Wright writes.....

[thegreenhowards]

8 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Steve,

 

Very sound reasoning,

 

But it doesn't always work like that. 

 

Having worked on the development of RTR models (in a small way) helping the likes of Heljan, Bachmann, Oxford Rail, Hattons, Hornby and one which must remain anonymous for now,  one has to eventually go with 'what one has got'. 

 

It is not as easy to model items 'correctly' as it is 'incorrectly'. There are very few ways to get things 'right', but trillions of ways of getting things 'wrong'. 

 

A manufacturer (in any scale/gauge of RTR products) has no way of knowing where his/her products will end up, and what railways they might run on. More 'chunky' bogie wheels will tolerate less-than-perfect track. No manufacturer wants customers complaining that 'it derails all the time!'  They'll blame the product, when it's their poor track which is at fault. For those who want greater fidelity, replacement bogie wheels are available.

 

With regard to the last point, I can draw a parallel with OO. It's well known that I think RTR bogie/pony wheels in OO are awful. They're precious little like the prototypes they're supposed to represent (look at your own Hornby B1 bogie wheels for instance), but they stay on the track. Despite their being (in my book) intolerable, posters on RMweb like Micklner and Gilbert Barnatt (Great Northern) seem more than happy to use them on their LNER locos. Both Bachmann's and Hornby's LNER Pacific wheels are just wheels, bearing little (other than having the same number of spokes) relation to the 'real things'. However, I fully-understand why the likes of Bachmann and Hornby use them; they accommodate less-than-perfect trackwork!

 

As for an 'anorexic' expansion link, I agree; the O Gauge A3s' ones are a bit 'thin'. I imagine it's a manufacturing compromise. Again, a parallel can be drawn with OO. I cite the same two chaps as before. Despite Hornby's A3 and A4 valve gear being rather poor in most areas, Micklner seems happy to use it, and Gilbert pays Tim Easter to alter/improve/renumber/rename/weather his Hornby A3s and A4s, yet the valve gear is left in all its 'less-than-realistic' guises. Bachmann's valve gear, too, leaves something to be desired. Again, it's a manufacturing compromise. 

 

I'm not wringing my hands about the above. As you know, I don't use them, anyway. However, it would appear that some are quite happy with the compromises.Their locos don't derail (because of the chunky wheels) and they turn a 'blind eye' to the poor gear. Might that be the same for users of these new O Gauge A3s and A4s?

 

Finally, how much of a 'scale' model' might one expect for £700.00? A very- well-built equivalent one from a kit would set anyone back at least £2,500.00, maybe more, especially well-painted. In fact, a good paint job in O Gauge would be (at least) half the cost of the full RTR A3/A4, maybe more.  I don't really build in O Gauge, and certainly no longer professionally, but could a professional builder/painter give an indication of how much he/she would charge to build, say, a DJH A3 or A4 in 7mm, and get Ian Rathbone to paint it? Or a Finney LNER Pacific? £700.00 wouldn't even be the deposit, especially if the cost of the parts is factored-in as well! What's an RTR Pacific in OO Gauge cost these days? Near £200.00, or getting that way? Were I still building professionally, I'd charge £750.00 just to build, say, a DJH LNER Pacific in OO. Factor-in the cost of the parts, plus a top Rathbone or Haynes paint job and it's well beyond twelve hundred quid! Getting on for twice what those RTR O Gauge Gresley Pacifics cost!  

 

I'm trying to be fair here, and I hope I'm not being perceived as 'hunting with both the fox and the hounds'. As I've said, other than in a 'professional' capacity RTR locos (in any scale gauge) don't interest me. Yet, when a manufacturer asks me for assistance in the development of new models, what should I say? In answer to my own question, it's always 'Yes, how may I help?' I do see then some of the difficulties they have to overcome, first hand.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Tony,

 

That’s a thought provoking comparison. The key question for me is what drives the cost of the ‘O’ gauge RTR loco to £700 compared with £150-£200 for an ‘OO’ version? I would imaging it’s mainly the size of the potential market meaning that the development costs have to be spread over far fewer sales. Clearly the ‘O’ gauge loco will have bigger parts and therefore more raw material, but raw material is cheap, so I would imaging that’s a small factor. There may be more detail on the ‘O’ gauge loco - is that what drives the higher cost of a professional build? But again I can’t believe that makes a huge difference to the cost - perhaps 10-20%. Similarly the cost of assembly can’t be that much different unless there are dramatically more parts.

