The future of loco kit building

[t-b-g]

Tony,

 

I think that the concept of "batch production" is something that is used more as a marketing tool than being a requirement of kit production. With the exception of Alan Gibson (Colin Seymour) and Bill Bedford's cast resin wagon kits, I don't know of a kit manufacturer that produces kits in batches, or more importantly, require orders for a "batch" before they produce the kits.

 

As I have already pointed out, but probably not sufficiently clearly, the processes commonly used for kits provide very small production quantities. Etches are produced one at a time, so to order a one off etched sheet isn't an issue. Taking a tank loco for example, the layout of the etched components might require a sheet of n/s for the loco chassis (plural) and a sheet of brass for the bodies. That might give sufficient for three kits, so that's the size of a batch.

 

The same pretty much applies to resin or w/m casting and investment castings for brass or n/s. Two or three of each kit held in stock is probably sufficient for most of the etched kit suppliers, other than for new releases. However, with a lead time of 3-4 weeks from suppliers (it used to be less, but the etchers in particular seem to have more work than they can usually cope with), it does't take too long to restock any particular kit.

 

Batch "marketing" for RTR products is probably more about the variety of liveries being produced and the taking the opportunity to stampede the "collector" into buying, by creating the impression of scarcity.

 

Jol

 

Thanks for that explanation Jol.

 

I had presumed that the way that Colin at Alan Gibson produced batches of his kits was likely to be the same as others but it clearly isn't! It never crossed my mind that kits might be made up and sold almost "to order" but it makes sense as I am sure most kit producers wouldn't want huge numbers of unsold kits in stock and may just wish to replenish stock as and when some get sold.

 

I would still maintain that it is a good idea to purchase kits when they come out or whenever the opportunity arises. Out of my stock of around a dozen kits, only a couple are available now, due to retirements/businesses closing etc..

 

Tony

[PaulRhB]

Small kit manufacturers do produce in batches when certain components they buy in are bought in batches. Unless you can afford to have all the casting machines etc you will probably end up having to buy in something. Whether you hold all the parts in stock is a different matter but one manufacturer I know has to buy the specfic wheels (a unique size on extended axles), and brass castings in largish batches to save a significant amount so he needs to be sure he will sell that number of kits eventually. Etches are ordered in 1-2 at a time to minimise the risk. Once a kit seems to have run it's course and orders dry up then it's more likely that you would need a certain number of orders before starting a batch unless they are willing to pay a premium for the others castings that might sit on the shelf for years.

[Michael Edge]

I have to agree with most of what Jol says above about batch production, we now have a fairly large range of kits in several different scales, we try to keep most of them in stock but often only two or three. Nothing is permanently out of production (sometimes temporarily, pending revision) and any kit can be ordered within three weeks or so. As a guide to kit sales only three of our kits have passed the 100 mark in the last ten years and the order demonstrates the impossibilty of predicting which ones will sell:

in 1st place - NER Bo-Bo electric ES1

2nd - Spanish version of YE Taurus in 1:87 scale

3rd - Ruston 165DS 0-4-0, our first kit but we still one of these at most exhibitions.

It may be someting to do with the more specialised nature of our kit range but we do notice a large age spread amongst our customers, ranging from teenagers to nonagenarians and the majority are at least younger than we are, which gives us hope for the future. I have been reading about the imminent demise of this hobby since i was a teenager in the early 1960s but it doesn't seem to have happened yet and I've been making a living out of it since 1977.

Michael and Judith Edge

[Donw]

I have to agree with most of what Jol says above about batch production, we now have a fairly large range of kits in several different scales, we try to keep most of them in stock but often only two or three. Nothing is permanently out of production (sometimes temporarily, pending revision) and any kit can be ordered within three weeks or so. As a guide to kit sales only three of our kits have passed the 100 mark in the last ten years and the order demonstrates the impossibilty of predicting which ones will sell:

in 1st place - NER Bo-Bo electric ES1

2nd - Spanish version of YE Taurus in 1:87 scale

3rd - Ruston 165DS 0-4-0, our first kit but we still one of these at most exhibitions.

It may be someting to do with the more specialised nature of our kit range but we do notice a large age spread amongst our customers, ranging from teenagers to nonagenarians and the majority are at least younger than we are, which gives us hope for the future. I have been reading about the imminent demise of this hobby since i was a teenager in the early 1960s but it doesn't seem to have happened yet and I've been making a living out of it since 1977.

