Wright writes.....

[Clearwater]

About a year ago, when I was thinking of beginning to buy and build some kits, I brought one of the Dapol coach kits. I found the kit quite disatisfying- it was too simple, too clip together and crudely moulded. There was no feeling of "I built that" at the end of the process, less than I've felt on building a card building kit.

 

I know, and have seen, what people can turn these kits into but for me it only served to convince me to buy an etched coach kit. I've found the challenge of brass/white metal kits and the inherent 'problem solving' in them far more enjoyable to build than the Dapol kit.

 

Unless you're planning major mods to those kits, in which case you're probably not a beginner, I don't think they work as stepping stones to metal kits. Different tools, different techniques albeit some similarities. Something in the same medium but not intended to move is probably a better starting position. Eg a simple building - still needs to be square, folded, pieces fettled etc but perhaps easier to pass off some of those errors that might stop a moving model working.

 

David

[Brian Kirby]

The Dapol CKD coaches are simple and straightforward, so yes, not much of a challenge. On the other hand, imagine if you totally stripped-down a recent RTR loco, into it's individual components, right down to removing handrails and separate body details, and remove gears, motor, wheels off axles, pick-ups and motion, then re-assembly could be more of a challenge? So picture these parts all laid out in a display box, with comprehensive instructions (and a help line to the spares department?), perhaps even with unpainted bodies, and maybe a slightly cheaper price? Surely this would re-generate an interest in kit-building? Before I get slagged off, does anyone have a better idea?

                                                                                 Cheers, Brian.

[Clearwater]

Yes but why would someone buy something that you could obtain properly built, insert warning about H's ability to build their own stuff properly, and a warranty you can exercise if it doesn't work? Particularly if the price differential is small.

 

The halfway house is already there in terms of coach sides to add to existing rtr and conversion / detailing kits for rtr. Articles like the recent WR restaurant conversion in RM provide the info for the less confident to follow.

Edited May 23, 2016 by Clearwater

[Brian Kirby]

Yes but why would someone buy something that you could obtain properly built, insert warning about H's ability to build their own stuff properly, and a warranty you can exercise if it doesn't work? Particularly if the price differential is small.

 

The halfway house is already there in terms of coach sides to add to existing rtr and conversion / detailing kits for rtr. Articles like the recent WR restaurant conversion in RM provide the info for the less confident to follow.

 

Where's the "halfway-house" for loco building, where's your better idea? 

 

Giving this further thought, I would suggest any CKD loco kit, from the RTR world, would be best supplied un-painted. This way the completed model is unlikely to be confused with the RTR factory-finished product, plus the modeller can try out their painting skills as part of the experience, or else leave the model un-painted as a "badge of honour", to show that you've built it yourself.

                                                                         Cheers, Brian.

[The Stationmaster]

The Dapol CKD coaches are simple and straightforward, so yes, not much of a challenge. On the other hand, imagine if you totally stripped-down a recent RTR loco, into it's individual components, right down to removing handrails and separate body details, and remove gears, motor, wheels off axles, pick-ups and motion, then re-assembly could be more of a challenge? So picture these parts all laid out in a display box, with comprehensive instructions (and a help line to the spares department?), perhaps even with unpainted bodies, and maybe a slightly cheaper price? Surely this would re-generate an interest in kit-building? Before I get slagged off, does anyone have a better idea?

                                                                                 Cheers, Brian.

 

The problems the would be builder would then face could be considerable when you consider that much of the work done in the factory uses jigs or specially equipped machines.  So the solution to that is to ensure those assembly stages are either still done in the factory or the manufacturer supplies suitable jigs to aid assembly.  That of course increases cost compared with simply supplying all the various sprues of parts but helps guarantee the resultant model will work for those of lesser levels of skill.  And that is probably the crux of the argument - are manufacturers willing to risk their reputation on 'just anyone' buying a CKD model, getting it wrong for some reason and blaming the factory?

