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

[Willie Whizz]

And neither can YOU have it both ways. 

 

You can't expect a manufacturer to do his job for the love of it - loads of hours work that will never be paid for just so you can have a cheaper kit.

 

Then demand that they put lots and lots more of those unpaid hours into the product to bring it up to Tamiya quality. 

 

....

 

But Phil, you haven't really addressed my point.

 

You were the one who suggested "half a day" for the taking of a dozen or so photographs of stages of assembly.  I effectively doubled that to allow for a person who (supposedly) already knows in full detail what he/she is doing to type-up some suitable text to accompany them (using a PC, printer, and digital camera which in modern times it's not unreasonable to expect they already own).  'Tamiya quality' is not my phrase, nor my expectation - just sufficiently clear and comprehensive for someone relatively new to kit-building (and who is probably learning their skills from reading another, generic, book in parallel) to stand a fair chance of making a decent go of it, rather than fail and risk being put-off trying again.  Nor am I advocating "cheaper kits" - but if the price already bears no relation to the true costs of production, then why should it be the effort of producing Instructions that is considered the straw to break the camel's back?  Makes no sense.

 

You will know far better than I do, or at least be able to make a better-educated guess, how long that semi-amateur person will have taken to properly research, design, manufacture, refine, produce and pack their product.  Never mind "hours"; I cannot conceive it would often be less than many days, and quite possibly weeks ... which we are asked to accept they will do as much if not more "for love" than "for money"; and presumably out of a sense of personal (if not strictly professional) pride they will strive to get to the best standard they can - so they will put-in the necessary time.

 

In that scenario I simply can't see therefore why it is unreasonable to suggest they ought to spend one more day (or so) on producing a decent, useable (for the comparative novice, remember) set of instructions.  As a percentage of the overall 'effort' in time terms it is at worst modest - a few percent - and if the result is a reputation that the product is readily-buildable, then it is more likely to achieve greater sales, making the 'investment' of a little more time well worth the effort.

 

And if they ... not so much 'can't' as 'won't' be bothered ... and if the product gets a bad reputation, fails to sell in reasonable quantity and disappears, why then should we have much sympathy - yet we keep being asked to.  

[Andy Hayter]

Hi Brian

 

What about the advantages and disadvantages of scratchbuilding?

 

Advantage, fun to do.

Disadvantage, can't think of one.

 

Go on everyone have a go at making something.

 

Disadvantages

 

Can take a lot of time

Is often very addictive

[Clive Mortimore]

Disadvantages

 

Can take a lot of time

Is often very addictive

Hi Andy

 

They are positives, well time taken to make something is immaterial if it is fun. And you cannot become addictive to model making, obsessed but not addicted, something I did learn from my days as a nurse.  

[Andy Hayter]

I stand corrected Clive.

 

I do accept that the first point can be a positive if your time is not an issue.

[Blandford1969]

Personally I'm finding scratch building a great antidote to my anxiety and depression. I don't care if I spend years on them as they are not available as kits or RTR.

 

 

Best wishes

Duncan

[Legend]

Well going back to the original topic RTR v Kits , Economics, Variety and Quality, I have constructed several plastic kits. When I was a wee boy lots of Airfix kits, in the last 5 years Model airliners from various sources . I enjoy it as a means of getting the Model I want. However I’ve only ever constructed 2 Wagon kits for my Railway. They were already painted and just required construction. I think they may have been Ratio or Slaters . It would have been 30 years ago. Not terribly successful.

 

Why have I not made anymore when I’m into kits in other disciplines , well I could never get them to run very well . And that’s my issue. I’d be interested in a kit but only if there was reasonable certainty it would run well. I think this means something like a combination of the old Triang CDK for chassis and mechanicals and Airfix/Revell/Tamiya for body. I think that could work for subjects that are unlikely to be produced RTR . Maybe a Caley Dunalastair or something L&NWR.

 

What about the cost ? Well with RTR reaching £150-£160 I think a price level of £100-£120 could be acceptable . Why would you buy it, because it would be the only way of getting the model and there is something to be said for saying I made that. Would it need to be as detailed as RTR...not necessarily. It would need to be dimensionally accurate and look the part,separate handrails , but do we need sprung buffers, detailed cabs , sliding hatches.....I don’t think so. If I got something that looks like a Dunalastair or a Cardean I’d be happy. Oh we don’t want to go back to the level of detail of a Triang CKD kit, no , it has to be a development of that. While the short Princess wouldn’t be acceptable , would we turn our nose up at the EM2 ?

 

It has to be plastic. I really don’t think there are many people out there with soldering or metal work experience. I suppose it could be laser cut or 3D printer derived. I don’t know how easy that would be . Combined with a CKD style chassis to get it to run well , would work for me

 

Good instructions is a basic expectation, not a luxury.

 

Who could make it, well you’d think Hornby has the capabilities with its Hornby and Airfix Brands . I can’t see it though , a further complication in its range , could devalue its range. Replica , I always thought could establish itself doing something like that .

 

Too far fetched? Don’t understand the economics? It costs a fortune for tooling . Well there is a small company called S&M Models from Berkshire that makes models of British aircraft . I have several of their Viscount 800s . A well produced injection moulded kit sold for around £10 . Now these are hardly going to be volume products. So I would think diecast chassis and tender base with plastic body and motor with instructions (the aircraft kits come with good exploded diagrams and even decals) should be possible at £100-£120.

