Time to bring back design clever?

[cctransuk]

I agree. If it wasn't for all this talk of fidelity and minor details then perhaps Bachmann would have introduced a two coach pack to enable people like me to run an eight car Blue Pullman.

 

If you're that desperate, keep an eye on Ebay.

 

Kitmaster BP coaches pop up quite regularly, even as unbuilt kits.

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/KITMASTER-33-MODEL-RAILWAY-PULLMAN-CAR-DECALS-UNMADE-COMPLETE-SEE-PHOTOS/202198412695?hash=item2f13f6ed97:g:A6oAAOSwKXdaUACJ

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Covkid]

Strait-jackets are no good - they don't have pockets..............

 

Would you prefer Air-Smoothing, followed by being shut in the Oil Bath - ( a 4' x 4' x 4' malachite green square hole)?   

 

I think he said pockets not packets - as in "Channel Packets" !!!

[33212]

Just a few words..

 

Hornby has had its ups and downs over the last ten years, outsourcing everything to China, design clever, changing the old guard, leaving Margate, suppliers not supplying, alienating model shops, setting up their own, modelzone collapse - stock implecations, old guard coming back..they have survived where others have failed...Woolworths etc..

 

Hornby should continue marketing and building for three "tiers" bronze, silver, gold, or starters, normal and premium..and have a distinct plan for each. They can ditch some wheat and chaff if it has not sold, why waste time with it?

 

The best thing they can do is keep making decent models to suit all budgets and we need to keep buying them.

[Clive Mark]

Did "Design Clever" (Dumbing Down?) ever completely disappear ?

 

Hornby's BR Mk1 coaches introduced only a few years ago have moulded pipework on the roof and moulded grabrails at the ends while Bachmann's (tooled up many years ago) have fitted wired detail.

 

The prices of the latest releases of Hornby's Mk1 coaches have almost caught up with Bachmann's price, which has also just gone up.

 

Although the Hornby coaches can have the moulded detail removed and improved to match Bachmann coaches without disturbing the nice paint and lining of the sides.....why do all that work on a whole rake if Bachmann give you that detail ready made.

 

I never understood Hornby's approach with the Mk1 coach and now it is hardly cheaper. They may feel they can depend on brand loyalty to sell these.

[adb968008]

Did "Design Clever" (Dumbing Down?) ever completely disappear ?

...

 

I never understood Hornby's approach with the Mk1 coach and now it is hardly cheaper. They may feel they can depend on brand loyalty to sell these.

 

I can fully assemble a new Hornby MK1 coach, from all bits, including separating the bogie, wheels, NEM pocket, Coupling and hook and then box it for shipping in under 90 seconds without tools and I wasnt rushing to do it either... I reckon if pushed i could assemble it in 1 minute.

 

https://www.youtube.com/edit?o=U&video_id=8ZTmbk-GmgY

The old MK1 requires a screwdriver, 2 screws, it is made from 2 separate side pieces, roof, frame etc and can take upto 5 minutes, the even older ones needed two rivets !

 

The new tooling is design clever.. and i'd imagine much more cost efficient than the older tooling and the Bachmann one.

The only thing I didn't do in the video was glue windows.

 

Whilst Bachmann and Hornby's may have similar retail prices, I suspect Hornby has a better margin and greater potential to sell to the family market, though some of Bachmann's newer coaches are of a very similar nature of assembly to the new Hornby MK1 (I'm thinking the Porthole.. it's pretty simplistic).

Edited February 19, 2018 by adb968008

[G-BOAF]

....

The prices of the latest releases of Hornby's Mk1 coaches have almost caught up with Bachmann's price, which has also just gone up.

 

....

I never understood Hornby's approach with the Mk1 coach and now it is hardly cheaper. They may feel they can depend on brand loyalty to sell these.

Which echoes post #7 - design clever quickly becomes 'less detail for similar price' - so be careful what you wish for....