Michael and Judith Edge

 

I doubt whether any of those would have featured in one of the magazine polls for most wanted model. Regarding the strength of the hobby it could be there are fewer modellers but they spend more. Certainly in the 60s more kids would have had train sets and most kids I knew made Airfix kits and the like. These days the train sets they have seem to be those designed for real youngsters and not likely to lead to kit building although the lego type can be rebuilt in different ways. What people have worried about is where new kit builders would come from. Fortunately the still seem to appear perhaps the number of real modelling enthusiasts has not differed as much as some think.

Don

[Coach bogie]

Small kit manufacturers do produce in batches when certain components they buy in are bought in batches. Unless you can afford to have all the casting machines etc you will probably end up having to buy in something.

 

A caster friend of mine will produce cast wagon kits in runs of between 6-10. This takes into account maximising his time, best use of the machine when it has taken a good hour + to reach operating temperature, allows for poor spins/ flawed castings, and stock flow - predicted sales over following months/number of shows in the calendar. Occasionally, and very occasionally, he may run a large batch of 20-30 kits, if it is new, popular, or a large order has come in. Common parts such as buffers, axleboxes will be cast in large numbers for obvious reasons.

 

Otherwise casting quantities per session are to maintain a minimum of 5 of each kit in stock to allow for mail order.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[davelester]

Perhaps the kit designer never has been a true manufacturer, concentrating increasingly on personal defined markets that are decreasing. More of a case of designing a kit for self and a few like-minded friends, rather than the world as a whole.

 

Kenton,

 

Congratulations! You have now achieved what I had previously considered impossible. Twice.

 

Disturbingly, I find myself agreeing with Bill Bedford --- the man who bought etched crossing vees to a largely unappreciative world.

 

First, a few pages ago you suggested full research should be included. I've now spent twenty hours or more researching J52s for a project. I have not yet written it up, so double the current time budget. My consultancy rate is £30 per hour, so that's £1,200. Divide that through a production run of -- say -- 50 and we get an extra £24 per kit. Now that does not include the copyright permission involved in lifting data and photos from Yeadon. The simplest solution would be to include a free gratis copy of Yeadon with the kit. So, add another £18 per kit.

 

Now, what we could really do with is a decent drawing. My investigation of NRM holdings shows a significant number of (possibly) useful drawings there. One suspicious problem is that the late John Edgson did not do a J52. Does this mean that the drawing descriptions are inaccurate? Quite possibly. How long will it take me to draw out the J52? Dunno, but it will not come cheap. For our 50 kit production run, let's say add £25 each.

 

In short, you will never get full research for a kit: it would be too expensive. You will also struggle with proper instructions. Technical documentation is a skilled art and most designers are probably the last person you should get to write the instructions! Getting this done professionally, which should be done out-of-house, will be expensive. Add £25 for decent instructions.

 

You've also suggested wheels and motors ought to be included. Alan Gibson make exactly the right wheel, in brass, so we could include those, as it is a user fitting problem to put the steel tyres on. Add £35 per kit for wheels, crank pins etc. A Maxon coreless 1320 will cost about £40, and a high-level gearbox about £15.

 

So, on top of the current £37 that John at Walsworth charged me for a 4mm J52 you wish to add a further £182? I fear that the market for such a kit will be rather small!

 

And now you are suggesting that we think of kit suppliers as "manufacturers"? I think not. Instead, think of these -- even Bill's stuff -- as scratch-building aids. Walsworth's kit will save me at least a couple of hours of scratchbuild time, so its worth it!

[Horsetan]

....the current £37 that John at Walsworth charged me for a 4mm J52 ....

 

Aha, I wondered how many J52 kits John had managed to sell in the 12+ years since it was first released. He's held the kit price at about £38 for years!

[Kenton]

davelester, I'm not for one minute going to dispute your costings (other that perhaps the £30/hr as being a little high) However, the point I think is being missed here is that designing a kit is not guesswork. The designer has to do it from research material, measurements, photos, scale drawings (if lucky) all this must be done before the skilled breaking down of 3D shapes into 2D etched parts (let alone the masters for castings). Are we saying that all that effort in research should then be discarded simply because of some strange belief that the kit builder should endure the same pain (possibly greater pain because they do not have the same access to the material, contacts for researching)?

 

All the designer's research could be shared at virtually no cost.

 

As I believe I said on the subject of wheels, motor and gearbox - I realise the gauge dilemma it presents for 4mm and the need to carry stock (though I do not see why the stock needs to be with the kit designer, but on a priority order from the wheel supplier) I can wait extra days to receive a package that is the full kit (just like seems more common 7mm).