 

i think what I’m asking is, would there be any more research done for a £700 ‘O’ gauge loco than for an equivalent ‘OO’ gauge loco, or is the cost just being spread over fewer customers? If the latter, then it’s not surprising that there are a similar number of detail issues on the ‘O’ gauge loco.

 

Andy

[Dave Hunt]

Tony,

 

Like you, although I have no interest myself in acquiring RTR locomotives, I have helped several manufacturers with information, suggestions and pre-production critiques of MR/LMS types. I have found them always to want and to try for the most accurate products they can achieve within the constraints of: the limitations of modelling standards (i. e. 00 or 0F affecting such things as the width of splashers and thus sizes of adjacent sand boxes etc.); moulding techniques governing whether lifting holes in frames can be included, how thick such things as frames above the platform have to be etc.; and cost implications in order to achieve value for money a well as keeping within the 'target' range of the product. The latter has of late become more significant as prices in the East have risen.

 

There are, of course, exceptions to what I have just stated and I have helped with some products that have reached the standards of even the best professional scratchbuilders but they have price tags to match and in the case of 7mm engines would set you back well into four figures. The 'mainstream' offerings, though, are still to my mind of exceptional quality and if they satisfy the requirements of the majority in the hobby I am all in favour of them.

 

It is, of course, still the case that many modellers see such products not simply as the complete answer to their requirements but as stepping stones to what they want to achieve - hence the detailing/improving kits such as Brassmasters - and even eventually to them going on to become builders of models rather than box-openers (and I do not use that description in a perjorative sense, merely as a convenient shorthand). 

 

I suppose that what I am stating is that I am in complete agreement with what you have written on this topic and that whilst there are, and probably always will be, errors in what 'mainstream' RTR manufacturers have to offer as well as improvements that can be made to their products, if we continue to encourage the 'modellers' among us to  carry out those improvements themselves it can only be to the benefit of all.

 

Dave

[CUTLER2579]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Mike,

 

Might I ask what your hourly rate is now, please? And, does anyone know the price of a complete DJH O gauge kit for an LNER Pacific? Or a Finney one? Or what a top paint job in O Gauge costs? 

 

I'm also in agreement (in part) with your last statement, but what about RTR manufacturing constraints? The expansion link has been mentioned on the O Gauge A3s. I accept it's 'wrong' because it's only a single piece (it should be a 'thick'sandwich, with the radius rod going through it, of course). Though I don't know the exact cost-imperatives, clearly to do it properly would increase the end-price. Beyond the target markets' purse? 

 

Certainly, in 4mm Scale, most valve gears in kits just has a single-piece expansion link, as does most RTR. The same is so for the union links, where the ends are not forked. 

 

As for building something correctly being as easy as building something incorrectly, how come I'm much better at the latter? I find that much easier!

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Tony,

In O Gauge a DMR B17 built and painted by Mike Russell will cost about £1750 

In O Gaugea DJH A2/1 Kit and Slaters wheels will set you back £775 plus motor and bits. Then there is the build cost.

In O Gauge  a Finney 7 A$ kit is £480 for the Loco and a further £180 for the Tender. Then you have Wheels and a Motor to purchase and the Build cost.

Kind Regards,Derek.

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2019 by CUTLER2579
Made clear the gauge.

