RTR vs Kits... Economics, Variety and Quality: a discussion.

[Jeff Smith]

Joel and Mike you sound like my kind of modelers.....

 

A note about finishes. I have an airbrush but cannot be bothered to mess with the mess. Any spraying I do is from a can, e.g. primer. All my vehicles are brush painted with acrylic paint. I'm not making model cars so I don't need a showroom gloss finish. Acrylics usually require several coats onto a suitable colour base as they do not necessarily have as dense a pigment as oil based paint. Any lining I do is with transfers. All in all finishing is not necessarily problem for me but I have been practicing/practising for many years...

 

The best rider I have seen recently on instructions was included with some laser cut wooden structure kits for On30, from memory it was something like 'read the instructions carefully then build it any way you like.....'

[truffy]

Then let the "half a day" be eaten, and chalk it up along with the other R & D costs of producing your kit in the first place, if you are even keeping track.

 

 

But why should they do it for love? You are presumably happy never to be paid for your work, but if we want a product to improve and a range to expand, the only way that happens is if either the person is rich enough to do it for fun, or they can make it as a business.

 

 

I suppose that one point here is that instructions for a given model only need to be written once, so spending some time getting them right could then be amortised over the number of kits subsequently sold.

 

And if you have good instructions in PDF format, why not put them on your site so people can see how easy your kit will be to build? (there is a steamily obvious rejoinder to that...it doesn't need to be stated though)

[2ManySpams]

There's a circular argument here about sales, costs, quality and instructions. There's no single correct answer. I suspect though that over time a Darwinian survival of the fitest will occur. Those kit (and RTR) manufacturers most aligned with what customers want will prosper and others will fall away.

 

Folk like the Finney7 boys have taken on the 7mm Finney range and have engaged with forums, done threads on builds, revamped kit parts, gone for class leading destructions (with PDFs available on the web) and have an accessible website. Still early days but folk appear to be responding well to this approach and you do see a fair number of kits being bought/collected at shows.

[Phil Parker]

I suppose that one point here is that instructions for a given model only need to be written once, so spending some time getting them right could then be amortised over the number of kits subsequently sold.

 

And if you have good instructions in PDF format, why not put them on your site so people can see how easy your kit will be to build? (there is a steamily obvious rejoinder to that...it doesn't need to be stated though)

 

True, but many kits will struggle to make three figures in sales, and that over a long period. Comet put the instructions up on the web and I'm sure there are others.

 

Which brings me to another point - all kits are not the same. People keep harping on about some of the worst in the breed such as later MTK productions and there has only been one mention of Connoisseur Models which are the other end of the quality and ease of use spectrum. There are "challenging" models out there but if the assumption is that no-one can build a kit because there are some real stinkers lurking in drawers and eBay, then the discussion can stop now as there is no way to go back in time and fix everything. 

 

Many of the newer makers are making use of technology to produce excellent products. 

 

 

This rail crane is from Make Your Mark Models - I wrote it up in the July 2015 issue of BRM. It's resin, so you can stick it together with superglue. All the parts are well moulded and transfers are available from the manufacturer for a small amount extra. I suspect anyone could make this as the static model it's intended to be (the prototype is usually hauled to the site) and motorising with a SPUD as I show in the article isn't difficult.  

[brossard]

On the subject of downloadable instructions I will give a shout out to Connoisseur and Kemilway who do just that.  You can also download Comet kit instructions.

 

John

[BMacdermott]

There's a circular argument here about sales, costs, quality and instructions. There's no single correct answer.

 

 

Hello 2ManySpams

 

That is why I constructed the draft table at #106.

 

Brian

[2ManySpams]

Phil I think Connoisseur have been mentioned as a good example of kits by at least three people. Jim even has a range of skillbuilder kits, one of which was the first ever brass kit I managed to finish.

 

The point about new media is a good one. With options such as 3d printing and resin casting available and being increasingly used, I think there's real potential for the future. A kit doesn't necessarily have to be all metal. Mixed media with the most appropriate material used for a part is good. I like the use of resin for highly complex shapes that are a s0d to get formed up from flat etch.

[Clearwater]

Thanks @coach bogie for posting a picture of your stash! Mine is slightly more out of sight but growing. Partly, I buy in anticipation of ranges no longer being available and I'm always up for a good rummage at the s/h stall at shows to see what I can unearth. Fully agree with your philosophy of building what you want for where it feels unlikely rtr will go.

 

On the small manufacturers, my sense is a lot have grown out of someone who has a gap in what they want, has either got or acquired the skills to design a kit, in whatever medium. It's not too much of an extension to then sell a few kits to friends with similar interests and for that to grow into selling at a few shows and before you know where you are you are an established cottage industry. It's probably still a hobby and doesn't make life changing sums of money. It's not realistic to expect such businesses to provide idiot proof instructions such as IKEA writes nor for those businesses to have response times registered in the seconds.