 

Oh well it will cost just the same in labour to pack it as to make it . But then we hear the reason for increasing costs is Chinese labour and assembly of models. Contradictory information on here. Which is it.

 

So imagine a series of pre grouping models with metal chassis and plastic bodies. I think there’s an opportunity there.

Edited March 13, 2018 by Legend

[Craigw]

But Phil, you haven't really addressed my point.

 

You were the one who suggested "half a day" for the taking of a dozen or so photographs of stages of assembly.  I effectively doubled that to allow for a person who (supposedly) already knows in full detail what he/she is doing to type-up some suitable text to accompany them (using a PC, printer, and digital camera which in modern times it's not unreasonable to expect they already own).  'Tamiya quality' is not my phrase, nor my expectation - just sufficiently clear and comprehensive for someone relatively new to kit-building (and who is probably learning their skills from reading another, generic, book in parallel) to stand a fair chance of making a decent go of it, rather than fail and risk being put-off trying again.  Nor am I advocating "cheaper kits" - but if the price already bears no relation to the true costs of production, then why should it be the effort of producing Instructions that is considered the straw to break the camel's back?  Makes no sense.

 

 

 

And if they ... not so much 'can't' as 'won't' be bothered ... and if the product gets a bad reputation, fails to sell in reasonable quantity and disappears, why then should we have much sympathy - yet we keep being asked to.  

Which kits have you built recently where the instructions are lacking?

 

there seems to plenty of talk in general terms about these kits with bad instruction but the actual detail seems to be lacking.

 

Specific examples please?

 

Craig W

[Ravenser]

Well going back to the original topic RTR v Kits , Economics, Variety and Quality, I have constructed several plastic kits. When I was a wee boy lots of Airfix kits, in the last 5 years Model airliners from various sources . I enjoy it as a means of getting the Model I want. However I’ve only ever constructed 2 Wagon kits for my Railway. They were already painted and just required construction. I think they may have been Ratio or Slaters . It would have been 30 years ago. Not terribly successful.

 

Why have I not made anymore when I’m into kits in other disciplines , well I could never get them to run very well . And that’s my issue. I’d be interested in a kit but only if there was reasonable certainty it would run well. I

So the issue is building a square chassis

 

I am not an especially productive modeller and I'm certainly not a highly-skilled finescale modeller. But I must have built at least 50 wagon kits, and in the last 25 years there have been very few that won't run. I'd say my success rate is over 95%. And failures can be rebuilt

 

1. Get a dead flat surface to check that all four feet are on the floor. A mirror is ideal - at a pinch an old CD will do.

 

2. Do a dry run before cementing the thing together. Cement 1 solebar in place , then do a dry run with the wheels and the other solebar tacked in place with blutack (or even held) Sight down the chassis between the axles . If the axles are parallel, all's well . If not , you will need to drift a bearing hole up or down to sort it out.

 

3. Make sure you file the top of  both solebars flat before assembly to remove any mould line /flash 

 

4. This bit's a bodge but it works - don't assemble any wagon chassis "tight" . Make sure at least one  wheelset has a bit of slop, so it can float and adjust. In an emergency this can be created by melting one bearing in a little with a soldering iron, so the wheelset is loose and can float.

 

Dapol's ex Airfix wagon kits were designed by a large organisation highly skilled in plastic kit design. If you can't build one of those square then no plastic locomotive kit can be designed to satisfy you.

[Ravenser]

Which kits have you built recently where the instructions are lacking?

 

there seems to plenty of talk in general terms about these kits with bad instruction but the actual detail seems to be lacking.

 

Specific examples please?

 

Craig W

 

Coopercraft LNER Tourist Brake third. I'm having to reengineer quite a bit of it , so the instructions are not necessarily relevant.

 

Bratchill 150. Having had to re-engineer the bogies and the underframes, replace the windows with etched frames/lazercut , get lighting /decoder in somehow, add an interior and Kadees , - none of this foreseen by the instructions (ok that's not that recent and the EMUs are not necessarily affected - he supplied EMU underframe gubbins)

 

DC Kits 128 - caused by the fact I bought a body kit + Replica chassis not the original full kit, and am modifying for a particular variant

[Legend]

So the issue is building a square chassis

 

I am not an especially productive modeller and I'm certainly not a highly-skilled finescale modeller. But I must have built at least 50 wagon kits, and in the last 25 years there have been very few that won't run. I'd say my success rate is over 95%. And failures can be rebuilt

 

1. Get a dead flat surface to check that all four feet are on the floor. A mirror is ideal - at a pinch an old CD will do.

 

2. Do a dry run before cementing the thing together. Cement 1 solebar in place , then do a dry run with the wheels and the other solebar tacked in place with blutack (or even held) Sight down the chassis between the axles . If the axles are parallel, all's well . If not , you will need to drift a bearing hole up or down to sort it out.

 

3. Make sure you file the top of both solebars flat before assembly to remove any mould line /flash

 

4. This bit's a bodge but it works - don't assemble any wagon chassis "tight" . Make sure at least one wheelset has a bit of slop, so it can float and adjust. In an emergency this can be created by melting one bearing in a little with a soldering iron, so the wheelset is loose and can float.

 

Dapol's ex Airfix wagon kits were designed by a large organisation highly skilled in plastic kit design. If you can't build one of those square then no plastic locomotive kit can be designed to satisfy you.

