DJM wish list thread

[The Stationmaster]

 

I am not trying to paint a gloomy picture Mike, just wanting to be realistic. If there is felt to be demand for a particular product, surely it is not difficult with forums such as this for an individual (or group of individuals) to do a poll of members and if that looks good seek to crowd fund it, or put that research to the manufacturers (or indeed NGS).

 

Regards

 

Roy

I understand that DJModels are more than happy to consider and progress commissions (funded commissions that is)

[ThaneofFife]

....as per #708

[Revolution Mike]

Roy

 

If a loco production run costs £50k (excluding tooling which lets say costs £100k) then if something is a poor seller why produce more of them?  You are only compounding a problem.

 

Regardless of whether the tooling cost is paid off you are throwing good money after bad.  If you amortise the tooling cost across the first 1000 models (I'm not saying you would) and they were a poor seller but you eventually sold all of them, to run a second 1000 still costs you £50k (if the tooling is not paid off then it costs you more!). 

 

So as a minimum the production costs should say you don't re-run them (certainly not multiple times as Farish have done with the 87 and 90!).

 

Of course all that is predicated on them being poor sellers and the stock sitting on the shelves...

 

Mike

[Karhedron]

As we have seen, production capacity seems to be squeezed at the moment. Do you allocate valuable production slots to slow sellers (even if they have recovered their tooling costs) or focus limited resources on the best sellers. There is no point making 87s to sit on shelves if people are crying out for another run of 70s.

[The Stationmaster]

As we have seen, production capacity seems to be squeezed at the moment. 

A little bird tells me that it depends where you go - some Chinese factories seem to be able to romp ahead although rapid progress in development might not necessarily go hand in hand with equal speed and facility at production time for all I know.

[Roy L S]

A fair point Matt, and probably not.

 

In response to Mike's comment above, I thought I had already covered this point in the posting I think he is referring to (715).

 

If the product were such a complete "lemon" that it took a number of years and heavy discounting just to sell the initial batches and recover tooling costs then no, clearly you would see no market for additional product and even at a lower unit cost you would not proceed with further batches - we are not disagreeing on that particular issue at all!

 

However were there seen to be a further demand for an existing product where tooling *had* been amortised then there would be a far lower unit cost and far less risk attaching to that subsequent batch.

 

For example (only) while there may too much financial risk for Bachmann to (say) do a newly tooled 9F (other models in similar circumstances may equally apply!) there is clearly far less risk for Dapol to continue to produce further batches of their existing 9F where tooling costs have already been amortised: -

 

- Unit costs will be lower,

- The all important "breakeven" will therefore happen sooner on the batch - costs covered and into profit. 

- There will (assuming pricing remains consistent) be a greater margin.

- As a by-product of the greater margin also a "safety net", with greater scope to discount if part of the batch "sticks" without making a loss on the remaining stock.

 

So, provided (and for as long as) there remains sufficient demand, re-runs from existing tooling makes good commercial sense as an alternative to brand new models.

 

Of course there are probably a number of caveats to all of this, and one is the march of technology. There will come a time when demand for the "Dapol 9F" will fall away as it is not considered close enough to current standards, at that point the manufacturer needs to determine whether there would be sufficient new demand for a brand new freshly tooled "state of the art" model notwithstanding the existence of the existing one, as has happened many times in recent years.

 

Regards

 

Roy

[steve1023]

If Farish commit to producing the 2EPB I'll commit the cash and buy 2x4ceps and 2x2epb. Until then farish really aren't incentivising me to buy a 4cep. I can't create a decent Southern Electric layout with just a CEP.

 

Steve

[ady77014]

Not really a wish list anymore isn't have we got to the point where need create a new thread and lock this one?

[chris newman]

Hi all, as an avid N gauge fan I'd like to add my "token" wish list before closure!!  Obviously in N!!!

 

BR Std 4 4-6-0(75000-079)

BR Std 3 2-6-0(77000-019)  Liveries-Tenders as appropriate!!

BR Std 2 2-6-0(78000-064)

BR Std 2 2-6-2T(84000-029)

GWR 10xx 4-6-0 County

GWR 42xx 2-8-0T

GWR 72xx 2-8-2T

 

Any BR 1st generation DMU-(early and late production =Class 108(late)+120) +DTS units for Class121/122 Bubble cars(forgotten/ignored by Dapol) liveries as appropriate.

D6xx Warships

D800-812 warships (pre-4 digit headcode)

 

Any Coaches (pre-nationalisation) that the others don't do(we can't just have rakes made up of three coach types!!)+ Pullmans (K Type??(8+12 wheelers)Pre & post Modifications)

Any MoW wagons particularly a "Shark" Ballast Plough.

 

Dave, Thanks for letting us  express our views and for taking the time to read them(gave me a headache reading 29 pages--what's it done to you!!!).

 

regds

 

Chris

[ThaneofFife]

 

Of course there are probably a number of caveats to all of this.......

 

Regards

 

Roy

Youre not wrong Roy.

[Roy L S]

Hi Thane of Fife

 

I an sure that is the case but the underlying point of what I have been trying to say recently is pretty sound.

 

As far as Dave is concerned, as his own plans are now set for the next couple of years (funded commissions aside) I guess "wish listing" is for the time being at least pretty academic whatever we would like to see.

