Hudson carrying road number 312 and sold as a Chessie System release. The kit provided all-plastic components molded in color, as well as decals. The kit returned from Monogram in its “Metal Master” collection with chrome plating and decals for the Chessie System on its tender. From Monogram, you’ll find these kits branded as “Snap Tite” releases. Con-Cor’s offerings branded them “Desktop Collectors Series.” In addition to Con-Cor and Monogram, Revell marketed these HO steam kits for a time too, and their origin, at least for the New York Central Hudson kit, may date to the early 1960s and Rosebud Kitmaster models imported from Europe by AHM.

 

Thank you so much for that, it will be interesting to see if the working Kitmaster rods and motion can be adapted to the Con-cor Hudson, I very much doubt it, but if I was young and silly like I once was I'd probably have a go!

[robmcg]

Thank you Fred and also Il Grifone for your replies and insights, much appreciated.  It will take a couple of weeks for my Con-cor and Kitaster models to reach me in NZ.

 

What ever happened to instant gratification, eh?  I recall walking and running home from a model shop with a new Kitmaser model in my hands and within hour construction was well-advanced, having purloined a wooden coffee table in the front room to cut parts from their sprues, plastic glue in places it oughtn't be....    

Edited February 8, 2019 by robmcg

[robmcg]

9 hours ago, sncf231e said:

Hello Rob,

 

The detail shown is original from the kit; I painted the golden version but the silver version is all original. It is quite some time that I made these so I don remember whether the motion was working (it is not now) if you build carefully, but I doubt. I do not have the Kitmaster version, so I cannot compare whether they used (partly) the same moulds.

Monogram/Revelll also made this BigBoy and the German Baureihe 41, which also have fixed motion the way I build these:

 

 

 

Regards

Fred
 

Edit: I found this text about Concor: Among the unique Chessie System HO-scale static steam locomotive models are the ones marketed by Monogram and later Con-Cor. Replicated in 1/87th size, this series provided static plastic HO steam locomotives. Under research currently for a feature in a future edition of HO Collector, the series of static steam releases included a 4-6-4 Hudson carrying road number 312 and sold as a Chessie System release. The kit provided all-plastic components molded in color, as well as decals. The kit returned from Monogram in its “Metal Master” collection with chrome plating and decals for the Chessie System on its tender. From Monogram, you’ll find these kits branded as “Snap Tite” releases. Con-Cor’s offerings branded them “Desktop Collectors Series.” In addition to Con-Cor and Monogram, Revell marketed these HO steam kits for a time too, and their origin, at least for the New York Central Hudson kit, may date to the early 1960s and Rosebud Kitmaster models imported from Europe by AHM.

 

 

I must say Fred that the detail on these models is extremely well-done, a glowing testament to the early days of plastic moulding technology.

 

Nice photography too.

 

I have limited skills in assembly but make up for it with shameless photo-editing...  here is a pic I made of an MTH ? H0 'Big Boy' and I hope to make nice pictures of the NYC Hudson in the same way.

 

Pic is edited, will remove if requested.

 

  

Edited February 8, 2019 by robmcg

[sncf231e]

Rob,

 

If you like models of the NYC Hudson you might like the e-book I made about this subject, which can be downloaded (at no cost of course) at: http://sncf231e.nl/lner-pacifics-and-nyc-hudsons/

 

Regards

Fred (not Ken)

[robmcg]

2 hours ago, sncf231e said:

Rob,

 

If you like models of the NYC Hudson you might like the e-book I made about this subject, which can be downloaded (at no cost of course) at: http://sncf231e.nl/lner-pacifics-and-nyc-hudsons/

 

Regards

Fred (not Ken)

 

Oops sorry Fred not Ken...  fixed, my apologies. I blame the French.

 

Brilliant book, I have taken a very quick look and there is much to read and enjoy.  My cup floweth over!

 

In particular with acknowledgements to you Fred here is a picture of the Monogram H0 Hudson which I think looks super, taken via screen shot from your excellent book.

 

 

ah the joys of kitsets!  Next people will start making powered versions!

Edited February 8, 2019 by robmcg

[Il Grifone]

14 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

Thank you so much for that, it will be interesting to see if the working Kitmaster rods and motion can be adapted to the Con-cor Hudson, I very much doubt it, but if I was young and silly like I once was I'd probably have a go!

 

They are allegedly the same locomotive, so it should be possible to swop the frames over as a complete unit. The bearings (to be polite) and the fine wheels of the Con-Cor kit would doom any attempt to make them work IMHO. The tender is a possibility however as the bogies turn. A bit of additional weight and metal wheels (and preferably bearings should be sufficient.