Yep spot on Ravenser, although the issue might also be lack of weight . But that’s why on a locomotive I’d be looking at a metal chassis that’s capable of slotting together, as in a Triang CKD kit Edited March 13, 2018 by Legend

[Barry O]

Coopercraft LNER Tourist Brake third. I'm having to reengineer quite a bit of it , so the instructions are not necessarily relevant.

 

Bratchill 150. Having had to re-engineer the bogies and the underframes, replace the windows with etched frames/lazercut , get lighting /decoder in somehow, add an interior and Kadees , - none of this foreseen by the instructions (ok that's not that recent and the EMUs are not necessarily affected - he supplied EMU underframe gubbins)

 

DC Kits 128 - caused by the fact I bought a body kit + Replica chassis not the original full kit, and am modifying for a particular variant

So none of these are being built, by your choice, as per the original design? Don't see the instructions are relevant at all for these!

 

One of the "tricks" about building kits is making use of specialist "tools" ( such as an elastic band or two to hold the fuselage halves together in an Airfix plane kit).

 

For 4mm loco kit chassis try buying a Poppy chassis jig. Using that makes getting loco chassis square so easy.

[Ravenser]

So none of these are being built, by your choice, as per the original design? Don't see the instructions are relevant at all for these!

 

One of the "tricks" about building kits is making use of specialist "tools" ( such as an elastic band or two to hold the fuselage halves together in an Airfix plane kit).

 

For 4mm loco kit chassis try buying a Poppy chassis jig. Using that makes getting loco chassis square so easy.

 

- Coopercraft Tourist Bk 3rd. The plastic roof moulding supplied does not fit the body , and cannot be made to fit the body. Therefore I have had to source a section of aluminium extrusion from Wizard Models. This will need to be cut to length , and as the vehicle has bow-ends, dressed back on each side at both ends,symmetrically, somehow. Then I have to sort out roof vents - somehow. Naturally the instructions don't cover any of this.... There are no instructions with the aluminium extrusion

 

I have a feeling you are left to sort out your own arrangements for attaching the bogies - brass bolts inserted . Kadee couplings weren't envisaged by the designers. Moulded table tops are supplied - they don't appear to fit between the seating mouldings supplied. Painting has to be incorporated within the build process - something not acknowledged by the instructions.

 

I wouldn't see replacing the roof as my choice , exactly - there isn't an alternative if you want to build the kit successfully

 

- DC Kits 128. Charlie was advertising his kit as a package deal "body only + Replica chassis", whereas the original kit was a full kit . I find that the etched underframe bits supplied don't fit with the chassis supplied , because the original kit floorpan would have been at a different height. The relationship/join between body and chassis is up to the builder . The instructions don't address any of this , because they're from the original full kit, and relating the underframe etches to a Goulding drawing is not easy. We are commonly told that "a good result can be achieved if you add detail" - this means in practice that you need to add the handrails all round. The instructions - never mind the kit - don't offer anything on this point. "Yer on yer own, mate"  I'm not quite clear how the plastic buffer beams are going to relate to the Diecast Replica chassis 

 

While I understand where Charlie was coming from , trying to clear stocks, I was unaware I would be facing all these issues.

 

- Bratchill 150: The bogies supplied are wrong. The underframe equipment supplied is completely wrong. This is because mouldings from a 3rd rail EMU kit have been supplied to avoid the cost of tooling up something that's correct.  No interior supplied - you're on your own. No provision for/comment about fitting Kadees - in fact I'm not sure there's any provision for fitting couplings at all. Find your own motor bogie, and work out yourself how to attach it to the body, how to fit bogie sideframes to it , and how to arrange pickups to any trailing bogie

 

And of course no hint in the brief instructions how you sort out any of this . "An interior can be fitted" doesn't really help....

 

The point I was trying to make is that very often a kit cannot be built satisfactorily using the parts supplied and following the instructions supplied. Either because the parts won't go together satisfactorily; or because parts of the kit are seriously wrong, and if you follow the instructions you'll get a poor, badly inaccurate model; or because the kit isn't really comprehensive and the modeller is left to sort out parts of the build on his own with his own materials ; or because the kit design simply doesn't envisage things like Kadees or DCC and doesn't cater for them.

 

 

 

I don't feel that these issues are of my choosing or my making - I'd very much prefer the roof moulding to fit, but it doesn't. Whether you class these as defects in the kit design or in the instructions , the result is the same - to make a success of the kit you have to start doing all sorts of things using stuff that isn't in the box and working out for yourself how to do it. I'd say something like 2/3rds to 3/4rs of kits require some degree of "re-engineering" in this way if you want to get a reasonable model you can use at the end of it.( And at that point the build sequence needs to be rearranged around the corrective actions, and the instructions are only intermittently relevant)

 

It's bad enough being faced with problem after problem like this on a multiplicity of projects, without being told publicly that the only problem is you and you're simply being difficult and unreasonable.

 

I appreciate that an experienced commission-builder could effectively scratchbuild the model himself if push came to shove, and therefore the kit is effectively just a scratch aid. If it goes together as designed in strict accordance with the instructions that's a nice bonus - in the meantime an experienced builder will simply re-engineer the kit as necessary and "fill in the gaps" in kit/instructions as he goes without really thinking about it. For the less experienced modeller, this starts to be a significant obstacle

Edited March 13, 2018 by Ravenser

[PatB]

Something that hasn't really been covered, as far as I can see, is the fact that kits were never a cheap option. A perusal of the prices in the ads in old magazines reveals the cost for a complete kit to be anything up to 2 or 3 times that of an equivalent r-t-r loco. Even a Kemilway motorising kit for an Airfix Bulleid pacific was ~50% more expensive than a generic r-t-r pacific in one ad I found.