[Clive Mark]

I can fully assemble a new Hornby MK1 coach, from all bits, including separating the bogie, wheels, NEM pocket, Coupling and hook and then box it for shipping in under 90 seconds without tools and I wasnt rushing to do it either... I reckon if pushed i could assemble it in 1 minute.

 

https://www.youtube.com/edit?o=U&video_id=8ZTmbk-GmgY

The old MK1 requires a screwdriver, 2 screws, it is made from 2 separate side pieces, roof, frame etc and on the older ones needs a rivet and can take upto 5 minutes.

 

The new tooling is design clever.. and i'd imagine much more cost efficient than the older tooling and the Bachmann one.

The only thing I didn't do in the video was glue windows.

 

Whilst Bachmann and Hornby's may have similar retail prices, I suspect Hornby has a better margin and greater potential to sell to the family market.

 

Interesting !

 

I've just remembered the Bachmann coach has separate side panels leaving a visible join at the ends if looked at closely. It shows more on the blue/grey coaches as the ends are coloured blue and not black.

Edited February 19, 2018 by Clive Mark

[adb968008]

Which echoes post #7 - design clever quickly becomes 'less detail for similar price' - so be careful what you wish for....

 

Agreed... but if that was in turn applied to Mk1 based EMUs or 1st GEN AC EMUs or DMUs like the 104/120 etc then this could be a cost effective opportunity to bring a product to market, which today is beyond financial practicality...

 

Using a Class 73 railroad style motor bogie with 4 "MK1" styled design clever body shells  toolings and standard NEM couplings, without lights could give a something like a Class 303/304/508 EMU or perhaps a class 120 / 124 for the price of  3xMK1 + a Railroad 73 (RRP of approx £200 before discounts).... and the new MK1 isnt that bad...

 

£200 for a 4 car EMU / DMU ?

 

Remember once a tool is made, it can be modified.. for example moulded pipes can be filled in a tool and drilled...meaning todays Railroad could at some point become a super detailed model... that is how some of the older tools were upgraded in China in the first place.

Edited February 19, 2018 by adb968008

[YesTor]

When I started modelling if you wanted super detail you went out and bought detail kits and parts and created your own model, whereas now you just buy a model and stick it on your track or in a cabinet, no personality

 

Hmmm, I'm not sure I quite agree.  No matter how great a detailed model there is always going to be something that can improved or altered to add that touch of individuality.

[YesTor]

Much better than the Bachmann version? Does this not prove what a good deal in high detail models the UK sector gets. The step down for a 25-40% reduction in price (i.e. design clever) would be HUGE - if in the long-run a price reduction is what happens... (see 72xx example above)

 

I'd say it's one hell of a lot better than the Bachmann version.

[The Blue Streak]

Isn't there a specification in the railroad range that every wheel has a pickup? Sure I read that on some marketing ages ago....

 

I have a few railroad models that are quite old now that We bought when My kids showed a glimmer of interest, one of them is 4472 that was one of the earliest loco drive models that came when the new tooling started to be used (but with the old tender minus the ringfield motor). It does have pickups to all driving wheels and all those on the tender, along with it's 5 pole motor it runs superbly.

 

The latest railroad versions of the A1/A3, don't have tender pickups (or a 5 pole for that matter) at all which means they might just stutter a bit on trainset type points a slow speeds. But if My kids were anything like the norm, then slow speeds just didn't get a look in, because it raced around at Mach 1 everywhere so it's probably a mute point.

 

Like I said it's running abilities are faultless and it's lack of fine detail was perfect for kids and a bit of rough handling. Aesthetically however it's not in the same ball park as the Main range versions and I'm not even sure why I haven't sold it on. Probably because one day it may be a source of spares for one of the others (motor and chassis are common) but partly because because I think I might have a bit of an emotional attachment to it

 

But there's no way I would have bought one for Myself, when the main versions are so sweet on the eye ! It's also the reason I'm not a fan of the design clever models, the P2 is probably a prime example for Me, looks ok when on it's own but just doesn't compare well when sat next to Main Range A4's and A3's. Even the more expensive versions of the P2 with the extra lining and added detail just look cheap in comparison (especially the tender) it was a bit of a let down for Me especially when I was so looking forward to it and I have since moved it on.