[Tony Wright]

57 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Tony,

 

That’s a thought provoking comparison. The key question for me is what drives the cost of the ‘O’ gauge RTR loco to £700 compared with £150-£200 for an ‘OO’ version? I would imaging it’s mainly the size of the potential market meaning that the development costs have to be spread over far fewer sales. Clearly the ‘O’ gauge loco will have bigger parts and therefore more raw material, but raw material is cheap, so I would imaging that’s a small factor. There may be more detail on the ‘O’ gauge loco - is that what drives the higher cost of a professional build? But again I can’t believe that makes a huge difference to the cost - perhaps 10-20%. Similarly the cost of assembly can’t be that much different unless there are dramatically more parts.

 

i think what I’m asking is, would there be any more research done for a £700 ‘O’ gauge loco than for an equivalent ‘OO’ gauge loco, or is the cost just being spread over fewer customers? If the latter, then it’s not surprising that there are a similar number of detail issues on the ‘O’ gauge loco.

 

Andy

Good morning Andy,

 

I always like to be thought-provoking.

 

You raise some thought-provoking points as well. 

 

I have no idea how the development costs of RTR models (in any scale/gauge) are spread out. 

 

However, I can speak from personal experience of the differences between building in 4mm and building in 7mm. Regarding raw materials, there's a hell of a lot more material in an O Gauge loco than there is in an equivalent OO one. Who's good at sums? What percentage more?

 

Now, to time............. I can usually build a full-blown Pacific in OO in around 30-35 hours. When I built the O Gauge Stanier Five featured recently, it took me over five times longer! I was astonished. Granted, I'm 'inexperienced' at building in the Senior Scale, but then I thought about it. Those lubricators on the footplate, for instance. In OO they're just a single casting - fix in the hole, a dab of solder and they're on. Not in O Gauge. I had to make all the individual conduits - hours of work! And, what about the firebox backhead? In 4mm, fix on the regulator handle and that's that. Not in 7mm! I'm equally astonished at how Mike Edge can build an O Gauge Pacific in under 50 hours. 

 

Even if I just tripled my time for constructing in O Gauge; over £2,000.00 just for building a Pacific? Well over £3,000.00 as an end-product price? 

 

Obviously, having assisted manufacturers, I'm going to take 'their side' to some extent. And, I still believe that £700.00 is good value for an O Gauge RTR Gresley Pacific. It's less than a quarter of the price of a (good) kit-built equivalent. Not only that, it won't be long before the £200.00 'barrier' will be 'broken' for a big RTR steam-outline loco in OO Gauge in my opinion. £700.00 for an O Gauge equivalent doesn't seem that bad to me, especially since both will be 'compromised' to some extent. And, sales of the latter will certainly be less.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited July 2, 2019 by Tony Wright
to clarify a point

[gr.king]

If all thickness are kept to the same proportions and all details are the same (which I doubt) then there is 5.36 times as much material in a 7mm scale model as in a 4mm scale version. Just multiply the 7:4 scale ratio for length x width x height.....

Edited July 2, 2019 by gr.king
correction

[Tony Wright]

15 minutes ago, CUTLER2579 said:

 

Tony,

a DMR B17 built and painted by Mike Russell will cost about £1750 

 A DJH A2/1 Kit and Slaters wheels will set you back £775 plus motor and bits. Then there is the build cost.

A Finney 7 A$ kit is £480 for the Loco and a further £180 for the Tender. Then you have Wheels and a Motor to purchase and the Build cost.

Kind Regards,Derek.

 

 

 

Thanks Derek,

 

I assume the DMR B17 is in O Gauge? If so, I think that's incredible value. That said, it's still well over twice the price of a Hatton's A3/A4 in the same scale. Of course, it'll be better, but would you (as a user of O Gauge now) buy a Hatton's Gresley Pacific? 

 

You've supplied some very interesting figures - again thank you. All the components for a DJH 7mm equivalent will cost a lot more than the complete RTR one. For a Finney equivalent, a lot, lot, more. Of course they'll be better (but only if built-well and painted-well). A similar price differential can be found in OO Gauge, again with the caveats mentioned.  

 

Yet, once again these discussions illustrate my usual 'hypocrisy'. There am I, advocating the making of things (whatever the cost comparison), yet 'defending' the products of the RTR boys (and girls). 