 

EDIT  If I have time (SWMBO is making noises about tidying up and finishing the bathroom.... (looks all right to me!    ) I'll post pics of the Kitmaster Hudson (if I can find her box!).

Edited February 9, 2019 by Il Grifone
additional information

[robmcg]

I have taken the liberty Fred of messing around with another Hudson picture in your excellent and informative book this time the silver-plated Monogram Hudson.

 

Your photo showed the shaded side which rather suits the model, even if not normal for photos of models, and has become I consider a fine picture as well as testament to your model-making skill. I hope you don't mind if I publish it here.

 

 

Also as is my habit I thought it might suit a background with some atmosphere, shed scene, another engine's smoke, steam, wind, that ethereal effect , almost surreal, which working steam engines sometimes had...

 

 

Quite impressive for a collection of mouldings! 

 

Pictures edited, will remove if requested.

 

Rob

[sncf231e]

Just go ahead Rob. Your edited pictures look better than the original.

 

I have 6 more downloadable books with pictures  http://sncf231e.nl/my-e-books/

 

Regards

Fred

[robmcg]

Thank you Fred, I have enjoyed your A4 and Hudson book greatly, it has re-awakened my love of the NYC Hudsons and I have bought a couple of Rivarossi versions...

 

 

 

I hope to make some nice pictures!  

 

The MTH  and BLI H0 verions are nicer but fairly pricey, so I will see what I can do.

 

Cheers

[Il Grifone]

There is of course also this NYC Hudson

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/GRAAM-FARISH-RIVAROSSI-OO-Gauge-NEW-YORK-CENTRAL-NYC-4-6-4-HUDSON-LOCO-5405/332885814667?hash=item4d818a6d8b:g:~b8AAOSwn91b7oxX

 

(Ignore the price, it is Gostude after all!)  (Nothing to do with Rivarossi beyond the prototype.)

[jjb1970]

I still think the nicest NYC Hudson's are the old Westside Models examples made by Microcast Mizuno. They were made in the late 70's yet in many ways they remain unsurpassed, they were near the end of an era for Japanese brass as that part of the hobby was moving from Japan to South Korea.

[robmcg]

2 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

I still think the nicest NYC Hudson's are the old Westside Models examples made by Microcast Mizuno. They were made in the late 70's yet in many ways they remain unsurpassed, they were near the end of an era for Japanese brass as that part of the hobby was moving from Japan to South Korea.

 

I must check them out.

 

Often older models seem better than newer versions, or perhaps I should say, 'sometimes'.

 

I don't know if the Rivarossi Dreyfuss Hudsons are collectable but they were tooled in 1972 I think, and seem to fetch higher prices than the basic Hudsons...

 

I made this pic today and was surprised how good it looked with only very minor editing, the 'donor' original from the web, acknowledgements and thanks to whomever took the original here...

 

 

different light for my picture of a model similar to the one I just bought on Ebay for £121.80...  I used a screen grab from a Youtube review for this, plus PSP6...  a superb model of a superb 1938 engine which could sustain over 5,000 hp at 77mph.

 

 

 

 

A fairly long way from Kitmaster, but Kitmaster did make a lovely Hudson.

 

typos as ever

Edited February 13, 2019 by robmcg

[Hacksworth_Sidings]

Stumbled across this thread whilst looking for a K’master Hudson for sale, and I thought I’d give my own thoughts on the matter:

 

For all of you saying that Dapol owns Kitmaster, I personally doubt that, K’master died in 1962, many of the railway toolings went on to Airfix, and when they went bust in the 80s, the remaining Kitmaster toolings went on to Dapol, they simply use the Kitmaster name, as that’s the brand they were part of when initially tooled, I doubt legal issues involving 6-decade old models that have seemingly been lost to time (in terms of original tooling) would be the issue.

 

I do believe that the main issue with this would be finding all those unbuilt kits, butchering a few poorly made ones at a stretch, something like the Hudson, Stirling, Garratt, Croc, etc would likely be hard to find unbuilt, and simply drawing up new components likely would be the way forward given how rare they are. And yes, time would likely be an issue, but I’m sure there’s one or two dedicated collectors out there who would put in the time to see this range make a return.

 

Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see a revival of this range, especially considering the quality of recent Dapol releases, where the toolings are seemingly reaching a point of being totally cream-crackered, if all the necessary models can be found in unbuilt and good condition I absolutely see this being an option, but with how hard it is to find said kits in this day and age it probably won’t happen for a while.

