Would we accept less detailed models

[Mike_Walker]

I'm told the operators, or one at least, get more complaints about the seats in the 800s than anything else.  They were specified by the DfT at the lowest possible cost.  The joke on GWR is that all the money went into the driver's seat and nothing was left for the punters.  Having sat in driving seat on a couple of occasions I can confirm that they are about the most comfortable I've ever encountered and I'm not talking just about train cabs. 

 

When you compare the present GWR first class offering with those superb leather seats on the HSTs in their latter days, well...

 

Up thread someone poured scorn on the BR InterCity 70 seats.  The standard class seats on the Chiltern Mk3s seem to be held in high regard by the punters.  How many of you realise they are IC70s that have merely been reupholstered and lined up with the windows?

[adb968008]

25 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Or, from only a slightly different angle, most things get built down to progressively lower prices over time.

 

Thats also a cultural British thing.

 

Europeans tend to take a long term view on things.

Where we may waste and dispose we tend to benefit newer. (If not cheaper more disposable) stuff over time.

In Europe it takes forever for a decision, but feels like a lifetime ROI is expected from many things… how old is some SNCF commuter stock ?

 

in models, Roco, Trix are banging out some real ancient toolings at high prices still… Test of time yes, detailed for their age yes but strewth theyve got their moneys worth out of them.

Edited January 31, 2023 by adb968008

[GreenGiraffe22]

To answer the initial question, I'd happily lose all the non visible detail underneath wagons and carriages (which I still don't really see the point of) if it made them a little cheaper 

[jjb1970]

2 hours ago, Mike_Walker said:

Up thread someone poured scorn on the BR InterCity 70 seats.  The standard class seats on the Chiltern Mk3s seem to be held in high regard by the punters.  How many of you realise they are IC70s that have merely been reupholstered and lined up with the windows?

 

I haven't seen an original Intercity 70 seat in decades. When the Mk.3 coaches were refurbished in the 80's with new seat covers and improved more supportive cushion contours it was a huge improvement. The original seat design was awful and a huge retrograde step compared to the Mk.2 coaches (well, except the Mk.2F coaches with IC70 seats). 

[The Johnster]

13 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Maybe we are reaching the time in modern image, that chassis are superfluous as we have too many locos, and just make bodies.

 

That would be cheaper.

 

You can multiple bodies for a single chassis.

 

(Thats how Ive downsized my fleet a little).

 

I have a Bachmann small prairie chassis which timeshares between 45xx and 4575 bodyshells, but wouldn't want too many locos on this basis.  Body securing screws are samll and easy to lose...

[Legend]

16 hours ago, adb968008 said:

 

 

But if whole locos are going up too much, and youve several already, you dont really need more chassis / boxes.. maybe thats a better route than dumbing down details ?

 

 

I've actually done this for years . There used to be a company Blackwells that sold Hornby bodies , so I was able to convert my Blue Hymek to a Green one , and swap back as required . Same with the 25 . I had a blue one and acquired green body . Got several Hornby 47 bodies that can be swapped with the older Hornby chassis ie 1977 version . 

[The Johnster]

With diesels, electrics, and multiple units, one can have different numbers on opposite sides a well, at least so long as there is no turntable, triangle, spiral, figure 8, or other visible means of seeing both sides during the same operating session.  I do this with coaches and brake vans, and I suppose I could get away with it on wagons as well!  Twice the models for the cost of some transfers!  
 

Different number plates on each end of road vehicle?

[RJS1977]

52 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

With diesels, electrics, and multiple units, one can have different numbers on opposite sides a well, at least so long as there is no turntable, triangle, spiral, figure 8, or other visible means of seeing both sides during the same operating session.  I do this with coaches and brake vans, and I suppose I could get away with it on wagons as well!  Twice the models for the cost of some transfers!  
 

Different number plates on each end of road vehicle?

 

Different loco numbers/name plates/liveries on both sides works quite well for out-and-back operation (i.e. terminus to reversing loop) - at least for diesels/electrics that don't need to use a turntable at the terminus - as the loco that brings the next train in is different to the one that just went out.

[RJS1977]

Different number plates on each end of road vehicles isn't quite so useful - but I know of one situation where it can be used quite effectively.

 

This is the situation where a road disappears off the layout by means of a vertical mirror which extends the road into the distance. What I have seen at some shows is a vehicle parked facing the mirror, with a similar-looking vehicle facing back at it. But the two have different registration plates because the numberplate on the front of the "real" vehicle not only is different to the rear numberplate, but is in mirror writing!

 

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

With diesels, electrics, and multiple units, one can have different numbers on opposite sides a well, at least so long as there is no turntable, triangle, spiral, figure 8, or other visible means of seeing both sides during the same operating session.  I do this with coaches and brake vans, and I suppose I could get away with it on wagons as well!  Twice the models for the cost of some transfers!  
 

Different number plates on each end of road vehicle?

As a lad, I had a 4-coach rake of Tri-ang Mk1s with the sides swapped around so it was green on one side and crimson/cream on the other. Turning one of the composites gave a mixed rake.

[Colin_McLeod]

1 hour ago, RJS1977 said:

Different number plates on each end of road vehicles isn't quite so useful - but I know of one situation where it can be used quite effectively.

 

This is the situation where a road disappears off the layout by means of a vertical mirror which extends the road into the distance. What I have seen at some shows is a vehicle parked facing the mirror, with a similar-looking vehicle facing back at it. But the two have different registration plates because the numberplate on the front of the "real" vehicle not only is different to the rear numberplate, but is in mirror writing!😃

 

 

Thee is a head on collission just waiting to happen lol

[johnofwessex]

J suspect that when the first manufacturer breaks ranks to produce shall we call it a 'stand off scale' model with less detailing but at a lower price then we will know

[The Johnster]

If that happens, which I doubt it ever will because the cost of producing a 'stand-off' model is not less than a full-fat one to the extent that the retail price will be low enough for the markets demands, I would expect the rank-breaker to be a completely new company, probably from the toy trade.  None of our current RTR manufacturers are likely to do it in the current climate.