 

To finish, the forthcoming O Gauge RTR locos will allow a much larger number of folk to indulge in 7mm modelling. At a price previously way beyond their pockets. Yes, they won't be as good as good kit-built equivalents, but they're 'within reach' so to speak with regard to price. I can't see that as a bad thing, whatever the manufacturing restraints/constraints.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

1 minute ago, gr.king said:

If all thickness are kept to the same proportions (which I doubt) then there is 5.36 times as much material in a 7mm scale model as in a 4mm scale version. Just multiply the 7:4 scale ratio for length x width x height.....

Thanks Graeme,

 

I knew someone out there would be good at hard sums (I taught art, of course), though I thought it might be more.

 

Even so, that's over five times the price in terms of raw materials. Not insubstantial. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[grahame]

19 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

 

Even so, that's over five times the price in terms of raw materials. Not insubstantial. 

 

 

I doubt that a motor for an O gauge loco costs over five times more than one for a OO model. And my understanding is that total material cost of model is a very, very small percentage of the total cost. Even multiplying it by five the percentage of the total cost would still be small. 

 

The big costs would be labour (assembly) and I guess that an O gauge loco would need more labour time/cost with more detailing parts to add/fit. Many other costs like research, CADs, marketing, packaging and distribution would probably be broadly similar although, of course, spread over a significantly smaller production/batch quantity would inflate the unit cost.

 

G

[queensquare]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Andy,

 

I always like to be thought-provoking.

 

You raise some thought-provoking points as well. 

 

I have no idea how the development costs of RTR models (in any scale/gauge) are spread out. 

 

However, I can speak from personal experience of the differences between building in 4mm and building in 7mm. Regarding raw materials, there's a hell of a lot more material in an O Gauge loco than there is in an equivalent OO one. Who's good at sums? What percentage more?

 

Now, to time............. I can usually build a full-blown Pacific in OO in around 30-35 hours. When I built the O Gauge Stanier Five featured recently, it took me over five times longer! I was astonished. Granted, I'm 'inexperienced' at building in the Senior Scale, but then I thought about it. Those lubricators on the footplate, for instance. In OO they're just a single casting - fix in the hole, a dab of solder and they're on. Not in O Gauge. I had to make all the individual conduits - hours of work! And, what about the firebox backhead? In 4mm, fix on the regulator handle and that's that. Not in 7mm! I'm equally astonished at how Mike Edge can build an O Gauge Pacific in under 50 hours. 

 

Even if I just tripled my time for constructing in O Gauge; over £2,000.00 just for building a Pacific? Well over £3,000.00 as an end-product price? 

 

Obviously, having assisted manufacturers, I'm going to take 'their side' to some extent. And, I still believe that £700.00 is good value for an O Gauge RTR Gresley Pacific. It's less than a quarter of the price of a (good) kit-built equivalent. Not only that, it won't be long before the £200.00 'barrier' will be 'broken' for a big RTR steam-outline loco in OO Gauge in my opinion. £700.00 for an O Gauge equivalent doesn't seem that bad to me, especially since both will be 'compromised' to some extent. And, sales of the latter will certainly be less.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

These are interesting figures and I would broadly agree, though I certainly couldn't build an OO pacific in under 40 hours or a 7mm pacific in 50. It should be pointed out that these time scales relate to cast whitemetal kits where the basic body, so long as its a descent kit, goes together pretty quickly. For an etched equivalent you can double those sorts of figures at least. Then, as you say, add in details that need to be fabricated as opposed to simple castings and the hours rapidly stack up. 

I'm told I charge a very modest hourly rate but there are still those who are shocked when I give them an estimate of cost. The basic kit, wheels, motor etc are not cheap but if you are paying somebody to build a loco for you it is always the labour which will be the major cost. Thankfully there are still plenty of people out there who understand this and my order book remains healthy. 