 

I doubt it so the 'kit' includes far bigger/more complete sub-assemblies - is it then still a challenge to construct for the more practiced modeller?  Would the cost then be too high because the factory still had to do a lot of the work?  I can see numerous reasons why a brand might not be keen to become associated with such a process although on the other hand I really can't think of many reasons why they would go for it as the main one which used to exist (saving the cost of the tax) no longer exists.

 

(BTW I have in the past put together a CKD loco - from Trix - and the main reason I bought it was to save myself money as at the time I was a fairly impecunious teenager.  It went together well and ran superbly so it worked for both me and Trix.)

[Brian Kirby]

 

 

(BTW I have in the past put together a CKD loco - from Trix - and the main reason I bought it was to save myself money as at the time I was a fairly impecunious teenager.  It went together well and ran superbly so it worked for both me and Trix.)

 

There's the perfect example, couldn't have summed it up better myself. I don't think the manufacturer's reputation will be damaged by a few badly-built DIY un-painted examples, as for jigs, you can quarter driving wheels by eye in most cases, if it's a probem, supply them as ready-to-roll wheelsets (where they drop in/out of chassis), complete with bearings, they're probably assembled by machine anyway? (But that's veering away from the "kit" element.). Handrails would be pre-formed as per RTR, just not fitted.

                               Cheers, Brian.     

[Clearwater]

Where's the "halfway-house" for loco building, where's your better idea?

 

Giving this further thought, I would suggest any CKD loco kit, from the RTR world, would be best supplied un-painted. This way the completed model is unlikely to be confused with the RTR factory-finished product, plus the modeller can try out their painting skills as part of the experience, or else leave the model un-painted as a "badge of honour", to show that you've built it yourself.

Cheers, Brian.

I didn't have one! Though I do feel that if you can build one thing, that kit is stepping stone to something else. A logical progression is sides to a coach, a full coach,loco chassis or body for 0-6-0 tank, 0-6-0 tender, simple valve gear etc.

 

I've been fortunate to have a lesson from Tony and have nearly finished the loco we started (having a 12 week old infant has somewhat curtailed my evenings and hence progress). I'll post pictures in due course though I suspect my efforts will not be qualifying for prizes any time soon! The next thing I'll try to make is a comet chassis for an old mainline dean goods. I'll then try a full tender loco. Almost as much as the actual building, I enjoy the process of working out what to do (at the moment for example, research loco to model, buy the plates, what colour to paint (loop to first issue), how to prepare model). I'll adopt a similar approach on painting. BR black is a pretty useful starting point.

 

David

[Headstock]

Hold on a minute, isn't this what Mr Bedford is already supplying with his recent GN carriage kits?

[Memphis32]

I've just acquired a Crownline conversion kit - I'm hoping that will be a good stepping stone into kit building...

 

My biggest worry about kitbuilding (or conversions) is the painting/finishing - I've seen too many magazine articles proclaiming the virtues of kit-built and scratch built locos on a layout, and I've thought the finish was appalling!

[richard i]

I've just acquired a Crownline conversion kit - I'm hoping that will be a good stepping stone into kit building...

 

My biggest worry about kitbuilding (or conversions) is the painting/finishing - I've seen too many magazine articles proclaiming the virtues of kit-built and scratch built locos on a layout, and I've thought the finish was appalling!

The paint finish might be, but following simple steps "ensures?" it will look fine. Paint on warm dry days, clean the model before painting, spray paint the main colour, if only from a rattle can etc.

There are excelent books on it.

Like all things in life, the more you do it the better they become.

Richard

[Tony Wright]

Hold on a minute, isn't this what Mr Bedford is already supplying with his recent GN carriage kits?

I don't know if Bill would be happy with the notion of his resin coach kits being compared with CKD kits of yore, if that's what you mean. 

 

I'd say that if anyone can't build these kits, then I'm puzzled why they've taken up railway modelling as a hobby. 

 

It could well be that simple (yet very accurate) kits for (complex?) rolling stock is a way forward in the hobby with regard to folk actually making things for themselves. Metal kits are not for all, yet making a resin carriage and finishing it off well will be very rewarding. 