And now you are suggesting that we think of kit suppliers as "manufacturers"? I think not. Instead, think of these -- even Bill's stuff -- as scratch-building aids. Walsworth's kit will save me at least a couple of hours of scratchbuild time, so its worth it!

 

I am not a scratchbuilder and never even wish to become one. For me it is a dirty word even though I respect those that manage to build remarkable models out of just about nothing. I can see no pleasure in it for me. I am a kit builder and as such I require a supply of kits, not bits of metal that have no design on being a kit. Something that is without instructions or some of the parts cannot call itself a kit and indeed shouldn't do so. Fortunately there are many true kits out there (many very good ones) that seem to be able to meet that specification.

 

On instructions, I still believe that the worst person to write them is the kit designer. In fact, I don't want the designer to write them. I would rather see the kit built by some near novice on RMWeb* (lots of photos) with the input from the designer to explain some of the design quirks and to explain what the parts are supposed to be for. The cost, a free kit perhaps, but you have that test etch anyway.

 

*RMWeb is well suited, plenty of others to offer advice, interactive and a good advert for the kit itself. Magazine build articles are always lacking in both detail and critique, assume far too much about the builder's ability, and are usually presented rather poorly IMO not worth much more than the paper as a simple review (and we all know what we think of reviews in the model mags).

[davelester]

davelester, I'm not for one minute going to dispute your costings (other that perhaps the £30/hr as being a little high) However, the point I think is being missed here is that designing a kit is not guesswork. The designer has to do it from research material, measurements, photos, scale drawings (if lucky) all this must be done before the skilled breaking down of 3D shapes into 2D etched parts (let alone the masters for castings). Are we saying that all that effort in research should then be discarded simply because of some strange belief that the kit builder should endure the same pain (possibly greater pain because they do not have the same access to the material, contacts for researching)?

 

All the designer's research could be shared at virtually no cost.

 

Ahh, but, the current Walsworth kit is based on measurements of 1247 (NRM collection, Shildon), and I have no reason to believe it could not be built into a fine fine model.

 

The research lies in exploring which other J52s it can be adapted to (answer: all of them, depending on your scratchbuild skills), and how easily (Sharp Stewart series: probably OK; other early new-build J52s, possibly; late builds: missing fluted coupling rods, variant for steel buffer beam; J53 conversions: wrong brakes, wrong spectacle plate, wrong springing details, wrong cab, wrong width of footplate, no condenser; oddities: no sentinel coaler, no weird hopper for 1260; missing a multiplicity of chimneys and domes, variant injectors, fire iron stowage, variant stepping arrangements, variant coal bunker arrangements, variant brake hangers, variant buffers (taper and parallel), weird variant non-Wakefield lubricators)!

 

If you get all that lot in the kit, you'd expect to be given loco numbers and dates for which each of these fittings applies, no? Hence the Yeadon suggestion. Plus, of course there will be locomotives for which currently "we just don't know"

 

I'm just grateful that what we now get is as useful as it is. Long live all the kit designers!

[davelester]

davelester, I'm not for one minute going to dispute your costings (other that perhaps the £30/hr as being a little high)

 

If anything that must be an under-estimate. If the EU is prepared to pay €500 plus expenses for scientific reviews, I'll have to remember to double my rates when IBM Manchester next come calling!

[Horsetan]

If anything that must be an under-estimate. If the EU is prepared to pay €500 plus expenses for scientific reviews, I'll have to remember to double my rates when IBM Manchester next come calling!

 

*quickly checks own hourly charge-out rate*

 

On a recent judicial review application, I think my rate was set at £220 per hour.....

[Kenton]

The research lies in exploring which other J52s it can be adapted to (answer: all of them, depending on your scratchbuild skills), and how easily (Sharp Stewart series: probably OK; other early new-build J52s, possibly; late builds: missing fluted coupling rods, variant for steel buffer beam; J53 conversions: wrong brakes, wrong spectacle plate, wrong springing details, wrong cab, wrong width of footplate, no condenser; oddities: no sentinel coaler, no weird hopper for 1260; missing a multiplicity of chimneys and domes, variant injectors, fire iron stowage, variant stepping arrangements, variant coal bunker arrangements, variant brake hangers, variant buffers (taper and parallel), weird variant non-Wakefield lubricators)!