 

I think that the LMS guys have been waiting a long time for a newly tooled Duchess / Coronation (which is the catalyst for this topic I think) and if they had been dished up a watered down Design Clever version, it would have been a slap in the face for them. The new model is superb* and you get what you pay for. There's plenty of the older versions around much cheaper if that's your thing.

 

* I'm even tempted to get one Myself, just because it's so nice, even though it goes with nothing I have and I might have to sacrifice a future ER purchase to get one

Edited February 20, 2018 by The Blue Streak

[frobisher]

I never understood Hornby's approach with the Mk1 coach and now it is hardly cheaper. They may feel they can depend on brand loyalty to sell these.

Thing of it is, they have the product and they are not competing on a level playing field - Hornby traditionally have a greater presence in the high street than Bachmann, so better chance to sell more product there. The purpose of the MK1s was to service their Railroad, main and transet markets with one set of tooling and make the savings where appropriate on finish level and provision of metal wheels. Supplying lit versions of the main range ones gives them a leg up over the Bachmann ones in some regards.

 

The one trick they missed was putting in provision for a CCM (a bit late now unfortunately). You would obviously skip installing that on the Railroad and trainset ones, and rely only on a bogie mounted NEM pocket clipped into the CCM void on the frame (just look at Bachmann's spares bogies for how this works), and have it there by default on the main range ones. They could also have sold CCM upgrade kits as spares for those interested in upgrading.

[PatB]

In terms of pricing, are we now finding out just how much all those Christmas train sets, fictional but brightly coloured PO wagons and zillions of GWR 101s and Smokey Joes cross-subsidised the upper end of the model range? Now that the "toy" market has all but disappeared, apart from maybe a bit of Thomas, we've (well, not quite we, 'cos I can't afford current main range prices) got to cough up what the better models actually cost.

 

Me, I'd just be happy if online secondhand prices were a bit less stupid, on average, because those of us outside the UK don't have access to swapmeets or exhibition trade stands where the in-person bargains can be found.

[The Blue Streak]

While I'm on the subject of disappointing LNER design clever models. (Others far more knowledgeable than I, have already mentioned Design Clever GW efforts among others).

 

I have already addressed the P2, which the OP claimed as a Design Clever success story and that apparently fits nicely into both ranges.

 

But the OP also claimed that the Hornby Peppercorn A1 / Tornado was also a Design Clever success story.

 

That model was / is an excellent model for the railroad market, but any claims that the tarted up version fitted into the main range is simply nonsense, the so called enhanced version (with enhanced pricing) again (like the P2) looks sub standard when directly compared to Hornby's Gresley pacifics from the main range (Lets not even compare in to the Superb (IMHO) Baccy Peppercorns which are not modelled on Tornado but original A1's).

 

Again, it comes back to not cross pollinating the two ranges. I think Hornby got it right with the a3 and a4 models, make a separate but simplified set of tooling for the railroad models using the main range versions as a starting point and just leave bits off and simplify the graphics and paint.

Starting with simplified (Design Clever) tooling and trying to tart it up later to sell it off as a full fat version, just didn't work, at least for Me. I can enhance a pig by putting it in a pretty dress - but it's still a pig.

Edited February 20, 2018 by The Blue Streak

[Hilux5972]

I agree that people will always want high end models, and those starting out will cheap Models, but if design clever was brought back and its principles clearly laid out, and not trying to use them for both railroad and main range as per the hall and 71000 etc then I definitely think it has its place.

[Craigw]

I have to say that it has long surprised me that, with the notable but limited exceptions of Brassmasters (LMS) and RT Models (Bulleid Pacifics), our cottage industry suppliers haven't come up with readily obtainable replacement detail parts in metal to substitute for the inevitably broken plastic ones............