 

What I did notice, however, was that a number of model shops specialising in loco kits offered packages of kit, motor, gears and wheels, rather than leaving the buyer to choose and source their own hardware. This seems to have become less prevalent with the demise of the specialist shops. The kit now needs to be bought direct from the manufacturer who may or may not be able to supply or advise on suitable (and, importantly, obtainable) bits and pieces.

 

it's worth noting that K's kits, whilst reputedly of...erm...variable quality were complete. I wonder if this has any bearing on the apparently huge number that have been built over the years. Admittedly, some less than successfully, but I think the number that still seem to be around in finished form suggests that Keysers did something right.

[Guy Rixon]

So the issue is building a square chassis

 

I am not an especially productive modeller and I'm certainly not a highly-skilled finescale modeller. But I must have built at least 50 wagon kits, and in the last 25 years there have been very few that won't run. I'd say my success rate is over 95%. And failures can be rebuilt

 

1. Get a dead flat surface to check that all four feet are on the floor. A mirror is ideal - at a pinch an old CD will do.

 

2. Do a dry run before cementing the thing together. Cement 1 solebar in place , then do a dry run with the wheels and the other solebar tacked in place with blutack (or even held) Sight down the chassis between the axles . If the axles are parallel, all's well . If not , you will need to drift a bearing hole up or down to sort it out.

 

3. Make sure you file the top of  both solebars flat before assembly to remove any mould line /flash 

 

4. This bit's a bodge but it works - don't assemble any wagon chassis "tight" . Make sure at least one  wheelset has a bit of slop, so it can float and adjust. In an emergency this can be created by melting one bearing in a little with a soldering iron, so the wheelset is loose and can float.

 

Dapol's ex Airfix wagon kits were designed by a large organisation highly skilled in plastic kit design. If you can't build one of those square then no plastic locomotive kit can be designed to satisfy you.

 

It can be easier to build a 4-wheeled vehicle with brass axleguards than to use the plastic axleguards moulded into a kit. Making one axle rock, using the brass parts, ensures that all four wheels are on the rails, even if the construction is a bit off square. And no soldering is needed to use these parts.

[Guy Rixon]

...It has to be plastic. I really don’t think there are many people out there with soldering or metal work experience. I suppose it could be laser cut or 3D printer derived. I don’t know how easy that would be . Combined with a CKD style chassis to get it to run well , would work for me...

Mike Trice has produced a kit for a coach body from printed resin. Looks to have worked well. Making it a kit (of about 6 parts) rather than a pre-assembled body works round some problems in the printing process.

[sem34090]

A few points from me.

 

Firstly, I am liking what 'Legend' is saying, and it ties in nicely with my thoughts. Interesting note on the small, British based, company that manages to produce cheap plastic kits for a niche market...

 

Secondly, I am always on the lookout for K's Kits (particularly the terrier...) on ebay as they are complete! The same goes for anything I'm looking for - I need it at a reasonable price, and wheels, gears and motors all add up to create a very expensive model that I cannot afford.

 

 

Finally, I have a scheme forming in my mind...

 

I would like a few opinions on my next planned (after the current projects) 3D Printed kit idea. I intend to cover the LBSCR Classes A1 and A1x, in an economical and simple fashion. 

 

The plan is inspired by 'Sparkshot' and consists of the following:

 

A series of basic bodies to cover the different boiler and cab/bunker variations.

A series of domes and chimneys to cover further variations.

Smokebox doors to cover variants.

Splashers to cover variants.

Sandboxes to cover variants.

Brake Blocks to cover variants.

Miscellaneous fixtures and fittings to cover variants.

A few chassis to cover different variants (including 2-4-0)

 

In addition to this 'pick and mix' I would intend to offer a few 'standard' versions as complete loco shells. I will also attempt to design the model in such a way that it can either fit the existing Dapol/Hornby chassis (and maybe parts from the body, with its many inaccuracies and hybrid features) or a specially-designed scale chassis. This should allow any modeller to put together a model of any terrier at pretty well any stage of its life, the following should be able to be shown, amongst other versions and freelance versions:

Original A1, as built, any batch.

A1 with no condensing pipes and cast iron brake blocks (last batch built with latter feature)

2-4-0 A1.

Motor-Fitted A1.

Pauling & Co. A1 (Dumb Buffers)

Newhaven Harbour Co. A1 (And A1x)

IoWCR A1 (And A1x with above-footplate splashers and IOW Cast Chimney)

LSWR A1 (Including Drummond Boiler and Chimney, plus push-pull equipment)

SECR A1 (Including Wainwright Boiler)

FYN A1 (As above)

KESR A1 (And A1x - Including bunker variations)

EHLR A1 (And A1x)

'Brighton' A1x (Splashers modified, various other small changes)

'IOW' A1x (Splashers not modified, cast or Drummond Chimney, extended bunker. All era-dependent)

Myriad coal rail variants.

Myriad toolbox variants.

A1 with extended smokebox door straps (As per the preserved 'Boxhill')

'PO' A1x (Similar to 'IOW' A1x, but with a few differences, sometimes work executed at Brighton)

I gather there are many more variations, and there has been an excellent, though as yet unpublished, document on this matter by a member of the greater RMweb parish.