[Focalplane]

I think Wright Writes is all about having a go. It has taken me 70 years to actually complete a model to my satisfaction. Along the way I have had my diversions and house (no, country) moves to frustrate my desires to make things and run them. And when I finally got the time the 4mm models were getting beyond my sight and touch capability. 4mm lamp irons anyone? Can't see them.

 

Tony W has given enough insight in the previous 405 pages to incite almost anyone to have a go.

 

Twelve people liked my can sprayed 4F enough the other day to say so, so if I can have a go, so can youngsters. Speaking of which, when our grandchildren visit we have a tendency to put the kits away. Last week my wife and I agreed that this is not right, they should know more about what Pops does. One grand daughter has all the signs of making a damned good engineer but there is still too much emphasis on art over applied science in schools. Dyson (whose products I detest) recently said that the UK graduates 40,000 engineers a year when 80,000 are needed. Believe it or not, kit building could persuade an 11 year old that she has a future in engineering. Why? Or perhaps the question should be: Why not?

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

there is still too much emphasis on art over applied science in schools. 

 

Actually, from my experience of dealing with what pops out the end of 14 years schooling there's fark all emphasis on art or applied science.  

 

Lots of well-developed  facebook bullying and mithering skills though.

[Headstock]

 

It could well be that simple (yet very accurate) kits for (complex?) rolling stock is a way forward in the hobby with regard to folk actually making things for themselves. Metal kits are not for all, yet making a resin carriage and finishing it off well will be very rewarding. 

 

I would agree with this. Coupled with the right marketing, no pun intended.

[Jol Wilkinson]

CKD means "complete knock down". What I think you are seeking is a PKD or "partial knock down" where some of the complicated assembly is done (perhaps including painting and lining),but leaving some work to the buyer  in an attempt to reduce costs.

 

That probably means a redesign of the product to make it possible for the buyer to assemble. So the minor benefits of saved labour are probably offset by the cost of redesign and probably lower production volume.

[peach james]

Oh, for petes sake...

 

 

 

 

DSC_0076 by Peach James, on Flickr

 

My horrid work as a 17 year old (and 20 year old for the Sentinel).  I have the other DJH starter kit (the 02), but didn't drag it out for photos.  The 02 is glued together, the Baclay is soldered with a 25w iron & 273 solder.  If I could manage them then, then anyone can manage.  It will take ruining a kit or two to get decent, but hey, that's the price you pay.  All 3 were workable (the Sentinel needs me to finish the replacement power unit, which is made using NWSL parts and a HUGE mill for the job), but all 3 of them have been used on layouts.  I'm not going to stand up and say that better isn't now available RTR, but it wasn't 20 years ago, and there is definitely a "I made it" factor with them.  They are not just engines which I fitted with DCC, but kits which I put together.

Edited May 23, 2016 by peach james

[Brian Kirby]

CKD means "complete knock down". What I think you are seeking is a PKD or "partial knock down" where some of the complicated assembly is done (perhaps including painting and lining),but leaving some work to the buyer  in an attempt to reduce costs.

 

That probably means a redesign of the product to make it possible for the buyer to assemble. So the minor benefits of saved labour are probably offset by the cost of redesign and probably lower production volume.

PKD?  They're in Cornwall aren't they?  Oh no, that's  PDK !  :-))

I advocate CKD, everything down to individual components, but would compromise on valve gear, and maybe wheelsets, pre-assembled, but still un-painted, to distinquish them from the regular RTR. Which parts of the CKD loco would have to be re-designed????

                                                                                                Cheers, Brian.

[Jol Wilkinson]

PKD?  They're in Cornwall aren't they?  Oh no, that's  PDK !  :-))

I advocate CKD, everything down to individual components, but would compromise on valve gear, and maybe wheelsets, pre-assembled, but still un-painted, to distinquish them from the regular RTR. Which parts of the CKD loco would have to be re-designed????

                                                                                                Cheers, Brian.

Brian,

 

there was reference earlier (by others) to factory assembly techniques and the use of jigs, presumably to speed up/facilitate assembly. If that is correct then it might be necessary to the design some of the parts involved for easier "hand" assembly. Of course it may not, so simply putting in the parts in a box, with a simple exploded parts diagram might provide what people want.