 

John  

 

I suspect you will find that a good number of people are too scared to do anything on their models with plastic bits (that break off) because they are worried about damaging the paint work. hence, a limited market for these detail parts.

 

It would be nice if there were more available, that I agree on though.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[grahame]

Hornby dont have to cater for all - they only have to cater for the biggest sustainable market.

​Deciding what that is would be like hitting a moving target. And having decided there is no guarantee that it will be the same the following year - fads and trends come and go and manufacturers need flexibility in addressing that. No doubt we can be discussing what the 'sustainable' sector is ad infinitum. And, of course, shrinking down the market you cater for reduces potential sales, turnover and profit. 

 

The current catalogue seems to imply steam sells over most categories and my logic then is that there is a market for reasonably priced stock to run behind it.

 

I suspect you probably would draw that conclusion by being a steam era enthusiast. But the best sellers don't have to be pigeonholed by era - Bachmann have said their best sellers are brightly coloured models - both pre-grouping and modern ones. Sales can also be categorised by other criteria such as region, scale/gauge, price, design type, traction type, and where they are sold. And I don't understand the logic connect between steam and 'reasonably priced stock' to go with it - just what is reasonable will vary between purchasers.

 

G.

[Dunsignalling]

I agree that people will always want high end models, and those starting out will cheap Models, but if design clever was brought back and its principles clearly laid out, and not trying to use them for both railroad and main range as per the hall and 71000 etc then I definitely think it has its place.

Wasn't the entire basis of the Design Clever concept that Railroad and main range models could and would be produced from the same core tooling?

 

The problem was that, in general, the "main range" locos so produced weren't considered good enough to justify the tag and the Railroad versions were too expensive for the target market. One can argue the merits of individual models but the only widely accepted exception is the Crosti 9F. That seems to have been as close to a main range loco as made no odds, no doubt assisted by having a plain black livery, but it still came out too expensive for most Railroad buyers.

 

The same conflicts would arise again were the idea to be revisited..

 

IMHO, Hornby need to pursue excellence in the main range, with cost borne in mind, but not uppermost in their considerations, and better define "Railroad" so as to properly differentiate it.

 

My own thought is that Railroad should be defined (though not solely) on the basis of pricing. At present, I would propose: No loco over £100, no coach over £25 and no wagon over £15 (RRP). If they can't be sold for that, they don't get made. Simple and clear-cut.  

 

John

Edited February 20, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[Dunsignalling]

I suspect you will find that a good number of people are too scared to do anything on their models with plastic bits (that break off) because they are worried about damaging the paint work. hence, a limited market for these detail parts.

 

It would be nice if there were more available, that I agree on though.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

 

Most of the parts affected seem to be black and occupy the "nether regions" of locos and, once the plastic bits have broken off, that fear surely disappears?

 

John

[The Blue Streak]

My own thought is that it should be done on the basis of pricing. At present, I would propose: No loco over £100, no coach over £25 and no wagon over £15 (RRP). If they can't be sold for that, they don't get made. Simple and clear-cut.  

 

John

 

I'm making an assumption here John that you are referring to Railroad. Which is a fair call after all these are supposed to be what gets the newbies in.

Edited February 20, 2018 by The Blue Streak

[The Blue Streak]

I agree that people will always want high end models, and those starting out will cheap Models, but if design clever was brought back and its principles clearly laid out, and not trying to use them for both railroad and main range as per the hall and 71000 etc then I definitely think it has its place.

 

So if you already have a low budget lineup and a high end line up, why would you want a third ?

 

Wasn't the entire basis of the Design Clever concept that Railroad and main range models could and would be produced from the same core tooling?

 

The problem was that, in general, the "main range" locos so produced weren't considered good enough to justify the tag and the Railroad versions were too expensive for the target market. One can argue the merits of individual models but the only widely accepted exception is the Crosti 9F. That seems to have been as close to a main range loco as made no odds, no doubt assisted by having a plain black livery, but it still came out too expensive for most Railroad buyers.