 

The idea is to allow people of many different abilities and pockets to put together a series of accurate locos. This could range from simply purchasing a 'complete' shell, finishing it (I may yet offer colour-printing, I need to look into it more.) and fitting it to a Hornby/Dapol chassis, to working out an exact combination of parts required to represent a particular member of the class at a particular time and assembling the model onto it's own 'scale chassis'.

 

Of course, I intend to offer the models in a few other scales, and some of the bits may be done for 7mm to assist those working on detailing Dapol's model, but the main scales to be offered will be 3mm, 3.5mm, 4mm, 5.5mm and 10mm. I may also go down to 2mm, we'll see.

 

Criticism invited and welcomed!

[Mad McCann]

Hi Brian

 

What about the advantages and disadvantages of scratchbuilding?

 

Advantage, fun to do.

Disadvantage, can't think of one.

 

Go on everyone have a go at making something.

I reckon you’re bob on with that, Clive.

Admittedly, I’m going to get all my half-built kits completed before I try to scratch build the chassis for the Wee Smellie Bogie I found on eBin!

 

 

D4

[PatB]

A few points from me.

 

Firstly, I am liking what 'Legend' is saying, and it ties in nicely with my thoughts. Interesting note on the small, British based, company that manages to produce cheap plastic kits for a niche market...

 

Secondly, I am always on the lookout for K's Kits (particularly the terrier...) on ebay as they are complete! The same goes for anything I'm looking for - I need it at a reasonable price, and wheels, gears and motors all add up to create a very expensive model that I cannot afford.

 

 

Finally, I have a scheme forming in my mind...

 

I would like a few opinions on my next planned (after the current projects) 3D Printed kit idea. I intend to cover the LBSCR Classes A1 and A1x, in an economical and simple fashion. 

 

The plan is inspired by 'Sparkshot' and consists of the following:

 

A series of basic bodies to cover the different boiler and cab/bunker variations.

A series of domes and chimneys to cover further variations.

Smokebox doors to cover variants.

Splashers to cover variants.

Sandboxes to cover variants.

Brake Blocks to cover variants.

Miscellaneous fixtures and fittings to cover variants.

A few chassis to cover different variants (including 2-4-0)

 

In addition to this 'pick and mix' I would intend to offer a few 'standard' versions as complete loco shells. I will also attempt to design the model in such a way that it can either fit the existing Dapol/Hornby chassis (and maybe parts from the body, with its many inaccuracies and hybrid features) or a specially-designed scale chassis. This should allow any modeller to put together a model of any terrier at pretty well any stage of its life, the following should be able to be shown, amongst other versions and freelance versions:

Original A1, as built, any batch.

A1 with no condensing pipes and cast iron brake blocks (last batch built with latter feature)

2-4-0 A1.

Motor-Fitted A1.

Pauling & Co. A1 (Dumb Buffers)

Newhaven Harbour Co. A1 (And A1x)

IoWCR A1 (And A1x with above-footplate splashers and IOW Cast Chimney)

LSWR A1 (Including Drummond Boiler and Chimney, plus push-pull equipment)

SECR A1 (Including Wainwright Boiler)

FYN A1 (As above)

KESR A1 (And A1x - Including bunker variations)

EHLR A1 (And A1x)

'Brighton' A1x (Splashers modified, various other small changes)

'IOW' A1x (Splashers not modified, cast or Drummond Chimney, extended bunker. All era-dependent)

Myriad coal rail variants.

Myriad toolbox variants.

A1 with extended smokebox door straps (As per the preserved 'Boxhill')

'PO' A1x (Similar to 'IOW' A1x, but with a few differences, sometimes work executed at Brighton)

I gather there are many more variations, and there has been an excellent, though as yet unpublished, document on this matter by a member of the greater RMweb parish.

 

The idea is to allow people of many different abilities and pockets to put together a series of accurate locos. This could range from simply purchasing a 'complete' shell, finishing it (I may yet offer colour-printing, I need to look into it more.) and fitting it to a Hornby/Dapol chassis, to working out an exact combination of parts required to represent a particular member of the class at a particular time and assembling the model onto it's own 'scale chassis'.

 

Of course, I intend to offer the models in a few other scales, and some of the bits may be done for 7mm to assist those working on detailing Dapol's model, but the main scales to be offered will be 3mm, 3.5mm, 4mm, 5.5mm and 10mm. I may also go down to 2mm, we'll see.

 

Criticism invited and welcomed!

 

First off, good luck with the project. Whilst I'm sure there will be naysayers, I would say that the Terrier lends itself very well to what you're trying to do. It's a prototype with wide appeal and application but there is not, and has never been a good r-t-r representation, nor a straightforward way of modelling all the variations. The one r-t-r offering is of questionable fidelity and running quality as it comes out of the box and is now rather expensive for what it offers.

 

3D printing would appear ideal to achieve what you are proposing, offering a feasible means of offering a multitude of different components to cover all the variants at an affordable price. If you can make a printed chassis work, so much the better as it also offers a near equivalent of a mass-produced moulded chassis, without the tooling costs. As an engineer and long time mechanical fiddler, building a working chassis doesn't daunt me, but I'd be prepared to pay money for the convenience of obtaining a complete unit to which I can attach the assorted whirry bits. The big question is accuracy. It's vital that the axle hole centres be identically spaced as any coupling rod supplied, or one or t'other be made easy to adjust. Any error and the chassis will run like a 3-legged dog, which is very discouraging for someone starting out in kitbuilding  I'm not sure how you intend supplying coupling rods, but might I suggest contemplating how you might enable the chassis to be used as a jig to assist the builder in drilling their own rods? I'm thinking of a set of drill guide bushes that will fit into the axle bearings and the ability to temporarily attach the chassis to whatever material is being used for the rods.