 

But I don't give a **** about all that. All I want to do is build the kit as it was designed to build an xyz (presumably what the designer wanted it for) with all the parts for an xyz not an xyz as modified and running on a specific Wednesday in some out of the way hole in Yorkshire! If the kit says its for a J53 then it should build into a J53 - I care not what it's differences are or that it doesn't build into a J54 as I'll wait for the kit for that. If someone comes up with a kit to convert the J53 kit into a J54 then that's fine, but a detailing kit to convert a Bachby J53 to a J54 then keep it - I don't do bashing of RTR. Others, I realise have other interests in the hobby and enjoy that as much as I enjoy building well produced kits.

[billbedford]

I am not a scratchbuilder and never even wish to become one.

 

If you build etched kits you are a scratchbuilder -- it's just that someone has cut out all the bits of the jigsaw for you.

[davelester]

But I don't give a **** about all that.

You don't?

 

All I want to do is build the kit as it was designed to build an xyz (presumably what the designer wanted it for) with all the parts for an xyz not an xyz as modified and running on a specific Wednesday in some out of the way hole in Yorkshire! If the kit says its for a J53 then it should build into a J53 - I care not what it's differences are or that it doesn't build into a J54 as I'll wait for the kit for that. If someone comes up with a kit to convert the J53 kit into a J54 then that's fine, but a detailing kit to convert a Bachby J53 to a J54 then keep it - I don't do bashing of RTR. Others, I realise have other interests in the hobby and enjoy that as much as I enjoy building well produced kits.

 

Kenton,

 

What I'm pointing out is that if the kit says "J52" it should be dealing with over one hundred engines built or re-built over a period of 40 years by at least four different contractors and in service for around sixty. The Walsworth kit is fine: it is just for 1247. Better still, it is adaptable (easily) for about half of all J52s.

 

So what do you want? Kits that are for particular individual locos? Or those that capture a number of different ones? Or kits that are rather approximate on the detail, and are technically incorrect for some of the claimed prototypes?

 

I get the feeling that I'm not quite understanding you correctly ... could you explain what it is that you really want?

 

Dave.

[billbedford]

If the kit says its for a J53 then it should build into a J53

 

Even though all J53s varied over time and no two were likely to be the same at the same time? You are likely to be left with a kit for a model which was like this at this time, or more likely when that photo was taken. Which is basically what Hornby have been doing with some of their locos.

[davelester]

If you build etched kits you are a scratchbuilder -- it's just that someone has cut out all the bits of the jigsaw for you.

 

Not in Manchester, you're not.

 

I notice that Sid Stubbs won the scratchbuilders prize posthumously this year at MMRS. The reason is that buying in any commercial products (motors or wheels) precludes the model qualifying under the rules as "scratchbuilt".

 

I cannot help feeling that Sid and/or Norman might be in line to win in perpetuity, if posthumous entry becomes a defining feature!

[Horsetan]

....I get the feeling that I'm not quite understanding you correctly ...

 

Don't worry; you wouldn't be the only one.

[N15class]

Kenton

If the kits are not being produced and sold, with the wheels, motors, gearboxes, and intstructions with research data, the way you like them. Surely it would pay to design and make some kits, just the way you feel they ought to be. I am sure you would finish off all the competion.

 

I have never found a kit yet no matter how good, where I did not need to find photos and other imformation about the one I wanted to build.

[Kenton]

What I'm pointing out is that if the kit says "J52" it should be dealing with over one hundred engines built or re-built over a period of 40 years by at least four different contractors and in service for around sixty. The Walsworth kit is fine: it is just for 1247. Better still, it is adaptable (easily) for about half of all J52s.

 

So what do you want? Kits that are for particular individual locos? Or those that capture a number of different ones? Or kits that are rather approximate on the detail, and are technically incorrect for some of the claimed prototypes?

 

I get the feeling that I'm not quite understanding you correctly ... could you explain what it is that you really want?

 

Dave.

 

A kit claimed to be for a J52 (your example above) should be able to be built into a J52 - I don't care which version, I don't care if it is only one version or all of them (though the opinion of the kit goes up leaps and bounds if it caters for more than one). But it must be able to be built into a J52 as it claims to be a kit for a J52.

 

Ideal kit:

Details of the prototype for which the kit is produced, brief history and photos or references to obtainable sources on where to find them. It is pointless referring to sources in the designer's possession that are long out of publication or personal.

 

Clear instructions - I don't need to be told how to solder or fold an etch but I do need to know that item 21 on the copy of the etch is for a brake hangar and requires folding at 45 deg to the solebar on the right hand side and not on the side of the cab as a window sill. An exploded diagram can be as good as or even better than words - if it makes sense - often they do not unless you know exactly what the part looks like and where it goes.

