Would we accept less detailed models

[Phil Parker]

13 hours ago, The Johnster said:

It has been done, though, in N gauge by Little Loco.  I have no idea how well these sell but they seem to have kept their producers in business.  The starting gun was fired a while ago, though, and things are different now...

 

If it's such a success, I'm surprised I've never heard of "Little Loco" - any chance of a link?

[Reorte]

38 minutes ago, Phatbob said:

Very true.  I for one will never feel any nostalgia for Pacers.

However, if I may play Devil's advocate, we now have the concept of "the Concorde moment".  The point at which no change ever seems to bring any improvement and usually quite the reverse.  By example, every new train is less comfortable than the old one it replaced.  Pacers are perhaps the exception that proves this rule.

Maybe RTR models are reaching their "Concorde moment" to remain afordable and consequently commercially viable, levels of fitted detail will have to fall?  Only time will tell.

Not a bad idea though. I think I said earlier in this thread that it would be good to have cheaper models with less detail that are nevertheless designed to not preclude adding detail should you want it (of course easier said than done). Those who want the detail are most likely to be the sort of people capable of adding it themselves.

[MartinRS]

1 hour ago, Phil Parker said:

 

If it's such a success, I'm surprised I've never heard of "Little Loco" - any chance of a link?

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09818565

[Phil Parker]

1 minute ago, MartinRS said:

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09818565

 

They have gone bust, not what I'd call a success. Also, their models were O gauge and @The Johnster said the models were N.

[AY Mod]

3 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

 @The Johnster said 

 

Reputable source. 😇

[The Johnster]

Ah, shows how much notice I take of matters in N gauge, and another nail in the coffin of standoff model production if lack of demand was the reason for their going through the hoop.

[The Johnster]

1 minute ago, AY Mod said:

 

Reputable source. 😇

 

Miaow, Andy!😈

[AY Mod]

Just now, The Johnster said:

Ah, shows how much notice I take of matters in N gauge, and another nail in the coffin of standoff model production if lack of demand was the reason for their going through the hoop.

 

Nope, the point is Little Loco were O gauge, overly complex and circled the drain.

[The Johnster]

Who was I thinking of then?  There was a firm making standoff locos in N gauge, wasnt't there, mostly 0-6-0 tender types, I just got the name wrong, confused old dodderer that I am.

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

 

Does The Johnster mean Union Mills who did a very fine line in lower detail cast N gauge locos - as long as they had a simple tender (no watercarts 😔) and inside valves.

 

Business now closed, but because the owner Colin has recently retired and not because it failed.

 

8 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Who was I thinking of then?  There was a firm making standoff locos in N gauge, wasnt't there, mostly 0-6-0 tender types, I just got the name wrong, confused old dodderer that I am.

I refer you back to my last post @The Johnster

[The Johnster]

That's the fellas, Union Mills!  Tx, Woodenhead.

[RJS1977]

7 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

But isn't that what the EFE range and perhaps to a lesser extent Oxford range all about? 

 

We can see how this strategy has overwhelmed the big expensive producers can't we?

 

So my real question to all of those who have posted that they want/need cheaper less detailed models, how many EFE and Oxford models are in your collection?

 

But then of course that depends on whether Oxford/EFE/Railroad are actually making the prototypes we want.

 

I bought an Oxford Dean Goods, but I wouldn't have bought a Radial, or 1938 Tube stock because they neither ran to Aberystwyth, or (so far) on the Cholsey & Wallingford Railway!

[Rivercider]

3 hours ago, Phatbob said:

Very true.  I for one will never feel any nostalgia for Pacers.

However, if I may play Devil's advocate, we now have the concept of "the Concorde moment".  The point at which no change ever seems to bring any improvement and usually quite the reverse.  By example, every new train is less comfortable than the old one it replaced.  Pacers are perhaps the exception that proves this rule.

Maybe RTR models are reaching their "Concorde moment" to remain afordable and consequently commercially viable, levels of fitted detail will have to fall?  Only time will tell.

 

I have defended Pacers before.

In a sense here we are mixing the model train world with the real railway.

Less detailed model trains, and cheaper commuter/branch trains.

 

At the time they were introduced Pacers were perhaps the only way replacement trains might

have been procured within the budget available to keep lines open, and a service running.

I used them regularly, and once refurbed  with 2+2 seating found them pretty comfortable.