 

So, yeah, I think that if you can bring this to market in a way that you can offer enough bits to build a complete loco for around the same price (or even a bit more, wheels not being cheap when bought separately) than the Hornby offering, and get sufficient (to you) remuneration for your efforts, the idea potentially has legs. If a Terrier can be made to work, then more obscure prototypes, or others with similarly wide variations which make them difficult to tool for by conventional means, could be tried.

[Pteremy]

I can't comment on your choice of prototype, but there is an obvious hierarchy that your proposal could deliver to, which would also mirror all the varying modelling capabilities and inclinations recorded in this thread:

 

- detailing kit for commercial product

- body kit to fit commercial chassis

- body kit to fit EM/P4 converted commercial chassis

- complete body and chassis kit (OO/EM/P4)

 

A different sort of design clever.

[sem34090]

This is the idea. I myself am no accomplished kitbuilder, and at present the prospect of fabricating a metal chassis that I must ensure won't short out is rather daunting. That's not to say I don't intend trying. My plan is to be able to offer a popular prototype accurately in 4mm, 3.5mm, 3mm, maybe 2mm, 5.5mm and 10mm for the first time. I will start with 4mm, as that is the scale I model in.

 

As mentioned above, as far as the 4mm models go, there is a definite hierachy:

 

- Components to allow detailing of the inaccurate RTR body. This would allow for, say, the creation of a rough representation of the LSWR Reboilered loco, through the use of a new chimney and dome.

- Replacement accurate body onto which the chassis and handrails, detailing components, etc from the RTR offering are fixed. This merely fixes the basic shape issues, and would allow (say) and IOW bunker and cast chimney to be fitted.

- A selection of components to fit a basic 'base' body. This would allow the purchaser to essentially customise their loco to almost all of the variations enacted on the Terriers over time. This would account for variations in bunker, coal rails, dome, safety valve, smokebox, boiler, chimney, etc... This would still fit RTR chassis.

- All of the above to fit 3D Printed 00, EM or P4 Chassis, the latter possibly with Hornblocks. I need to investigate this further. Rods will most likely be 3D Printed from bronze-infused steel, though I have yet to test this.

 

We are unlikely/never going to see all of these variations on an RTR model (especially ones like the dumb buffers fitted to those used on the construction of the GCR London Extension.) so I figured it was worth a go!

 

This will be a summer project...

Edited March 15, 2018 by sem34090

[hayfield]

A few points from me.

 

Firstly, I am liking what 'Legend' is saying, and it ties in nicely with my thoughts. Interesting note on the small, British based, company that manages to produce cheap plastic kits for a niche market...

 

Secondly, I am always on the lookout for K's Kits (particularly the terrier...) on ebay as they are complete! The same goes for anything I'm looking for - I need it at a reasonable price, and wheels, gears and motors all add up to create a very expensive model that I cannot afford.

 

 

Finally, I have a scheme forming in my mind...

 

I would like a few opinions on my next planned (after the current projects) 3D Printed kit idea. I intend to cover the LBSCR Classes A1 and A1x, in an economical and simple fashion. 

 

The plan is inspired by 'Sparkshot' and consists of the following:

 

A series of basic bodies to cover the different boiler and cab/bunker variations.

A series of domes and chimneys to cover further variations.

Smokebox doors to cover variants.

Splashers to cover variants.

Sandboxes to cover variants.

Brake Blocks to cover variants.

Miscellaneous fixtures and fittings to cover variants.

A few chassis to cover different variants (including 2-4-0)

 

In addition to this 'pick and mix' I would intend to offer a few 'standard' versions as complete loco shells. I will also attempt to design the model in such a way that it can either fit the existing Dapol/Hornby chassis (and maybe parts from the body, with its many inaccuracies and hybrid features) or a specially-designed scale chassis. This should allow any modeller to put together a model of any terrier at pretty well any stage of its life, the following should be able to be shown, amongst other versions and freelance versions:

Original A1, as built, any batch.

A1 with no condensing pipes and cast iron brake blocks (last batch built with latter feature)

2-4-0 A1.

Motor-Fitted A1.

Pauling & Co. A1 (Dumb Buffers)

Newhaven Harbour Co. A1 (And A1x)

IoWCR A1 (And A1x with above-footplate splashers and IOW Cast Chimney)

LSWR A1 (Including Drummond Boiler and Chimney, plus push-pull equipment)

SECR A1 (Including Wainwright Boiler)

FYN A1 (As above)

KESR A1 (And A1x - Including bunker variations)

EHLR A1 (And A1x)

'Brighton' A1x (Splashers modified, various other small changes)

'IOW' A1x (Splashers not modified, cast or Drummond Chimney, extended bunker. All era-dependent)

Myriad coal rail variants.

Myriad toolbox variants.

A1 with extended smokebox door straps (As per the preserved 'Boxhill')

'PO' A1x (Similar to 'IOW' A1x, but with a few differences, sometimes work executed at Brighton)

I gather there are many more variations, and there has been an excellent, though as yet unpublished, document on this matter by a member of the greater RMweb parish.