 

Jerry

[jamie92208]

2 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

Tony,

 

That’s a thought provoking comparison. The key question for me is what drives the cost of the ‘O’ gauge RTR loco to £700 compared with £150-£200 for an ‘OO’ version? I would imaging it’s mainly the size of the potential market meaning that the development costs have to be spread over far fewer sales. Clearly the ‘O’ gauge loco will have bigger parts and therefore more raw material, but raw material is cheap, so I would imaging that’s a small factor. There may be more detail on the ‘O’ gauge loco - is that what drives the higher cost of a professional build? But again I can’t believe that makes a huge difference to the cost - perhaps 10-20%. Similarly the cost of assembly can’t be that much different unless there are dramatically more parts.

 

i think what I’m asking is, would there be any more research done for a £700 ‘O’ gauge loco than for an equivalent ‘OO’ gauge loco, or is the cost just being spread over fewer customers? If the latter, then it’s not surprising that there are a similar number of detail issues on the ‘O’ gauge loco.

 

Andy

I've spent many hours helping on the Guild Bring and Buy stall and have seen roughly what people will pay for.  On average a 2nd hand 4-6-0 will rarely fetch more than £450 to £500.  Very few locos go i to 4 figures, usyally Ducheses or A4's. I suspect that the £700 figure is a good guess of what the potential market will bear. RTR A3's have been around for a while, produced by Sunset who are US based. I can't remember what they sild for but round about $1100 would sound about right. That would be not far off the £700 mark.   For info a good 7mm motor gearbox will cost you at least £80. They are also the items most commonly stolen from the B & B stand.

 

Jamie

[CUTLER2579]

Tony,

Regarding my earlier post, I have amended it to clearly state O Gauge.

The Loco's I have had from Mike in the past have either been painted by him or Graham Varley and I have been highly delighted by them.I declare that I have been friends with Mike for the best part of 30 years at least,but my opinion is 100% genuine and not influenced by friendship. Another person has built both DJH & Finney 7 Loco's for me and they have also been toa very high standard as were his oo gauge O2's 

Regards,Derek.

Edited July 2, 2019 by CUTLER2579

[Barry Ten]

Speaking of 0 Gauge

 

Every now and then I tempt the will of the rain gods by setting out an oval of Peco set-track on my decking:

 

 

I forget what the radius of this stuff is but it's rather tight - I suspect an A3 would take one look at it then fall off.

 

However, a Tower Brass Prairie is made of sterner stuff and easily copes with the tight curves and undulations caused by the decking:

 

The loco is RTR but I did have to paint it myself so there's a bit of personal modelling in there. The Mink is a Minerva RTR product picked up at this year's Bristol 7mm show, but awaiting weathering, and the other wagons are from Parkside and Slaters kits.

 

This is very much a train-set but there's a lot to be said for sipping a nice drink while the Prairie ambles around, making a faint chuff-chuff sound (even though it's DC!)

 

Al

[polybear]

1 hour ago, CUTLER2579 said:

I declare that I have been friends with Mike for the best part of 30 years at least,but my opinion is 100% genuine and not influenced by friendship.

Regards,Derek.

 

It would be interesting to know what has become of the etched C&S (?) Crane Kit he was working on some years back, should you remember to ask next time you see Mike....

p.s. Good to hear he's still ok, having had some health issues a while back.

[Michael Edge]

A few more build times for comparison:

Finney A4 (with all inside motion) 71.5 hours - I've posted photos of this one on here before, painted as 60033 in early BR blue by Ian Rathbone

Finney Hall 75 hours, again with all inside motion

Finney Duchess 102 hours

Finney West Country 72.5 hours

Mitchell King 67.5 hours

Gladiator Ivatt Duchess 102 hours (a lot of extra detail on this one)

From Judith Edge kits - these are understandably quite a bit faster.

NER EF1 Bo+Bo 37.5 hours

Most production has Slater's wheels but the A4, Hall, King and Ivatt Duchess have wheels machined (by me) from Alan Harris castings.

This is a small sample of locos built over many years, my current hourly rate is £19, estimates are usually about right - I win some and I lose some, evens out overall. I realised many years ago, even before I started building full time in 1977, that it's essential to work quickly and efficiently to make money.