 

As an occasional purchaser of model railway stock I am not looking for all whistles and bells,

but something that 'looks' right, and runs well. To me a train, or yard, full of modestly detailed

but appropriate stock looks right to me,

 

cheers

[Andy Hayter]

9 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

But then of course that depends on whether Oxford/EFE/Railroad are actually making the prototypes we want.

 

I bought an Oxford Dean Goods, but I wouldn't have bought a Radial, or 1938 Tube stock because they neither ran to Aberystwyth, or (so far) on the Cholsey & Wallingford Railway!

 

 

 

Aberystwyth is a pretty defined and therefore limiting basis for selecting models - and mine is probably no less limiting - so it's not surprising that companies are not always producing things to your needs.

 

It is just how things work for everyone who has tightly defined area or time period.  There is nothing in Hornby's, Dapol's or Bachmann's announcements so far for this year that interests me.  A couple of years ago my wallet was taking a beating.

 

So "cheaper" models are not available for you and currently nothing is available for me - that will change for me and will probably change for you as well.  

 

[The Johnster]

I model the Tondu area in the 1948-58 period, and it is surprising how much of the stuff I need is produced in RTR.  Bachmann are the main culprit; 57xx, 8750, 94xx, 45xx, 4575, and 56xx.  In the red box corner, we have 2721 (withdrawn to be replaced by Wills 1854), 42xx, and 5101.  Rapido are going to produce one of the missing players, a 44xx (though these were mostly kept to the Porthcawl Branch) and that only leaves one missing, the solitary Collett 1938 31xx large prairie.  There were only 5 in this class, 3150 rebuilds all scrapped by 1960, and I can't see anybody producing one of these before a 3150 appears, and despite ticking a lot of what we think are the correct boxes for RTR production (wide geographical spread, long service life, fairly numerous) nobody seems to be clamouring for a 3150 (of course we might see one off the back of the Hornby or Dapol large prairies)

 

Coaching stock does not fare so well.  Ex-Airfix/Hornby A30 auto trailers are available in the requisite running numbers, and I use the Hornby 57' Collett suburbans though they are not correct for South Wales.  After that it's kits, and some of the stock I want, Diagram N and A10/A20 auto trailers, is not even avaialble by this means.  In the long term, I am hoping that Dapol will put the Lionheart N through a shrink ray and maybe even turn up some toplight non-gangwayeds that are not Main Line & City.

 

NPCCS, goods, and mineral stock was pooled in my period and a very large amount of it is to be had from the RTR world.  This would be true of any BR period layout set in any location. 

 

For some locations, coaching stock is going to be the big gap in RTR.  Supposing we consider the period Grouping to say 1960, when most of the pre-grouping stock had gone, there is no RTR GER, GCR, GNR, NER, LNER GE section sub-64', NBR, LYR, LNWR, GSWR or Midland coaching stock at all, or SECR, LBSCR or LSWR gangwayed and these, especially the Midland, were big main line companies that left a lot of stock to the Big 4 that survived into BR days.  The Caledonian is only represented by the old Triang coaches to go with 123.  For someone modelling the Big 4 in their first decade, there would be more stock from the pre-grouping companies than post-grouping except on the top expresses, and in some places this situation lasted many years.  GE section branches prior to the introduction of dmus in the mid-50s for example, and the entire pre-nationalisation. GC. 

 

Goods stock is in a similar position as regards pre-grouping items, though this is being rectified with the GER vans and SECR wagons; the fact that these are available in BR liveries shows how long they were in service.  No Midland, a massive fleet, but there are GW examples like the Iron Minks.  Oh, and the Triang Hull & Barnsley ventilated van.  Can't offhand think of any others!

[DY444]

I haven't read the whole thread so if I'm just saying the same as loads of other folk then I apologise  ...

 

It seems to me that the question is do models to the current standard(s) of detail/features blah, blah sell?  I'm not a retailer or a manufacturer but my perception is that by and large they do.  My memory might be wrong here (the hardware is ageing!) but my recollection was that the first batch of the most expensive new Bachmann 47s sold out first (possibly to Bachmann's surprise).  I see no obvious incentive for manufacturers to produce say £25 coaches if the £60 fully loaded one is a viable commercial proposition. 