 

The idea is to allow people of many different abilities and pockets to put together a series of accurate locos. This could range from simply purchasing a 'complete' shell, finishing it (I may yet offer colour-printing, I need to look into it more.) and fitting it to a Hornby/Dapol chassis, to working out an exact combination of parts required to represent a particular member of the class at a particular time and assembling the model onto it's own 'scale chassis'.

 

Of course, I intend to offer the models in a few other scales, and some of the bits may be done for 7mm to assist those working on detailing Dapol's model, but the main scales to be offered will be 3mm, 3.5mm, 4mm, 5.5mm and 10mm. I may also go down to 2mm, we'll see.

 

Criticism invited and welcomed!

 

 

I am sorry but especially for locos why do we need plastic ?

 

The best kits use the correct material for the purpose, etched brass where needed, both resin and cast whitemetal parts where appropriate, turned brass fittings etc 

Next lets have chassis that are both robust and repairable

 

As for a new range of spare/detail parts, there are plenty out there

 

I can see there is a place in the future for 3D printing, looking at the products from the likes of Modelu exciting times, then I see the orange peel finish (looking like a badly sprayed item) and cringe at whats being offered

 

For me a loco not only needs to look correct but also feel right, something plastic fails to do.

I think the way forward and to improve kits is for composite models to be produced

Edited March 15, 2018 by hayfield

[Craigw]

This is the idea. I myself am no accomplished kitbuilder, and at present the prospect of fabricating a metal chassis that I must ensure won't short out is rather daunting. That's not to say I don't intend trying. My plan is to be able to offer a popular prototype accurately in 4mm, 3.5mm, 3mm, maybe 2mm, 5.5mm and 10mm for the first time. I will start with 4mm, as that is the scale I model in.

 

As mentioned above, as far as the 4mm models go, there is a definite hierachy:

 

- Components to allow detailing of the inaccurate RTR body. This would allow for, say, the creation of a rough representation of the LSWR Reboilered loco, through the use of a new chimney and dome.

- Replacement accurate body onto which the chassis and handrails, detailing components, etc from the RTR offering are fixed. This merely fixes the basic shape issues, and would allow (say) and IOW bunker and cast chimney to be fitted.

- A selection of components to fit a basic 'base' body. This would allow the purchaser to essentially customise their loco to almost all of the variations enacted on the Terriers over time. This would account for variations in bunker, coal rails, dome, safety valve, smokebox, boiler, chimney, etc... This would still fit RTR chassis.

- All of the above to fit 3D Printed 00, EM or P4 Chassis, the latter possibly with Hornblocks. I need to investigate this further. Rods will most likely be 3D Printed from bronze-infused steel, though I have yet to test this.

 

We are unlikely/never going to see all of these variations on an RTR model (especially ones like the dumb buffers fitted to those used on the construction of the GCR London Extension.) so I figured it was worth a go!

 

This will be a summer project...

 

So what do you propose for Motor, gear box, wheels, bearings  and pick ups?

 

All of these would be essentials to include in a "low cost" kit.

 

Will hand rails and other stand off detail be moulded on or separate, in which case you need to consider how to manufacture them and handrail knobs.

 

All things that need to be considered and all things that add to cost.

 

Craig W

Edited March 15, 2018 by Craigw

[chris p bacon]

A few points from me.

 

Secondly, I am always on the lookout for K's Kits (particularly the terrier...) on ebay as they are complete! The same goes for anything I'm looking for - I need it at a reasonable price, and wheels, gears and motors all add up to create a very expensive model that I cannot afford.

 

 

Finally, I have a scheme forming in my mind...

 

I would like a few opinions on my next planned (after the current projects) 3D Printed kit idea. I intend to cover the LBSCR Classes A1 and A1x, in an economical and simple fashion. 

 

The plan is inspired by 'Sparkshot' and consists of the following:

 

A series of basic bodies to cover the different boiler and cab/bunker variations.

A series of domes and chimneys to cover further variations.

Smokebox doors to cover variants.

Splashers to cover variants.

Sandboxes to cover variants.

Brake Blocks to cover variants.

Miscellaneous fixtures and fittings to cover variants.

A few chassis to cover different variants (including 2-4-0)

 

In addition to this 'pick and mix' I would intend to offer a few 'standard' versions as complete loco shells. I will also attempt to design the model in such a way that it can either fit the existing Dapol/Hornby chassis (and maybe parts from the body, with its many inaccuracies and hybrid features) or a specially-designed scale chassis. This should allow any modeller to put together a model of any terrier at pretty well any stage of its life, the following should be able to be shown, amongst other versions and freelance versions:

Original A1, as built, any batch.

A1 with no condensing pipes and cast iron brake blocks (last batch built with latter feature)

2-4-0 A1.

Motor-Fitted A1.

Pauling & Co. A1 (Dumb Buffers)

Newhaven Harbour Co. A1 (And A1x)

IoWCR A1 (And A1x with above-footplate splashers and IOW Cast Chimney)

LSWR A1 (Including Drummond Boiler and Chimney, plus push-pull equipment)

SECR A1 (Including Wainwright Boiler)

FYN A1 (As above)

KESR A1 (And A1x - Including bunker variations)

EHLR A1 (And A1x)

'Brighton' A1x (Splashers modified, various other small changes)

'IOW' A1x (Splashers not modified, cast or Drummond Chimney, extended bunker. All era-dependent)

Myriad coal rail variants.