 

However, I do feel there's a space for "better" instructions and adding pdf instructions to sites shouldn't be too difficult and some seem to be going down this route. In a sense, forums such as this provide space for build by builds to be published. Certainly, if I'm trying to build something (loco, coach or building), a first port of call is a google of the term plus RMWeb - invariably you find some useful pictures and guidance. In an ideal world, I'd like to see magazine articles that show pictures, descriptions and have embedded video demostrating techniques. Kind of a blend of the traditional, slightly abridged for space reasons, magazine step by step articles couple to the Activity Media DVDs.

 

David

[Clearwater]

On the new media point, I was interested to note that Missenden was running a CAD course (by Alan Buttler of Modelu http://www.missendenrailwaymodellers.org.uk/CAD.html). A useful course if you want to take advantage of 3D printing without having to rely on someone else to have produced the part you want

 

David

 

Edit: Memory didnt serve - was Missenden not Pendon but the point stands!

Edited March 11, 2018 by Clearwater

[Phil Parker]

In an ideal world, I'd like to see magazine articles that show pictures, descriptions and have embedded video demostrating techniques. Kind of a blend of the traditional, slightly abridged for space reasons, magazine step by step articles couple to the Activity Media DVDs.

 

 

We've done quite a bit of this with the BRM DVDs and are lining up some more. I prefer to keep the "Basic Technique" stuff seperate from a build though - if the techniques really are basic they will be usefulofor more than one project. It also makes filming a lot easier, there's enough work setting up the photos as we go through a build without trying to stop and make video too, especially if the video doesn't work and you have to bin a half-built kit and start again! Much easier to work on a specially prepared piece where we can have 2 or 3 to film with. 

 

And as I always say, if there are any basic techniques you'd like demo', then PM me. We'll see what can be added to the list. 

[dibber25]

True, but many kits will struggle to make three figures in sales, and that over a long period. Comet put the instructions up on the web and I'm sure there are others.

 

Which brings me to another point - all kits are not the same. People keep harping on about some of the worst in the breed such as later MTK productions and there has only been one mention of Connoisseur Models which are the other end of the quality and ease of use spectrum. There are "challenging" models out there but if the assumption is that no-one can build a kit because there are some real stinkers lurking in drawers and eBay, then the discussion can stop now as there is no way to go back in time and fix everything. 

 

Many of the newer makers are making use of technology to produce excellent products. 

 

Finished Model 3.jpg

 

This rail crane is from Make Your Mark Models - I wrote it up in the July 2015 issue of BRM. It's resin, so you can stick it together with superglue. All the parts are well moulded and transfers are available from the manufacturer for a small amount extra. I suspect anyone could make this as the static model it's intended to be (the prototype is usually hauled to the site) and motorising with a SPUD as I show in the article isn't difficult.  

 

Long before there was a kit - back in the 1980s - I built one of these from scratch, complete with extending, posable jib and with a SPUD bogie to drive it. There will always be those willing to build something from scratch, after they've ascertained that there isn't an appropriate kit or - perhaps - a ready-to-run model. At least, if you are forced to scratch-build, you have to do research and really get to know your subject. Sadly, I'm afraid modellers only tend to find out if a kit is good bad or indifferent once they've bought it and tried to build it. And, these days, you need to know if it's a recent kit or something that was first produced years ago. Modern kits using modern materials tend to lend rather more attention to proper instructions. It seemed to me that many kit manufacturers have long assumed that the modeller will know as much about the real thing as they do - he'll know where that widget fits, and which way round, so why bother telling him. I don't think there's any denying that any profit that lay in kit manufacture came from all the kits that were never built. A friend of mine refers to  his unbuilt kit collection as the world's most expensive loft insulation. (CJL)

[johnarcher]

The markets are fundamentally different though.

 

A good chunk of the railway modelling fraternity are interested in operating trains and that is the main thing they want to do. In the past, they built kits - or had them built - because there was nothing else.  Now, there is a tremendous amount of good RTR and they do not have to kit build so they don't.

 

Military Modelling is mostly about building the model. Some build out of the box, but a healthy number of people will get the reference books and after market parts to ensure that the Pz.Kpfw IV Ausf. H is correct for the tank in 6 Kompanie of Panzer Regiment 12 of 12SS Panzer Division Hitler Jugend.

 

The two are not comparable.

 

Incidentally, there is also discussion in Military Modelling of the ageing demographics.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

Personally I think that's all very true (and so are things others have said about skills acquisition etc).

 

I think that this hobby is indeed a bit different from other modelling hobbies - in that it includes two different tendencies . There are those here who are like people in other hobbies and enjoy making things as an activity in itself, and so would make a kit even if there were a rtr alternative, there are also those you mention, who mainly want the railway to operate, the finished product - the source of comments like 'there's a rtr one now so there's no need to build a kit'. (Plus of course people who have a bit of each, as with all over-simplifications).