 

[Bucoops]

25 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

A few more build times for comparison:

Finney A4 (with all inside motion) 71.5 hours - I've posted photos of this one on here before, painted as 60033 in early BR blue by Ian Rathbone

Finney Hall 75 hours, again with all inside motion

Finney Duchess 102 hours

Finney West Country 72.5 hours

Mitchell King 67.5 hours

Gladiator Ivatt Duchess 102 hours (a lot of extra detail on this one)

From Judith Edge kits - these are understandably quite a bit faster.

NER EF1 Bo+Bo 37.5 hours

Most production has Slater's wheels but the A4, Hall, King and Ivatt Duchess have wheels machined (by me) from Alan Harris castings.

This is a small sample of locos built over many years, my current hourly rate is £19, estimates are usually about right - I win some and I lose some, evens out overall. I realised many years ago, even before I started building full time in 1977, that it's essential to work quickly and efficiently to make money.

 

 

I doubt I would ever be in the position to commission a build but that seems a very reasonable hourly rate for skilled labour. Cheap is the wrong word, but it's certainly value for money going by the builds you have posted.

[Tony Wright]

4 hours ago, grahame said:

 

I doubt that a motor for an O gauge loco costs over five times more than one for a OO model. And my understanding is that total material cost of model is a very, very small percentage of the total cost. Even multiplying it by five the percentage of the total cost would still be small. 

 

The big costs would be labour (assembly) and I guess that an O gauge loco would need more labour time/cost with more detailing parts to add/fit. Many other costs like research, CADs, marketing, packaging and distribution would probably be broadly similar although, of course, spread over a significantly smaller production/batch quantity would inflate the unit cost.

 

G

I was thinking more in 'raw' material costs, Grahame, not necessarily specifics - five times more plastic, five times more metal and so on.

 

But, you're right, an O Gauge motor won't cost five times that of a 4mm one. But, it will be more. Twice more? Jamie says an O Gauge motor gearbox will be about £80.00. That's over twice as much as a Mashima/Canon/Comet combination, which I now use. I'm sure some big 7mm motors/gearboxes cost more than £80.00 as well.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[Tony Wright]

43 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

A few more build times for comparison:

Finney A4 (with all inside motion) 71.5 hours - I've posted photos of this one on here before, painted as 60033 in early BR blue by Ian Rathbone

Finney Hall 75 hours, again with all inside motion

Finney Duchess 102 hours

Finney West Country 72.5 hours

Mitchell King 67.5 hours

Gladiator Ivatt Duchess 102 hours (a lot of extra detail on this one)

From Judith Edge kits - these are understandably quite a bit faster.

NER EF1 Bo+Bo 37.5 hours

Most production has Slater's wheels but the A4, Hall, King and Ivatt Duchess have wheels machined (by me) from Alan Harris castings.

This is a small sample of locos built over many years, my current hourly rate is £19, estimates are usually about right - I win some and I lose some, evens out overall. I realised many years ago, even before I started building full time in 1977, that it's essential to work quickly and efficiently to make money.

 

£19.00 an hour, Mike?

 

For workmanship of your quality! 

 

I charge more than that.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[ardbealach]

in a recent posting uax6 said

 

Ah, but they replaced the Forth Bridge Rail for standard sized flatbottom about ten years ago, so it depends on the date of those photos if you will see the forth bridge rail.... ;-)

 

I attach some photos taken away back in 1967 on the Forth Bridge - these have already been added elsewhere on RMweb - which show the track laid on the bridge at that time. 

 

And why is it called a 'bridge' and not a 'viaduct'? (AM)

[Jesse Sim]

Good news today Tony, the J39 chassis works perfectly well on DC and has been sent off to Ian at the model store to get the good stuff added (DCC). I had enough of looking at that chassis and couldn’t be bothered to DCC it, I’ll learn that on the next one. 

 

Also, the tender has been completed, just painting left.

[Atso]

An interesting discussion on rates and time taken to build items. I'm nowhere near the same league as Tony, Mike, Jerry, etc but I'd normally ask for £15 per hour for CAD time or builds - usually following by "how much" from the prospective customer!