 

To my mind it's like saying to BMW we know you can sell all the £50K+ cars you can make but would you stop making those and make something cheaper?   Why would they when they're doing fine thank you very much with what they are doing?  Ergo the only way I see a mass market change to less detail is if the higher spec stuff doesn't sell and I see no sign of that.       

[Colin_McLeod]

2 hours ago, DY444 said:

To my mind it's like saying to BMW we know you can sell all the £50K+ cars you can make but would you stop making those and make something cheaper?   Why would they when they're doing fine thank you very much with what they are doing?  Ergo the only way I see a mass market change to less detail is if the higher spec stuff doesn't sell and I see no sign of that

 

The difference between cars and model trains is that there are cheaper cars available from other manufacturers, whereas it seems that all model railway manufacturers are producing full fat items and/or charging full fat prices.

[RJS1977]

17 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

 

 

Aberystwyth is a pretty defined and therefore limiting basis for selecting models - and mine is probably no less limiting - so it's not surprising that companies are not always producing things to your needs.

 

It is just how things work for everyone who has tightly defined area or time period.  There is nothing in Hornby's, Dapol's or Bachmann's announcements so far for this year that interests me.  A couple of years ago my wallet was taking a beating.

 

So "cheaper" models are not available for you and currently nothing is available for me - that will change for me and will probably change for you as well.  

 

 

And I certainly wasn't intending for it to come across as a complaint.

 

I understood your point to be that the "cheaper/less detailed" strategy wasn't working because Oxford/EFE weren't selling in huge numbers, and you challenged those of us who think there should be more budget models as to how many we'd bought.

 

TBF I'm not really too worried about the lack of budget models for my own purposes (though I wouldn't have bought the DG if it had been a £200 high-spec one). Even if I never bought another model again, I have more than enough to keep me happy!

 

I'm more concerned at attracting the younger generation into the hobby. Whilst sales of traditional train sets may be slowing, the smaller-type shows still attract a good number of families, and plenty of families visit heritage railways etc with excited children. So I think there is still a train-set market there, and Hornby seem to think so as well, given that they're now developing a new train-set type of loco.

The challenge is to get children from the train set into "junior modellers" and then continuing on in the hobby into adulthood and eventually retirement. (By that time, of course, the investment in keeping them in the hobby through childhood and the teenage years will have more than repaid itself). I hear too often of people who were given a train set, watched the train go round a few times, then it was put in a cupboard and eventually wound up on eBay. To encourage children to stay in the hobby, at least two things are needed:

1) Parental encouragement

2) Models that the child/young person (or their parent!) can afford to buy. We weren't always flush with cash when I was growing up, but as well as my original "train set" ( Hornby 101, three four-wheel coaches, a few wagons and a brake van on some old Triang track that may have come from my father's train set), other locos (Lima 94xx and Class 33 spring to mind), and bogie coaches at around the £8-10 mark weren't beyond the reach of a few weeks' pocket money (though true, the bogie coaches are still available at an affordable price). Plus all the usual scenic items (Airfix crane, etc).

 

(Even with these two things there's no guarantee children will stay in the hobby, but without them, they won't).

 

And whilst Railroad is a great idea in principle, I'm afraid it's still a bit of a mess - though much less so than for a long time. 

Plenty of "train set fodder" 0-4-0Ts, and plenty of (mostly) modern diesels, along with a smattering of big tender engines (Mallard and Tornado).

There's currently only one GWR bogie coach in the range (and the only GWR loco to pull it is the Holden tank). There are LMS coaches, but no LMS loco, and HST packs, but no extra Mark 3s to expand them. The only 0-6-0T is the S&DJR Jinty.

 

What's needed for each of the Big 4 (and BR steam) is an 0-6-0 tank, a "medium sized" loco (e.g. 61xx or Dean Goods), and an express loco (Castle or King), plus appropriate rolling stock. Similarly there is currently no class 08 in the range, or any smaller bogie diesels (22/25/31/33/35) apart from the 20.

 

Ideally the steam locos in the range should be associated with preserved classes ( e.g. Pannier, Jinty, Austerity tank, Terrier) - so families visiting heritage railways on which these classes run can buy a model of the loco they've just travelled behind at the station gift shop on the way out. 

[DY444]

19 minutes ago, Colin_McLeod said:

 

The difference between cars and model trains is that there are cheaper cars available from other manufacturers, whereas it seems that all model railway manufacturers are producing full fat items and/or charging full fat prices.