Myriad toolbox variants.

A1 with extended smokebox door straps (As per the preserved 'Boxhill')

'PO' A1x (Similar to 'IOW' A1x, but with a few differences, sometimes work executed at Brighton)

I gather there are many more variations, and there has been an excellent, though as yet unpublished, document on this matter by a member of the greater RMweb parish.

 

The idea is to allow people of many different abilities and pockets to put together a series of accurate locos. This could range from simply purchasing a 'complete' shell, finishing it (I may yet offer colour-printing, I need to look into it more.) and fitting it to a Hornby/Dapol chassis, to working out an exact combination of parts required to represent a particular member of the class at a particular time and assembling the model onto it's own 'scale chassis'.

 

Of course, I intend to offer the models in a few other scales, and some of the bits may be done for 7mm to assist those working on detailing Dapol's model, but the main scales to be offered will be 3mm, 3.5mm, 4mm, 5.5mm and 10mm. I may also go down to 2mm, we'll see.

 

Criticism invited and welcomed!

 

 

 

What you are proposing does not fit with your mantra of 'cheap & reasonable cost'  

 

To be able to produce the items you suggest you'll be printing in FUD/FXD,  a basic loco body will be in excess of £50, and then you have to add wheels, gears, motor & chassis*, Handrails, Handrail knobs, couplings etc which will push the 'simple' kit to £150+ 

You might suggest WSF because it's cheaper, but I would say you need to design and print one in that material, then test print it first so that you can see just how poor it is before offering it out.

 

The only way you're going to see if this is worthwhile is to draw something you want, print it and see what it comes out like. If it's ok then you could offer it through Shapeways.  

 

I helped in a small way with some pre-grouping locos that several of us wanted, with 2 skilled 3D designers and a skilled etch designer among the 5 of us, it took at least 50-60+ hours for each design along with test prints before we were satisfied.  The cost of each print ( with separate chassis) was an average of £95 for a tank loco and £75 for a loco body + £50 for a tender.

 

 

* How to motorise a 3D design is commonly either not bothered with, or left completely to the purchaser, and yet making the thing go is probably the most fundamental thing a modeller wants. If you don't design a kit around some suggested power plant then it really isn't worth starting.

[JSpencer]

Making a metal chassis that won't short out is easy to do. The harder part is making sure the chassis will go round your curves.

 

Kits of big locos generally won't like anything less than 3ft radius. I've cheated as much as much as I can to give a W1 as much side play as possible, but 3ft is the limit.

That said the big classes are getting good coverage by RTR makers.

Big classis can often use an RTR chassis, for example Turbomotive! So body kit for an existing chassis can be a good starting point (you probably need to wait for a cheap model/chassis appears on an auction site though).

 

For 0-6-0, Q1 and Q, I have managed to built these to go round a 22 inch and that is the limit.

 

What is also hard is assembling the thing so that there are no tight spots and that all wheels touch the rails (in an 0-6-0, the bearings often need to be opened up, so I purposely open up the middle pair towards the top and end pairs towards the bottom, this means that if a wheel pair has to be marginally higher than the others then it will be the middle pair to ensure the loco sits square on the track).

Once the wheels are turning freely in the bearings, you can fit the conrods, make sure they run freely too. Then the piston rods and finally the valve gear. This often needs to be tweeked to ensure it does not lock. The rivets need to loose enough to ensure they don't bind, but tight enough to ensure it does fall apart.

 

Hard of course, is choosing you wheels (most default to romfords these days), pick-ups (plunger type or wiper, which size stripe? - here the chassis spacers can hold a bit of PCB to solder wires). Motor and gears.

 

In the 90s, you had portescap, lovely gearboxs. But a lot of people use DS10s and 1 stage gear boxes that I found dreadful (I felt the chassis need to be dead square and very rigid to work ok!).

My preference is 2 stage gearbox with a big can motor, 40:1 gives good running while allowing a good degree of play.

 

Flywheels is another debate. In an ideal world, big motor and big flywheel, in practice, space will be tight on some/most models. My feelings are to use a bigger motor and only add flywheels if there is space. Others will have other experiences.

 

There are some challenges but equally these chassis do allow you to experiment and can be taken apart and corrected if they are found to be under powered etc....

[Legend]

JSpencer above is clearly an accomplished builder and his comments above show the wealth of experience he has building kits to talk about 3ft curves 22 inches, opening up bearings etc. "What is also hard is assembling the thing so that there are no tight spots and that all wheels touch the rails " This is exactly what puts me off building kits . I just don't have these skill sets . I think that possibly is also the case for lots of other people , they are put off by the complexities of assembling the chassis , and in my case the likelihood of not getting it wrong. Could this also be the reason there are lots of unfinished or unbuilt kits . We really wanted the loco , but when it came down to it we don't have the ability to make it? So again for me a kit would only become attractive if there is a reasonable chance of success . That means a Triang "CKD" approach to building the chassis , with plastic construction kit type body . If that was available I'd give it a go.

 

Hayfield asks why do we need plastic? I suspect Hayfield is also an accomplished builder, but for many of us the thought of brass, etchings and white metal is very daunting . Plastic on the other hand is something we are very comfortable with. I think this is what would distinguish a range of "Easy Build" kits to what is already out there.

Edited March 15, 2018 by Legend