 

Do you mean a totally unpainted kit, or just the items you refer? One reason often cited for not building  models from kits is that it would be very difficult to approach the finish of RTR items.

 

I think what people may be looking for is something like an Aster Gauge 1 steam loco kit, ready painted and designed for hand assembly with very few tools. However, these are more akin to a model engineering approach and produced in limited production runs. The kits save about 20% over a factory or importer assembled and set up loco, which while significant at Aster prices, may not be regarded as a significant saving on a 4mm model..

 

Jol

[Headstock]

Reading back through the conversation, I get the distinct impression that the perfect kit would come pre-painted, pre-assembled and cheap as chips.

[Tony Wright]

I'm glad that this thread, in the main, exhorts folk to have a go at making things for themselves. Because of my preference for making locos and passenger-carrying rolling stock in 4mm scale, the emphasis has been on that, though the personal making of all things in railway modelling is to be encouraged. Recently, I visited a mate and he'd put in place a new signal box on his layout. I congratulated him on its appearance, only to be told that it was a one piece, resin-moulding from Hornby or Bachmann. As a 'layout building' it looked excellent, though really close-inspection revealed it to be a bit chunky in places. It appeared to be a GNR prototype, but it was painted in LMR maroon in part. It would have been of no use to me, unless it were specifically LB's GNR 'box, then I might have considered using it, albeit modified. But, even if it were, it wouldn't have been a Bob Dawson building. What I have is unique, the product of a highly-skilled friend (and his highly-skilled grandson), acquired, at least in part, by horse-trading, not just the wielding of the cheque book or wallet. It's so much more personal than just the buying of things, or at least to me. Which comes back again to my exhorting folk to have a go for themselves, or at least trade skills with those who can. 

 

Speaking of trading skills, does anyone know about the reliability of Fulgurex polarity-changing switches on the firm's point motors? On Sunday, when two friends and I (almost perfectly) ran the railway, a feed failed to the south end Down lay by. Not a problem, thought I, and investigated yesterday. The siding was fed via the switches on the appropriate motor (Norman Solomon told me to do that) and those switches appeared to need adjustment. I fiddled, with disastrous results. The switches are so flimsy and prone to pinging out. The result, a dead short on the frog when set for the main line! I can run everything via the Down slow (I'll have to today when other friends come), but what a poor design of switch it seems to me. Has anyone else had problems with these motors' switches? I admit, I'm a bit alarmed, because there are 27 of the motors in use (this is the first to fail). I'm contemplating fitting separate micro switches if necessary.  

[jamie92208]

Speaking of trading skills, does anyone know about the reliability of Fulgurex polarity-changing switches on the firm's point motors? On Sunday, when two friends and I (almost perfectly) ran the railway, a feed failed to the south end Down lay by. Not a problem, thought I, and investigated yesterday. The siding was fed via the switches on the appropriate motor (Norman Solomon told me to do that) and those switches appeared to need adjustment. I fiddled, with disastrous results. The switches are so flimsy and prone to pinging out. The result, a dead short on the frog when set for the main line! I can run everything via the Down slow (I'll have to today when other friends come), but what a poor design of switch it seems to me. Has anyone else had problems with these motors' switches? I admit, I'm a bit alarmed, because there are 27 of the motors in use (this is the first to fail). I'm contemplating fitting separate micro switches if necessary.

Hi Tony, I've also had problems with those switches when I used Lemarco and Fulgurex. The switches were very flimsy. My preference would be a simple microswitch mounted alongside it, or next to the point in a place where the operating lever from the point can operate the switch.

 

Jamie

[t-b-g]

If a kit is too easy to build, some people, myself included, may feel that it is not enough of a challenge. To me, building a kit is not about getting a particular carriage or loco on a layout as quickly and easily as possible. If I wanted to do that I would go down the RTR route.

 

To me, a kit should give a good deal of pleasure and enjoyment in the construction, coupled with a an opportunity to use and maybe develop a few skills along the way.

 

I regard myself as a fairly experienced modeller nowadays and I don't think that there is a task within the hobby that I am scared of tackling. But it wasn't always so.