 

A list of numbered parts - INCLUDING where to get the ones deliberately omitted from the kit - wheels, sprung buffers, etc. And suggestions on what the designer had in mind (that works) for those other additions of gearbox and motor. I don't mind choosing to risk fitting a Cannon but at least I wan't to know that a Mashima 1833 will actually fit!

 

The etches should be crisp and provided shiny - I have the ability to clean them but don't expect tired dented and poorly packed brass. The castings (white metal) should also be crisp and without too much obvious flash - but most important should be identifiable. The tags/trails that hold the etched parts into a fret should be well thought out and thin. It should be clear when a tag is a tag and not a tab. All slotted builds should have slots that the tab will fit into. (tabs can be cut off, slots cannot be made bigger). Fold lines should always be inside unless clearly indicated that the design requires otherwise, don't leave me to guess what you were intending. If it is too small to be removed from the etch without distorting either don't bother or give me plenty of spares. I can solder most things so don't spare those overlays, use them to give detail and even half etch their location panels, also good for locating those lumps of whitemetal. Dimples to indicate where rivet details go positioned and counted correctly. Also if there is spare space on the fret - use it, spare part, number/name/shedplates, ... be imaginative

 

Photos on your website/RMWeb of the completed model - and as mentioned above - a detailed illustrated topic on the test build.

 

Finally, where to get those elusive transfers that would have been nice to have with the kit. I rarely paint a completed kit, that is not my skill, but I can see the need for some indication of livery as well as those decals I don't always personally need.

 

A good kit contains all this, many contain more, with parts to complete optional versions. But IMO get any of that wrong and all it can be described as is a pile of brass - n/s and whitemetal. For all that I expect to pay £100-£150 for a 4mm kit or £200-£300 for 7mm. But I don't expect to pay that for a scrap pile of metal.

 

If you build etched kits you are a scratchbuilder -- it's just that someone has cut out all the bits of the jigsaw for you.

 

A clear matter of definition - mine is evidently quite different from yours.

[billbedford]

Wow………. with a shopping list like that I would definitely put you in the category of people who see kit building as an means to an end, and whats more don't particularly enjoy the exercise.

 

Of course I could be wrong, and if I am, look forward to your first foray in the field to show us how it should be done.

[Kenton]

Wow………. with a shopping list like that I would definitely put you in the category of people who see kit building as an means to an end, and whats more don't particularly enjoy the exercise.

 

Of course I could be wrong, and if I am, look forward to your first foray in the field to show us how it should be done.

 

I do enjoy building good kits. Fortunately there are enough good ones to keep me at it almost every day. I only get depressed when I get asked to build a bad one. Usually because I end up having to hand the pile of scrap back. I'm even prepared to work a bit on a bad one if it makes sense, but I have no intention of wasting my time and money on attempting to fix the inadequacies of the designer.

 

As for designing my own kits - I have thought about it, even considering buying a business but fortunately my will to live, and the number of good kit designers out there, along with access to or knowledge of the prototype really precludes me from trying. Besides, I enjoy building them not designing them. So clearly my views on the good kit come from a pure kit builder.

[davelester]

A kit claimed to be for a J52 (your example above) should be able to be built into a J52 - I don't care which version, I don't care if it is only one version or all of them (though the opinion of the kit goes up leaps and bounds if it caters for more than one). But it must be able to be built into a J52 as it claims to be a kit for a J52.

 

Ideal kit:

Details of the prototype for which the kit is produced, brief history and photos or references to obtainable sources on where to find them. It is pointless referring to sources in the designer's possession that are long out of publication or personal.

 

Clear instructions - I don't need to be told how to solder or fold an etch but I do need to know that item 21 on the copy of the etch is for a brake hangar and requires folding at 45 deg to the solebar on the right hand side and not on the side of the cab as a window sill. An exploded diagram can be as good as or even better than words - if it makes sense - often they do not unless you know exactly what the part looks like and where it goes.

 

A list of numbered parts - INCLUDING where to get the ones deliberately omitted from the kit - wheels, sprung buffers, etc. And suggestions on what the designer had in mind (that works) for those other additions of gearbox and motor. I don't mind choosing to risk fitting a Cannon but at least I wan't to know that a Mashima 1833 will actually fit!