 

There is no difference unless you treat all cars as being equal and interchangeable.

 

A quick perusal of a major retailer's website shows a Hornby Class 59 at £82 and a soon to be available Heljan Class 47 at £331.  So there are cheaper diesel locomotives available from different manufacturers.  Might not be the one you want but then again if I want a 4 series I can't get it from Vauxhall or Ford.

Edited February 2, 2023 by DY444

[RJS1977]

2 hours ago, DY444 said:

I haven't read the whole thread so if I'm just saying the same as loads of other folk then I apologise  ...

 

It seems to me that the question is do models to the current standard(s) of detail/features blah, blah sell?  I'm not a retailer or a manufacturer but my perception is that by and large they do.  My memory might be wrong here (the hardware is ageing!) but my recollection was that the first batch of the most expensive new Bachmann 47s sold out first (possibly to Bachmann's surprise).  I see no obvious incentive for manufacturers to produce say £25 coaches if the £60 fully loaded one is a viable commercial proposition. 

 

To my mind it's like saying to BMW we know you can sell all the £50K+ cars you can make but would you stop making those and make something cheaper?   Why would they when they're doing fine thank you very much with what they are doing?  Ergo the only way I see a mass market change to less detail is if the higher spec stuff doesn't sell and I see no sign of that.       

 

I don't think anyone is saying the manufacturers should stop making highly-detailed models, provided that they also have some models for those who are excluded by the high price of the detailed ones.

[DY444]

2 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

 

I don't think anyone is saying the manufacturers should stop making highly-detailed models, provided that they also have some models for those who are excluded by the high price of the detailed ones.

 

I imagine that's an extremely complex financial dynamic.  Are the margins higher on the higher spec model?  Will costs be higher if 1000 high spec and 1000 lower spec models are produced vs 2000 higher spec?  How much cheaper can we make the lower spec model for?  How much extra design work do we have to do?  Will the lower spec dilute sales of the higher spec and thus reduce our overall profit on the models?  Will the lower spec have an adverse effect on our reputation going forward?  And probably a zillion more important things I don't know about.

 

Obviously there is a benefit to manufacturers in attracting more people to the hobby and lower prices no doubt play a part in that but at the end of the day these are businesses not philanthropies.  Demand for these high end models seems to me to be pretty healthy and in recent years has spawned some new entrants to the market who appear to be thriving in marked contrast to some previous new entrants.  That suggests serving that high end market well is the right call.  The lack of models generally at lower price points suggests to me that either sufficient demand isn't there or it's uneconomic to attempt to serve it without hand me down tooling like Hornby using Lima.  If there was a vast untapped profitable market in that lower end segment then someone would surely have gone in there?

Edited February 2, 2023 by DY444

[Dunsignalling]

5 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

 

I don't think anyone is saying the manufacturers should stop making highly-detailed models, provided that they also have some models for those who are excluded by the high price of the detailed ones.

But how much cheaper do they need to be? 15%, 25%, 50%? 

 

We have, in the past two decades, become accustomed to being supplied with copious quantities of excellent models at prices that were not going to be sustainable. Costs in China have been rising across the board and finding poorer countries with appropriate facilities and labour is difficult, morally questionable, disruptive, and probably only a temporary solution anyway. Nobody sets out to make their country the long-term sweatshop of the world.

 

In any case, I have a feeling that levels of detail may not be such a big factor in the overall price to the consumer as some of us imagine. It's possible that even quite drastically cutting back on detail might not deliver proportionate reductions in prices, with the resulting products looking poor value in consequence.

 

My own spending gone up a bit, but by nothing like what would be necessary to buy as many models as I have in the past. I've been dealing with rising prices by becoming more selective about what I do buy, and not making multiple purchases of locomotives unless operationally justifiable. 

 

I'm admittedly pretty focussed on both period and geography in my purchasing and over the years, many of my wants/needs have been satisfied already. Those with more eclectic or changeable tastes will undoubtedly feel the chill more than I do.

 

Will some some business (as yet unknown) consider it worthwhile going up against Hornby's Railroad range? If not, developing a sense of what one really wants rather than going after everything one would like, will necessarily shape future acquisition for many of us.