 

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...

[Dunsignalling]

10 hours ago, The Johnster said:

If that happens, which I doubt it ever will because the cost of producing a 'stand-off' model is not less than a full-fat one to the extent that the retail price will be low enough for the markets demands, I would expect the rank-breaker to be a completely new company, probably from the toy trade.  None of our current RTR manufacturers are likely to do it in the current climate.

 

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...

Exactly, getting the balance right in everybody's eyes is probably impossible. Current model railway suppliers would be very wary of potential reputational damage, even if they embraced the principle. The fall-out from Design Clever has possibly kicked re-attempting such an idea in the UK into the long grass for a generation.

 

People will have widely varying opinions on what details they are willing to forego and how much saving they think omitting them should generate.

 

One of the gents from Accurascale revealed earlier (in this thread or another?) that the difference in cost  between producing  a model with sprung buffers or the same thing without is as little as $1.

 

In all probability, similarly narrow differentials apply to most other detail fittings (as opposed to features, like DCC sound, where models with and without are already offered).

 

It might therefore be necessary to leave off an awful lot to get even half way to price reductions of at least 20% that I suspect to be both the ball-park figure advocates have in mind, and that required to provide clear separation from "full-fat". 

 

John

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 1, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[Andy Hayter]

15 hours ago, johnofwessex said:

J suspect that when the first manufacturer breaks ranks to produce shall we call it a 'stand off scale' model with less detailing but at a lower price then we will know

 

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?

[Reorte]

On 31/01/2023 at 03:55, adb968008 said:

Its a cultural British thing, anything thats old must be good.

 

Better than the all too common "it's new and shiny so must be good." Looking backwards for preference is the result of the failure of what replaces it rather more than on some general attitude. You can certainly find plenty of examples even among people like myself, who generally find the view backwards considerably less unappealing than the one forwards (as long as you don't look too far) of things where we can think "thank heavens that's gone." For a fairly recent example (and admittedly it's the usual easy target) look at Pacers.

[The Johnster]

3 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?

EFE Austerities are hardly cheap!  I have several Oxford 7-plankers, and while they are cheaper than Bachmann’s I regard them as full-fat models with a high degree of detailing.

[newbryford]

22 hours ago, The Johnster said:

With diesels, electrics, and multiple units, one can have different numbers on opposite sides a well, at least so long as there is no turntable, triangle, spiral, figure 8, or other visible means of seeing both sides during the same operating session.  

 

Not if the loco or unit carries end numbers as well.

i.e. easy to see side and front at the same time.

[Legend]

13 hours ago, The Johnster said:

If that happens, which I doubt it ever will because the cost of producing a 'stand-off' model is not less than a full-fat one to the extent that the retail price will be low enough for the markets demands, I would expect the rank-breaker to be a completely new company, probably from the toy trade.  None of our current RTR manufacturers are likely to do it in the current climate.

 

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...

 

Like Oxford you mean .  Yep think I tend to agree . Shame Oxford got subsumed by Hornby .

 

I don't view EFE as low cost £250 for a pacer .  I think that's basically a vehicle for Bachmann to improve its numbers as its not getting enough direct from Kader . Definitely not low cost

Edited February 1, 2023 by Legend

[newbryford]

4 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

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

 

 

£250 for a 2-car Class 143/144?

[HonestTom]

3 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

 

 

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?

If they make what I want, I'll buy it. I have several of Oxford's wagons, plus an N7, Janus and Radial. I don't know what flaws the N7 and Janus may have, to me they look fine. I know there are flaws with the Radial, but I just wanted something to haul a train of LSWR coaches I had. I was prepared to accept the flaws, because it was good enough for my purposes. I have nothing from EFE, but if I had space, a train of 1938 Tube stock would be top of my list.

[Phatbob]

3 hours ago, Reorte said:

 

Better than the all too common "it's new and shiny so must be good." Looking backwards for preference is the result of the failure of what replaces it rather more than on some general attitude. You can certainly find plenty of examples even among people like myself, who generally find the view backwards considerably less unappealing than the one forwards (as long as you don't look too far) of things where we can think "thank heavens that's gone." For a fairly recent example (and admittedly it's the usual easy target) look at Pacers.

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.

 

[Andy Hayter]

21 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

EFE Austerities are hardly cheap!  I have several Oxford 7-plankers, and while they are cheaper than Bachmann’s I regard them as full-fat models with a high degree of detailing.

 

Perhaps that comment and the one from @newbryforddemonstrates what some of us have been saying.  Reduced level of detail and simplified design will save something, but not a lot.

[MartinRS]

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 the company you are referring to is the same one in this thread https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/176611-little-loco-company-dissolved/ then Little Loco has been dissolved. I'm not sure what that tells us about less detailed products. I have never seen anything Little Loco produced.

[woodenhead]

13 hours ago, The Johnster said:

If that happens, which I doubt it ever will because the cost of producing a 'stand-off' model is not less than a full-fat one to the extent that the retail price will be low enough for the markets demands, I would expect the rank-breaker to be a completely new company, probably from the toy trade.  None of our current RTR manufacturers are likely to do it in the current climate.

 

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...

 

7 minutes ago, MartinRS said:

If the company you are referring to is the same one in this thread https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/176611-little-loco-company-dissolved/ then Little Loco has been dissolved. I'm not sure what that tells us about less detailed products. I have never seen anything Little Loco produced.

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.