 

I've spent around five or six hours so far assembling a 2mm Association Toad E kit for myself. Would somebody pay £75 to £90 for a 2mm scale wagon?

 

Here it is, in need of a good cleanup before I progress any further.

 

 

To be fair, this has been a slightly leisurely build.

Edited July 2, 2019 by Atso

[grahame]

20 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I was thinking more in 'raw' material costs, Grahame, not necessarily specifics - five times more plastic, five times more metal and so on.

 

But, you're right, an O Gauge motor won't cost five times that of a 4mm one. But, it will be more. Twice more? Jamie says an O Gauge motor gearbox will be about £80.00. That's over twice as much as a Mashima/Canon/Comet combination, which I now use. I'm sure some big 7mm motors/gearboxes cost more than £80.00 as well.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Raw material costs are very cheap (check out steel prices due to worldwide competition and current plastic prices) and with models requiring so little of it per model the material cost is a very small percentage of the finished selling price. And any changes due to different scales will have little comparative effect on total cost than a change in labour due to scale (more bits to assemble/fit).

 

Plus I guess that those prices (>£80) for a gearbox are the retail price for an assembled/completed one and would therefore include the manufacturing, labour, overheads, profit margin and sales tax. A model train manufacturer won't be paying those costs/prices. The material cost costs will be a small proportion of it.

 

The big costs in selling prices are labour, margin and taxes (like VAT). My understanding is that material cost is marginal.

 

G

[Richard_A]

1 hour ago, ardbealach said:

in a recent posting uax6 said

 

Ah, but they replaced the Forth Bridge Rail for standard sized flatbottom about ten years ago, so it depends on the date of those photos if you will see the forth bridge rail.... ;-)

 

I attach some photos taken away back in 1967 on the Forth Bridge - these have already been added elsewhere on RMweb - which show the track laid on the bridge at that time. 

 

And why is it called a 'bridge' and not a 'viaduct'? (AM)

 

I believe it is called a bridge because, it is a set of cantilever bridges. Not 100% certain though.

[polybear]

1 hour ago, grahame said:

 

Raw material costs are very cheap (check out steel prices due to worldwide competition and current plastic prices) and with models requiring so little of it per model the material cost is a very small percentage of the finished selling price.

 

G

 

Not too much Steel in a kit though.  Now Brass and Nickel Silver prices......

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, ardbealach said:

in a recent posting uax6 said

 

Ah, but they replaced the Forth Bridge Rail for standard sized flatbottom about ten years ago, so it depends on the date of those photos if you will see the forth bridge rail.... ;-)

 

I attach some photos taken away back in 1967 on the Forth Bridge - these have already been added elsewhere on RMweb - which show the track laid on the bridge at that time. 

 

And why is it called a 'bridge' and not a 'viaduct'? (AM)

 

 

Thanks for these,

 

Most interesting..............

 

And why is it called a 'bridge' and not a 'viaduct'? (AM)

 

Who knows? I think the terms are generic and even interchangeable. 

 

Everyone calls the great structure at Berwick 'The Royal Border Bridge'. Yet, an equally-famous, and similar, structure much further south on the ECML is always called 'Welwyn Viaduct' It's always 'The Royal Albert Bridge' at Saltash', yet, not far from us is the huge 'viaduct' at Harringworth. 'The Britannia Bridge' over the Menai Straits', yet 'Batty Moss (or Ribblehead) Viaduct'. 

 

Could it be that most steel structures are classed as 'bridges', yet stone ones (of any size) 'viaducts'? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited July 2, 2019 by Tony Wright
to clarify a point

[grahame]

15 minutes ago, polybear said:

 

Not too much Steel in a kit though.  Now Brass and Nickel Silver prices......

 

I thought we were talking about RTR costs rather than kits. Aren't the chassis in them steel with probably very little brass and nickel silver as these days they are mostly plastic. And I understand that brass is cheaper than steel.

 

G