 

John

Edited February 2, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[RJS1977]

5 hours ago, DY444 said:

 

I imagine that's an extremely complex financial dynamic.  Are the margins higher on the higher spec model?  Will costs be higher if 1000 high spec and 1000 lower spec models are produced vs 2000 higher spec?  How much cheaper can we make the lower spec model for?  How much extra design work do we have to do?  Will the lower spec dilute sales of the higher spec and thus reduce our overall profit on the models?  Will the lower spec have an adverse effect on our reputation going forward?  And probably a zillion more important things I don't know about.

 

Obviously there is a benefit to manufacturers in attracting more people to the hobby and lower prices no doubt play a part in that but at the end of the day these are businesses not philanthropies.  Demand for these high end models seems to me to be pretty healthy and in recent years has spawned some new entrants to the market who appear to be thriving in marked contrast to some previous new entrants.  That suggests serving that high end market well is the right call.  The lack of models generally at lower price points suggests to me that either sufficient demand isn't there or it's uneconomic to attempt to serve it without hand me down tooling like Hornby using Lima.  If there was a vast untapped profitable market in that lower end segment then someone would surely have gone in there?

 

Again, I'm not necessarily saying manufacturers should make lower spec models of everything - just that there should be sufficient lower-spec models for someone to be able to operate a geographically/historically coherent layout - which Hornby in particular are capable of doing with their back catalogue - and as I noted earlier Railroad does seem to be heading in that direction (with a lot more in that range currently than I've seen in recent years) but aren't quite there yet. And the success of the Railroad 66 in particular suggests that there is a market there.

 

However I would like to see more "previous version" models appear in the Railroad range when a new-tooled version comes out (e.g. the Terrier) rather than just being dumped altogether. I suspect the reason that doesn't happen is at least in part because Hornby wants everyone to buy the more expensive new model rather than the old one.

 

 

Another factor is the actual pricing. We all know that many retailers sell models for well below the manufacturer's RRP - indeed even many of the smaller retailers say "We will match prices elsewhere". So, why not just reduce the RRP in the first place? The Rapido Hunslets have an RRP of £129. I bought mine from Cheltenham for £109, and it doesn't take a lot of imagination to think that by not fitting sprung buffers or firebox glow, and adopting an unlined livery, a price below the psychologically important £100 mark might be possible. Though I appreciate that's not Rapido's philosophy.

 

 

[The Johnster]

Likewise, I have the bulk of locomotives that I 'need' to provide a convincing impression of my period and location, and any more that I buy now will be those that I 'want'.  There are, industrial possibilities excepted, three of these, and two of those are alternative to each other; 2721/1854, and 31xx.  Rapido are going to do the 44xx, which is a possible but tbh unlikely penetrator of Cwmdimbath's mountain fastnesses being specifcally allocated to Tondu for the sharply curved tramroad-based Porthcawl Branch, as if the other Tondu branches were paragons of straight line high speed running...

 

I have photographic evidence of 3100 at Abergwynfi, so it could just as easily have turned up at Cwmdimbath, but as I've said, an RTR of this is highly unlikely and I am plodding on with my kitbash cut'n'shut impressionest standoff (preferably in the next room) attempt as a placeholder against the day that an RTR does turn up or I can afford and feel confident enough for the kitbuild.

 

I have all the mineral and general merchandise goods stock I need and nearly all I want, likewise NPCCS, but it is a different story when it comes to coaching stock, which is correct A30 auto trailers (in as far as the crude Silurian Era Airfix/Hornby standoff model is correct; it's shortcomings are well known), Comet kit build A43/44 'Cyclops' compartment trailers, and the last of the Clifton Downs trailers, W 3338, Roxey of course, which was allox TDU 1953-4.  Also correct according to the late Chris Foren is an E147 B set which I cannot find corroborating or photographic evidence for in my period, again Comet, which is anomalous because there were AFAICT never any first class coaches used at Tondu except the Porthcawl-Cardiff gangwayed 'residential' set.  I use the Rule 1 excuse that my Cwmdimbath-Tremains ROF workman's needs first class for the managerial grades.  There is a 3-coach set of Ratio Dean 4-wheelers that serves as a miner's workmans, and I've pre-ordered a Dapol Main Line & City toplight Brake 3rd as an alternative; neither the Hornby nor the Hatton's generic 4-wheelers are suitable.