 

No-one's right or wrong, but they are rather different approaches which can lead to some mutual incomprehension, and even suspicion that someone is being critical when they are just expressing their own taste.

[BMacdermott]

 I don't think there's any denying that any profit that lay in kit manufacture came from all the kits that were never built. A friend of mine refers to  his unbuilt kit collection as the world's most expensive loft insulation. (CJL)

 

Hello Chris

 

I ran a 'Kit Survey' on what was MREmag back in 2014 which had 104 respondents. The results (below) concur with you.

 

There were 40 replies from those who had between 1 and 9 kits. Of those, 7 said they probably wouldn't make any; 18 said they would probably make some; and 15 said they would probably make all.

 

There were 64 replies from those who had more than 10 kits. Of those, 2 said they probably wouldn't make any; 32 said they would probably make some; and 30 said they would probably make all.

 

There was no requirement for respondents to state how many kits they actually had, but some offered it voluntarily:

12 had between 10 and 49 kits

8 had between 50 and 99 kits

7 had more than 100 kits (with one stating 900+)

 

Brian

[brossard]

I wonder in what universe people have lifetimes long enough to build such large quantities of kits.  I think that having to look at an enormous stash every day can put you off doing anything, not knowing where to start.  Best to put them up for sale and give someone else a chance with them.

 

John

[adb968008]

I think I’ve between 50-99 kits, though more recently I’ve taken an honest look at them to consider what I will do, want to do and probably won’t, I may now be in the 10-49 category, with 2/3rds complete, 1/3rd waiting the day.

[dibber25]

I wonder in what universe people have lifetimes long enough to build such large quantities of kits.  I think that having to look at an enormous stash every day can put you off doing anything, not knowing where to start.  Best to put them up for sale and give someone else a chance with them.

 

John

 

I agree. I think, in my case, it's time for a raft of disposals, although every time I pull something off the shelf to get rid of, I think "I'd really like to build that."

I wonder if the survey asked about part-built kits? How many of us have a shelf of part-built kits that we stopped building when we came to a difficult bit? (CJL)

[brossard]

That is the problem Chris, we buy kits that we want to build, that's the easy bit.  Getting them done is a whole 'nother matter.  I had a lot of part built loco and coach kits in 4mm and managed to sell some.  Now that I changed to 7mm, I can think about the rolling stock I actually need for my vision of a layout.

 

John

[Willie Whizz]

I hate to say it, but there are two conflicting arguments here.

 

You have the likes of Jol who, to some, appears to have been excusing poor kit quality and lack of instructions because the manufacturers are often running their businesses as 'a labour of love'.

 

Then you have the likes of Phil who, to some, appears to be saying that the quality of kit instructions is poor because the manufacturers need to make their money, and time is money.

 

As the earlier poster put it, you can't have it both ways! You can't excuse poor quality by essentially saying 'they do it because they want to and money doesn't matter' only to then excuse the lack of improvement by saying that they need that money. 

 

It may be so that it is only fair that they get paid, and I'll go with that, but you cannot have it both ways.

 

Yes, that's exactly my point.

 

In principle I would agree with Phil that a day's "work" ordinarily requires and fully justifies fair recompense. 

 

But the whole excuse that is so often made is that we should excuse poor, slipshod or inadequate "work" in the form of kits and the instructions etc. for them because the semi-amateur manufacturer doesn't seriously expect to cover their costs and make a profit in the same way they would if they were running a "proper" business; they are doing it "for love", or as a favour to like-minded enthusiasts in their segment of the hobby; or whatever other non-commercial motivation is claimed to drive them.  And if they are prepared (as it seems we're expected to accept they are) to spend many days or weeks or months using their skills in designing a kit, making castings, preparing etchings, packaging-up etc. etc. then I cannot see why they should not be expected to expend a little extra "love" to prepare a decent set of instructions - which the purchase may then choose to use, adapt or discard in the same way as they often do with the components of the kit itself.  In the "great scheme of things", if you've already spent say 30 man/days on the thing, what's another day or two - especially if you claim not to be counting the true cost anyway?

 

Can't have it both ways.

[TheSignalEngineer]

I've usually got three or four kits waiting for finishing, often doing a batch of buffers and couplings rather than one at a time. The wagon stash is currently about 10, all of which are either not available RTR or those which are being poor models.

There are also a few cut and shut jobs from RTR such as Palethorpes vans and GWR suburban stock waiting as I gather together the necessary bits and hope that someone announces production before I get started on them.