 

Regarding Chris N's list above, some great suggestions there I would say. Wrong thread I know but you would think a 78xx in N must surely be a possibility for Bachmann as I would think only a newly tooled loco and tender body would be needed? I guess that depends though how well the Ivatt 2mt 2-6-0 has done, and all three still show in stock at Barwell - interesting that unless my memory is failing me totally the price of that loco now appears to have been hiked once again, this time from £109.95 to £114.95!

 

Roy

[The Black Hat]

I am just wondering...

 

Would DJ Models start making rolling stock, or are locomotives etc the way forward for now?

[Karhedron]

I believe Dave said in one of his earlier posts that he is only looking at locos for the moment as R&D costs can be recouped over a smaller production run. Rolling stock takes many more models to cover its costs.

[Downendian]

Agreed, but Wagons would shift many more units of course. I would buy a rake of 21T hoppers or bogie anhydrous ammonia tanks in a heartbeat for example.

 

My stocklist is very loco-centric but there's absolutely masses of prototypes still to be done with wagonry.

 

Dave is wise to hold fire until his announcements come to fruition, but I'd be very supportive of further ventures to include wagonload RTR. Bachmann has very successfully exploited this area, and DJM could readily make this part of their 5 year business plan if they haven't done so already.

 

I'll mention a Swindon class 120 again just in case

 

Neil

[Karhedron]

Agreed, but Wagons would shift many more units of course. I would buy a rake of 21T hoppers or bogie anhydrous ammonia tanks in a heartbeat for example.

 

True but Dave would need to manufacture a bigger run which would eat up more of his working capital (at least until he sold enough of them). Dave does not (yet) have the deep pockets of the big boys so I can see the sense in him not putting all his eggs in one basket.

 

I'll mention a Swindon class 120 again just in case

I would buy one too.

[Downendian]

Well these are the anhydrous ammonia tanks I mean - rather selfishly because they were regular traffic through Bristol. See video below from 2min 10 sec onwards

 

 

My how Bristol Parkway has changed. This train used to be a regular diagram Avonmouth to Immingham and vice versa.

 

Neil

[D6975]

There seems to be a few people wanting first gen DMUS.

I would like a couple of class 126s, but realise that it has a limited appeal and is unlikely to be viable.

 

A class 120 however (which I also would buy a couple of) has a much bigger audience.  They worked all over the place, Cornwall, West Wales, Midlands, Inverness etc.

 

[Cleefy]

*raises hand for a class 120*

[D826]

*raises hand for a class 120*

Raises hands, feet etc for a first generation 64 foot DMU -117,118,119 or like the good men above say a 120.

 

The separate pendolino thread, which I wish every success, but which is of no personal interest, does make me wonder whether a smaller, 3 car model with greater longevity and range of operation than a pendolino, ( any of the DMUs mentioned above), would garner more support. I'd imagine being 3 car would make them more affordable, and they cater for everything from steam/ diesel transition have wide geographical spread, and were part and parcel of the railway from branch lines to main lines. From a modelling perspective they therefore have significant adaptability and suitability of use.

 

In N of course.

 

Cue rasping bone shaking departure with cheerful toot on the horns.

 

C'mon Dave you did such a good job with the 121 - you know you want to......

 

Regards

 

Matt Wood

Edited August 21, 2014 by D826

[westerner]

"In N of course.

 

Cue rasping bone shaking departure with cheerful toot on the horns.

 

C'mon Dave you did such a good job with the 121 - you know you want to......

 

Regards

 

Matt Wood"

 

Also in OO as well please.

Edited August 21, 2014 by westerner

[johnlambert]

I (or someone) asked Dave earlier in this thread about the Class 116 DMU and apparently one of the manufacturers has scanned the real thing, so it must (probably) be in someone's planned releases.  I suspect it would sell like the proverbial hot cakes.  I wish I could find the post so I could quote it here.

[westerner]

I think it might have been in reply to my hope that he would do one of the 64ft DMUs. If I remember correctly he suggested that someone had scanned a bubble car and therefore there was a possibility they could use it in doing a 117. The only people I know who are doing a bubble car in OO are Dapol whom Dave used to work for. So it may be in Dapol's future plans.

Edited August 22, 2014 by westerner

[H2Eric]

Small tank engines in 00 for me please, especially a LNWR 0-6-2 Coal Tank

[69843]

Small tank engines in 00 for me please, especially a LNWR 0-6-2 Coal Tank

Right engine, wrong thread!

 

Amazing bit of guessing though considering the Bachmann one was announced later that day.

 

 

Back to the relevant topic at hand, would an engine such as an A5 be a viable choice? As there were two different batches with significant differences (LH/RH drive, length differences etc) so that potentially makes manufacturing and mould making harder and costlier.

[Horsetan]

Not any specific prototype, but rather a wish to rethink the way in which RTR models are driven: would DJM consider not just the use of coreless motors, but also higher-efficiency, back-driveable geartrains - by this, I mean either bevel-and-spur, crown-and-pinion, or crossed helical gears?

 

The real things don't come to an abrupt stop (unavoidable with worm gears which lock up once power is cut), so why should our models? Why not have a stab at mass and momentum?