 

When I was a beginner, my first loco build was a K's "bodyline" kit J50, which was designed to fit a RTR chassis (even I can't bring myself to call a Hornby Dublo cast lump "frames"). I only built one before I decided that just having half a dozen bits to stick together wasn't that exciting So I moved on to things like the Wills J39, which had many more parts but still fitted a RTR mechanism. Even as a 14 year old, I compared the kit with drawings and could tell that the wheels were in the wrong place so my next effort was a NuCast J6. By the time I was 16 I had built a NuCast V2 complete with valve gear and was attempting to scratchbuild.

 

Most of the locos that I built from kits early on are now available RTR apart from the J6 and  a J11 would have done instead.

 

So is anybody in the situation I was in 40 years ago likely to start building kits? 

[t-b-g]

I'm glad that this thread, in the main, exhorts folk to have a go at making things for themselves. Because of my preference for making locos and passenger-carrying rolling stock in 4mm scale, the emphasis has been on that, though the personal making of all things in railway modelling is to be encouraged. Recently, I visited a mate and he'd put in place a new signal box on his layout. I congratulated him on its appearance, only to be told that it was a one piece, resin-moulding from Hornby or Bachmann. As a 'layout building' it looked excellent, though really close-inspection revealed it to be a bit chunky in places. It appeared to be a GNR prototype, but it was painted in LMR maroon in part. It would have been of no use to me, unless it were specifically LB's GNR 'box, then I might have considered using it, albeit modified. But, even if it were, it wouldn't have been a Bob Dawson building. What I have is unique, the product of a highly-skilled friend (and his highly-skilled grandson), acquired, at least in part, by horse-trading, not just the wielding of the cheque book or wallet. It's so much more personal than just the buying of things, or at least to me. Which comes back again to my exhorting folk to have a go for themselves, or at least trade skills with those who can. 

 

Speaking of trading skills, does anyone know about the reliability of Fulgurex polarity-changing switches on the firm's point motors? On Sunday, when two friends and I (almost perfectly) ran the railway, a feed failed to the south end Down lay by. Not a problem, thought I, and investigated yesterday. The siding was fed via the switches on the appropriate motor (Norman Solomon told me to do that) and those switches appeared to need adjustment. I fiddled, with disastrous results. The switches are so flimsy and prone to pinging out. The result, a dead short on the frog when set for the main line! I can run everything via the Down slow (I'll have to today when other friends come), but what a poor design of switch it seems to me. Has anyone else had problems with these motors' switches? I admit, I'm a bit alarmed, because there are 27 of the motors in use (this is the first to fail). I'm contemplating fitting separate micro switches if necessary.  

 

Just had a similar problem with the fiddle yard on Buckingham, which has the same motors. The fault took ages to find but I did manage to fix it by cleaning the contacts. I also gave the whole thing a good clean and a touch of oil on the moving parts and motor bearings and the action is much more positive and the motor is also  quieter now.

 

It may be worth (if you haven't already) making little boxes of card or plasticard to fit loosely over the motors. It will keep dust and muck out. Peter Denny had them fitted and the motor that gave me a problem is the one that we lost the box for in the move and I haven't got round to making a new one.

 

Tony

Edited May 24, 2016 by t-b-g

[chris p bacon]

Speaking of trading skills, does anyone know about the reliability of Fulgurex polarity-changing switches on the firm's point motors? 

East Beds has had these on "Sutton" for 20+ years, they are reliable but the contacts do need to be kept clean. we use an extremely fine emery which is slid back and forth between the contacts just 2-3 times and that does the trick. And yes they do "ping" and can go some distance.

[t-b-g]

East Beds has had these on "Sutton" for 20+ years, they are reliable but the contacts do need to be kept clean. we use an extremely fine emery which is slid back and forth between the contacts just 2-3 times and that does the trick. And yes they do "ping" and can go some distance.

 

Good point. I should have added that I cleaned the contacts with a bit of brass shim with very fine emery glued to both sides. It is a useful tool in cleaning lots of electrical contacts.