[Willie Whizz]

I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick, Jol actually stated when writing instructions for a new kit the difficulty is who detailed to make the instructions, this being in written form as  his point was that the costs involved in making a fully illustrated set of instructions would make the kits unaffordable

 

Plastic kits are being held up as a standard to achieve, Airfix instructions are/were very basic. And if bigger how many would bother to read them. I recently built a 0 gauge motor mount without referring to the instructions, guess what I got it wrong!!

 

On the (these days) not unreasonable assumption that the manufacturer is already in possession of a computer with word-processing software and a digital camera, where is the "cost", then, except in his own time and a ream of paper?

 

Of course, I may be presuming that our would-be manufacturer's skills in kit design and manufacture are accompanied by at least a degree of competence in written English, but if not, do they not have a mate in the hobby who can proof-read and ask intelligent questions to clarify the meaning of the text?

[BMacdermott]

 

I wonder if the survey asked about part-built kits? How many of us have a shelf of part-built kits that we stopped building when we came to a difficult bit? (CJL)

 

Hello Chris

 

I'm sorry, but no we didn't go into part-built kits, but - on reflection - it would have made for some good info.

 

I have just looked back at the incoming data and it does seem - from the few relevant answers - that (possibly) the '50% rule' might apply to part-building.

 

Brian

[Coach bogie]

I wonder in what universe people have lifetimes long enough to build such large quantities of kits.  I think that having to look at an enormous stash every day can put you off doing anything, not knowing where to start.  Best to put them up for sale and give someone else a chance with them.

 

John

Already have.

 

Recently sold on my second TPO train of sides etc split to two RM Webbers. I have a complete 4 coach BSL non corridor 4 coach set about to go on eBay. I have sold on several loco kits. As for the coaches, they WILL get built. I am averaging one a month so no problem with what is on the shelf. What will stop a build is if an  rtr versions become available. I have a about a dozen BSL 1925 stock that have been consigned to the spares drawers as Hornby brought theirs along. I tried to sell Hawksworth kits, no one wanted them, so I pooled the parts common to other coaches, the rest went in recycling. The same went for a couple of BSL autocoaches, only the roof and fittings were kept, sides and ends recycled.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[BMacdermott]

Hello everyone

 

Final Call for Comments - Draft Positives & Negatives of Kits & RTR (see post #106)

 

Can I please have any further comments by 16.00 Monday 12 March? I will then publish the table here.

 

Brian

[Andy Hayter]

I never saw the survey Brian, and I suspect I am the right side of (as in more than) 50.  I have no intention of counting them.

Additionally I have a number of projects obtained from others that will require (sometimes extensive) work to bring the kits to the standard and livery I am looking for.

In addition  I have more than a dozen significant buildings to be completed.  I could scratch - build that that would take longer and not give me a better result.

 

Will they all get completed?  I hope so, but the answer is finally not entirely in my control.

 

I have built up my stash while working, and now retired thought I would have much time to complete them.  I have added to the stash as a number of potential suppliers have announced their intention to retire.  With the debacle that is Coopercraft and the demise of other ranges into an abyss, I feel this was a cautious but necessary approach.

 

My 2017 aim was to reduce the number of outstanding kits waiting to be completed - I failed for the reasons above.  Will 2018 be any better - only 297 days or so to go.

[Paul Cram]

Yes, that's exactly my point.

 

In principle I would agree with Phil that a day's "work" ordinarily requires and fully justifies fair recompense. 

 

But the whole excuse that is so often made is that we should excuse poor, slipshod or inadequate "work" in the form of kits and the instructions etc. for them because the semi-amateur manufacturer doesn't seriously expect to cover their costs and make a profit in the same way they would if they were running a "proper" business; they are doing it "for love", or as a favour to like-minded enthusiasts in their segment of the hobby; or whatever other non-commercial motivation is claimed to drive them.  And if they are prepared (as it seems we're expected to accept they are) to spend many days or weeks or months using their skills in designing a kit, making castings, preparing etchings, packaging-up etc. etc. then I cannot see why they should not be expected to expend a little extra "love" to prepare a decent set of instructions - which the purchase may then choose to use, adapt or discard in the same way as they often do with the components of the kit itself.  In the "great scheme of things", if you've already spent say 30 man/days on the thing, what's another day or two - especially if you claim not to be counting the true cost anyway?

 

Can't have it both ways.

I think you are completely missing the point. Most of the kits available started off because the proprietor wanted a particular model and therefore did the research to please himself. The fact that he didn't need instructions to build it didn't require the time and effort being spent. When some others see it and say oh that's nice can I have one then that is where the production starts. At that point instructions are written usually based on the construction of the initial model. Writng instructions in those circumstances can lead to them not being as clear as another purchaser may like. Some step swill have seemed obvious and others assumed that the drawing will help. They don't deliberately set out to produce a poor set of instructions but they may not be as detailed as some would want.

Edited March 11, 2018 by Paul Cram