 

The same conflicts would arise again were the idea to be revisited..

 

Exactly, thanks John!!

 

Either You are a budget orientated person who wants a cheaper but still perfectly functioning Loco or You are a Person who has a few extra bucks kicking around and you like a bit more.

 

The third alternative is instead of having a fleet of a dozen loco's that are budget orientated, have three or four with all the fruit. Don't try and drag the quality down to a level to try and please everyone, because in the end no one will be pleased.

 

Crikey if Hornby reads this and starts to dumb down the range again I shall be most peed off. It's been said previously in this topic. But I think this is a case of some people wanting more than they can afford and want to toss their toys out of the pram, instead of 

A) settling for what they can afford

B ) having less

C ) waiting a bit longer until they can afford what they really want.

 

To Me it's starting to sound like -"I want it all and and want it now and if I cant have it, I don't want anyone else to have it".

 

I am sure (hope) over the recent past Hornby have done some soul searching and hopefully have worked out where it all went wrong and have an idea where their profits mainly lie.

If Hornby do go guts up, then there will be no low cost railroad type alternative (let alone a third), Bachmann certainly don't have one in OO. So those people griping will either have to fork out for Baccy top end stuff or similar, rely on the second hand market or buy themselves some nice Tyco or lifelike toys.

 

Rant over.

Edited February 20, 2018 by The Blue Streak

[tomparryharry]

I agree. If it wasn't for all this talk of fidelity and minor details then perhaps Bachmann would have introduced a two coach pack to enable people like me to run an eight car Blue Pullman.

 

Sorry Colin, I can't fully agree to that.

 

I'm in the other camp. We need to hold the producers to account. Otherwise, any producer will sell off any old tat, and at top dollar too. Who wouldn't? My evidence is this:- Which TOAD brakevan would you choose? The 30+- year old Airfix/Bachmann model, or the Hornby version, which is fairly faithful to the real thing?

 

I should point out that like you, I would also like some of the fairly rare exotica to grace my railway room. However, having finally having an opportunity to purchase said exotica, I'd expect it to be top notch.

 

I'd guess that deep down, you owe it to yourself. We all do.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[Jeff Smith]

These are commercial companies not charities, the market is what holds them to account in order to satisfy their shareholders or owners as the case may be. Yes they will strive to increase their market share but their strategies will not suit everyone.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

I agree. If it wasn't for all this talk of fidelity and minor details then perhaps Bachmann would have introduced a two coach pack to enable people like me to run an eight car Blue Pullman.

Sorry Colin, I can't fully agree to that.

 

I'm in the other camp. We need to hold the producers to account. Otherwise, any producer will sell off any old tat, and at top dollar too...

 This is purely a marketing decision from the production side, and has no impact other than on those who would choose such an option. If sufficient customers were to tell retailers they would like a pack of two extra trailers to make an eight car formation, and the volume case looks profitable, where's the problem in such an item being produced? It's exclusively for those who don't mind a little inaccuracy, and there's revenue from existing tooling, so everyone participating is good. Those who don't like the idea can ignore it and amuse themselves as they choose.

[G-BOAF]

 This is purely a marketing decision from the production side, and has no impact other than on those who would choose such an option. If sufficient customers were to tell retailers they would like a pack of two extra trailers to make an eight car formation, and the volume case looks profitable, where's the problem in such an item being produced? It's exclusively for those who don't mind a little inaccuracy, and there's revenue from existing tooling, so everyone participating is good. Those who don't like the idea can ignore it and amuse themselves as they choose.

There is form. Didn't rapido produce extra centre cars for the APT-E, very unprototypical, but for people who wanted to run an 'full length' train.

One could argue why are you paying top dollar for one of the most high quality, detail packed, releases (APT or BP) and then running it so inaccurately, but...