 

The etches should be crisp and provided shiny - I have the ability to clean them but don't expect tired dented and poorly packed brass. The castings (white metal) should also be crisp and without too much obvious flash - but most important should be identifiable. The tags/trails that hold the etched parts into a fret should be well thought out and thin. It should be clear when a tag is a tag and not a tab. All slotted builds should have slots that the tab will fit into. (tabs can be cut off, slots cannot be made bigger). Fold lines should always be inside unless clearly indicated that the design requires otherwise, don't leave me to guess what you were intending. If it is too small to be removed from the etch without distorting either don't bother or give me plenty of spares. I can solder most things so don't spare those overlays, use them to give detail and even half etch their location panels, also good for locating those lumps of whitemetal. Dimples to indicate where rivet details go positioned and counted correctly. Also if there is spare space on the fret - use it, spare part, number/name/shedplates, ... be imaginative

 

Photos on your website/RMWeb of the completed model - and as mentioned above - a detailed illustrated topic on the test build.

 

Finally, where to get those elusive transfers that would have been nice to have with the kit. I rarely paint a completed kit, that is not my skill, but I can see the need for some indication of livery as well as those decals I don't always personally need.

 

A good kit contains all this, many contain more, with parts to complete optional versions. But IMO get any of that wrong and all it can be described as is a pile of brass - n/s and whitemetal. For all that I expect to pay £100-£150 for a 4mm kit or £200-£300 for 7mm. But I don't expect to pay that for a scrap pile of metal.

 

Kenton,

 

Thanks for that. It's certainly cleared up a few points!

 

So Martin Finney's V2 kit would be your ideal? The kit makes up to all except 4771-5 (wrong sort of leading valve spindles; Martin will probably exchange to the other sort if asked).

 

On another topic, I get the distinct impression that Bill's aim with 3D printing (almost ready to run, just needs painting) misses what you ideally want -- which is a ready-painted version -- yes?

 

Cheers,

 

Dave

[Kenton]

Kenton,

 

Thanks for that. It's certainly cleared up a few points!

 

So Martin Finney's V2 kit would be your ideal? The kit makes up to all except 4771-5 (wrong sort of leading valve spindles; Martin will probably exchange to the other sort if asked).

 

On another topic, I get the distinct impression that Bill's aim with 3D printing (almost ready to run, just needs painting) misses what you ideally want -- which is a ready-painted version -- yes?

 

Cheers,

 

Dave

 

No wrong again The Martin Finney V2 kit is a lovely thing but I find nothing exciting about it. I steer clear of anything so big as the complexity and its size just simply doesn't make it worth while and besides I believe the kit to be over-complicated. Still an exceptional kit and perhaps one day I'll find the time and inclination to build one. If only to put it on a mantlepiece - for it will never run on any layout I build. I think I pointed out above that the small industrial is more of my field of interest than the giants of motion. Just a pesonal choice and nothing in the slightest to do with the kit.

 

As for a 3D kit - I don't like the material and don't really like the concept - it doesn't solder and it doesn't require building so I'd probably find a different hobby. As for just requiring painting - well that's where my builds end so that sort of offering is no good either.

 

It takes all sorts - some people get their enjoyment out of painting - some can do it really well - I can't and don't even claim to try.

[Clive Mortimore]

Not in Manchester, you're not.

 

I notice that Sid Stubbs won the scratchbuilders prize posthumously this year at MMRS. The reason is that buying in any commercial products (motors or wheels) precludes the model qualifying under the rules as "scratchbuilt".

 

I cannot help feeling that Sid and/or Norman might be in line to win in perpetuity, if posthumous entry becomes a defining feature!

 

Hi Dave

 

Not using commercial products makes someone a scratch builder. OK what would the Manchester club class this model as? It started as a MTK kit, the chassis was binned on opening the box. A mainline Peak was chosen to power it. Once built, the formed etched body turned out to be 5mm too high and was clipping the fuel point canopies. So I decided to build a body of the right dimensions from my favourite material plastic card. All that remained of the kit were the buffer beams and the little thingy on the under frame that hangs in between the bogies. Is a Kit? Is it a conversion of an RTR loco? Or is it scratch built? All I know I wanted to make it so I did and enjoyed doing so.

 

[Horsetan]

Kenton

If the kits are not being produced and sold, with the wheels, motors, gearboxes, and intstructions with research data, the way you like them. Surely it would pay to design and make some kits, just the way you feel they ought to be. I am sure you would finish off all the competition....

 

I wouldn't be too hopeful. He'd then be unhappy about the calibre of customers coming to him.