 

 

After that it's a rather hodge-podge collection of placeholders; Hornby 57' suburbans that should not be in South Wales, though coaches of similar outline available as Comet kits were, various cut'n'shuts that began life as Airfix E140 B sets, and two K's whitemetal A31 auto trailers placeholding for Diagram N and A10, allox TDU 1953-8.  These are too heavy to be used as a 2-trailer set, because the Bachmann 4575s won't pull them despite the very free-running Stafford Road Works 3D bogies. 

 

I hold out hope for the 2721 or 1854, more non-gangwayed toplights, and a Diagram N or A10 trailer, the N perhaps from Dapol who already have the ex Lionheart model in their 0 gauge range.  Panelled trailers are a big gap in both RTR and kit coverage that somebody is bound to fill soon, surely; there are kits for 70' trailers but these were not used in South Wales.  I have little hope of the trailer I would most like to see in RTR or kit form, the GWR diagram A20, a Taff Vale Railway gangwayed twin set with recessed twin folding doors.  There were 3 of these very distinctive and rather luxurious (they had curtains) sets, all of which in turn were allox TDU between 1953 and 1958.

 

One of the reasons for trailer oddities at Tondu is that there were (surprisingly, perhaps) no auto services in the area until 1953, and the slow running on the Porthcawl Branch was considered to be incapable of charging electric lighting batteries, as at Hemyock.  All of the initial allocation were therefore older gas lit types with limited remaining service lives.  In the event, it was found that batteries were sufficiently charged by the dynamos on the Porthcawl diagrams, and A30s and A44 'Cyclops' compartment trailers with A43 intemediates without driving cabs appeared in 1955, followed by A38 Hawksworth trailers in 1960.  W 3338, the last of the Clifton Downs A2s, was particularly interesting, not only as the last of it's type but because it had originally been withdrawn in 1946 from the Marlow Branch, and then re-instated for South Wales service, initially at Pontypridd then Cardiff Queen Street, in 1950, painted in an unusual and anomalous darker crimson livery with black/yellow lining at waist and cantrail level, carried around the cab end but not the other end, which was painted black.  I believe this was done at Swindon, as I'm not aware of it ever having visited Caerphilly.  It had some droplights replaced with cream painted ones, which I have reproduced on my model.  This Roxey kit is my favourite coach on the layout.

[Dunsignalling]

But if making lower spec models results in selling fewer high spec models and making lower returns, why would anybody do it? For us it's a hobby, for the makers it's their living. 

 

Trouble is that making models to two different specifications will mean two separate production runs, which in itself will increase costs unless the quantities are large. If you were making 5,000 of each version, that would be unlikely to hurt, but 1000 of each probably wouldn't cost appreciably less than 2000 of the higher spec., though only an insider would know the position of the line between the two.

 

We've also learned recently from the horse's mouth that the difference in cost between sprung buffers or not at production level is just a dollar (Chinese factories have to be paid in those). An LED for firebox glow probably amounts to less than half that. Hence my suspicion that leaving a few relatively minor items off isn't likely to result in an appreciable lowering of prices.

 

Hornby can price Railroad the way they do because, in most cases, the tooling had paid for itself even before they shifted production to China twenty-odd years ago. Nobody else is in that position, so any comparison would seem meaningless. Hornby could have tooled new models for the Railroad range but moved into TT:120 instead, suggesting that, even for them, "budget" doesn't deliver the required income. 

 

TBH, the "psychological" £100 barrier (at least at RRP) for larger locos was breached a decade ago, followed not long after by Hornby M7 tanks.

 

Unfortunately, the brutal truth is that all hobbies are "optional" and spending on them must take a back seat to the necessities of life. If one lacks sufficient cash for everything one desires, choices must be made as to what is more important. If one is merely unwilling to pay the asking price, that's entirely a personal preference, and there are a few hundred used locos to be had at every swapmeet. 

 

I buy both new and used models, and at the last such event I attended, spotted a virtually mint Bachmann Ivatt tank (not the current version, I hasten to add 😀) and the condition of the wheels indicated it had seen next to no use from the day it was made. It was in a plain box, which probably meant I was the first person to give it a second glance. It cost me the princely sum of £30, a couple of quid below the RRP of the Rapido wagons that are my current weakness! FWIW, it runs as well as it looks.

 

John

 

 

Edited February 3, 2023 by Dunsignalling