[cctransuk]

40 minutes ago, Hacksworth_Sidings said:

Stumbled across this thread whilst looking for a K’master Hudson for sale, and I thought I’d give my own thoughts on the matter:

 

For all of you saying that Dapol owns Kitmaster, I personally doubt that, K’master died in 1962, many of the railway toolings went on to Airfix, and when they went bust in the 80s, the remaining Kitmaster toolings went on to Dapol, they simply use the Kitmaster name, as that’s the brand they were part of when initially tooled, I doubt legal issues involving 6-decade old models that have seemingly been lost to time (in terms of original tooling) would be the issue.

 

I do believe that the main issue with this would be finding all those unbuilt kits, butchering a few poorly made ones at a stretch, something like the Hudson, Stirling, Garratt, Croc, etc would likely be hard to find unbuilt, and simply drawing up new components likely would be the way forward given how rare they are. And yes, time would likely be an issue, but I’m sure there’s one or two dedicated collectors out there who would put in the time to see this range make a return.

 

Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see a revival of this range, especially considering the quality of recent Dapol releases, where the toolings are seemingly reaching a point of being totally cream-crackered, if all the necessary models can be found in unbuilt and good condition I absolutely see this being an option, but with how hard it is to find said kits in this day and age it probably won’t happen for a while.

 

Are you serious? Simply drawing up new components? What about the toolmaking?

 

It may well be hard to find 'said kits' in this day and age, but the number of people looking for them and - more to the point - prepared to pay the cost of newly-tooled kits of non-motorised models would be vanishingly small.

 

Sorry, you have a very naive perception of the model railway market, and the costs of producing models.

 

CJI.

 

 

[Nearholmer]

15 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

What about the toolmaking?

Don’t people simply feed the data from the drawing-up process into a 3D printer these days?

 

That rate/cost of production would surely satisfy the tiny demand for these obscure retro- kits.

[Hacksworth_Sidings]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

Sorry, you have a very naive perception of the model railway market, and the costs of producing models.

 

 

Never said anything about toolings, the thread began with someone mentioning the prospect of scanning existing models, and with 3D printing becoming more common in the world of model railways, allowing an endless amount of obscure prototypes to be produced by individual modellers, my mind stepped over to that instead of making injection-moulding tools like the ones used on the original Kitmaster models. Sure, 3D printing may not be 100% reliable, not to mention some printers leave behind nasty print lines which can take lengthy sessions of priming, sanding, filling, etc to make a print look nice, surely something like that would be more cost effective than splashing out on injection moulding machines to make tools of obscure models that only a certain group of people really know a lot about. I never claimed to know anything about the costs of producing models either, not to mention the countless hours, days, months that go into designing brand new tools, I was simply sharing my opinion on the matter, a good idea, but likely not going to happen in this day and age simply due to how rare these kits have become, and how obscure they are in the grand scheme of the hobby.

[Nearholmer]

People are making cottage industries out of 3D printing bits for broken Triang trains, bits of Dinky and Corgi cars etc, so I wouldn’t rule it out completely.

[cctransuk]

4 minutes ago, Hacksworth_Sidings said:

Never said anything about toolings, the thread began with someone mentioning the prospect of scanning existing models, and with 3D printing becoming more common in the world of model railways, allowing an endless amount of obscure prototypes to be produced by individual modellers, my mind stepped over to that instead of making injection-moulding tools like the ones used on the original Kitmaster models. Sure, 3D printing may not be 100% reliable, not to mention some printers leave behind nasty print lines which can take lengthy sessions of priming, sanding, filling, etc to make a print look nice, surely something like that would be more cost effective than splashing out on injection moulding machines to make tools of obscure models that only a certain group of people really know a lot about. I never claimed to know anything about the costs of producing models either, not to mention the countless hours, days, months that go into designing brand new tools, I was simply sharing my opinion on the matter, a good idea, but likely not going to happen in this day and age simply due to how rare these kits have become, and how obscure they are in the grand scheme of the hobby.

 

The first post in this thread refers to scanning original kit components, in order to use the scanned dimensions to produce replic masters - ie. tooling.

 

No matter how it is developed, the production of a plastic kit requires a precision steel mould, into which liquid plastic is injected at tremendous pressure.

 

Whereas the original Kitmaster kit tools were probably hand-cut, modern tooling would be machine-cut under computer control. Whatever, and however done, the cost is one of the major price components.

 

So - I hold to my premise that tooling would be required, and the cost would be prohibitive.

 

CJI.

[PhilJ W]

There is/was a lot of Kitmaster Crocodile models around, they weren't exactly the best seller in the range. This was due to their being to 00 scale but on H0 gauge (as per British 00).