Results - Wishlist Poll 2014

[Oldddudders]

Ah, but can I come out of the closet as a LSWR fan too, Ian?

 

It’s to do with my Father buying me a beautiful print of an Adams design  T3 in LSWR livery in full glorious color. Had it on my bedroom wall in the family home since 11 years old... So elegant.

 

Of course there is a link with both the NLR and the GER.

 

Best, Pete. 

The LSWR - among other railways no doubt - does have a particular sort of resonance. Not quite so easy to detect when standing outside Honiton station in chilly weather the other week, waiting for a lift....

[sp1]

On the subject of coaches: have we seen the end of 'cheap' coaches?

Many recent releases have been up into the £30/£40 bracket, and the LMS inspection saloon over £50! - admittedly you are not going to want, say, 10 inspection saloons, but the price is on a par with an etched brass kit: without the added problem of constructing, painting, and probably the most difficult part, lining!

[garethashenden]

I thought that the North London Railway's Park Tank was noticeably lacking from the poll. 79 years of service and one preserved, seems fairly straight forward to me...

[The Black Hat]

Hello all,

 

Interesting results from the 2014 poll, with a few things that caught my attention.

 

Firstly the choices of engines making it to the top. Engines always seem to be popular given how thats the focus of the hobby, but the number selected and what for shows three main ideas stemming from us as modellers. The first is the perhaps newest theme to emerge recently given the various quick productions being able to be made. This means that people can collect a fleet. The first to really sieze on this were Heljan making all the prototype diesels which in turn became a collection everyone wanted to finish. The same is said for Bachmanns new range and tie in with the NRM. With various engines being made that become novel and icconic, the market is opening up to a collector/modeller who wants something different. I think the Eastern region took off in this direction, as with engines like the P2 made in original form, and with others like the C1 being made by Locomotion, tastes seem to have gone eclectic. It sees the W1 of all things head the list, a move to see if engines like Duke of Gloucester cant just be a one off. I do feel that this engine might be a step too far, that it does have some forms linked more to its A4 style appearance but question whether its a trend and successive demand. Again the Eastern region wants novelty, the Sterling Single was suspected by a few to be Locomotions next tie in with Bachmann when the C1 was announced. I think this model stands the strongest possibility of being made with this arrangement. The other style P2 is high given people have been tempted with the original form.

 

As an North Eastern modeller, I am pleased with the result. Looking at the idea that companies make a range its good to see the GE area looking for tank engines to complete the range, the second theme that we have seen for a while. The NE Region area polls highly. The J26/27 model is consistently high, following from the Q6 which has now left the poll, but other machines that worked in the area are equally climbing the ranks. The D49, J21 and G5 all show increased requests, but if Hornby can make two styled P2s from the same starting point, then surely the B16 is the obvious contender to follow with its combined score pushing it higher than all those. An extra boost is given to those wanting BR standard designs. The BR Standard 2MT was valuable in the North East, its cousin the standard 3MT was practically allocated in its entirety to South Durham for work over Stainmore, but this links to people wanting to model the entire fleet and have an example of each in their collection. Most won't realise the geographical limitations of BR 3MT, but its positon just behind 2MT shows people want to have them all. Its that or anyone modelling 77014 will make a fortune. It does give hope that the next range ready to be made is the NE Region, but will see what the future holds.

 

The idea of ranges does give some dispondency, Ive been there before. Anyone wanting Scottish themed engines must look to the Midland area where they mix with other LMS designs. Even in the LNER the K4 almost crashes in its position. Midland designs which have been encouraged by Bachmann show that here the engines are quite mixed, although this is now out of my knowledge area. The same applies for the Southern list, although the S15, and Streamlined Merchant Navy are no suprise. These I think will come, eventually, even the U class to follow.

 

The idea of steam railcars is encouraged by the Western designs return. This is the third view that engines in the limelight on the heritage scene boost their types interest. The 15xx and 28xx are winners here (even I voted for 15xx) but other Western region engines seem to be more for a new model, of something that has been released before.

 

The unit scene also shows considerable interest is growing for class 156. This I think is a sure fire winner for any company that steps up. The lima version is older now, even given Hornbys upgrade. Its the same as the class 101 which has seen a new model out. To modern standards and released in batches that have more liveries made to be available to modellers who run different periods in the recent eras this would be a very popular model. The rise of the blue and grey sector wanting units bigger than the usual 2 cars also is interesting vien most locomotives have been made, but like the issues with GW toplights, the production costs for such big packs to retail for a specific niche area of the market might be their undoing. Its one thing to make engines but DMU packs might be just that too complex an area to head into.

 

All in all, interesting. My thanks to the Poll team for their efforts as well as others to contibute to this annual discussion.

[BMacdermott]

Were flush-fronted, marker light fitted Peaks Class 45s and 46s not missing from the poll? I know Bachmann had them out before but re-tooled the model since then and have only brought out Split-headcode, centre headcode and split centre headcode versions since

 

Hello Gordon

 

They were not in this year's Poll, but someone else has suggested them so they are on the Agenda.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

[BMacdermott]

I thought that the North London Railway's Park Tank was noticeably lacking from the poll. 79 years of service and one preserved, seems fairly straight forward to me...

 

Hello Gareth

 

When the current Poll Team started running The Poll we were tasked with 'rationalising' the content. The NLR tank had polled really very low previously so it was taken out. I will put it on this year's Agenda for you though.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

[Ozexpatriate]

I believe that having unlimited votes in each section is giving false readings!

 

If there were only four votes, then each voter would have to make their mind up as to what they really want rather than just being able to pick all in that section!

Mark, I respectfully disagree - hence, my use of the disagree flag here.

 

You raise a fair question and we have discussed it often here. It's not the absolute number of total votes that matters, it's the relative number of votes for an item. Allowing people to vote for as many items as they would like to actually broadens the results.

 

The idea of the poll is to vote for items, that if they were manufactured, one would purchase. There are necessarily more items in the poll than will be manufactured, certainly anytime soon, so only a small number of unique items would be manufactured and subsequently purchased anyway.

 

Some years back poll data was shared that demonstrated that the spread of the number of votes per individual varied widely. Some people voted for only one thing. Some people voted for a large number. The largest number of people voted for a relatively small number, if I recall correctly back when that data was shared the mode was less than 20 votes. EDIT: It was 12.

 

Why would someone pick everything anyway, even everything in a section?

 

I don't see what difference it would make.  If everyone only votes for things they would buy then you get exactly the same result but with less choice for the manufacturers.

And as evidenced by the results the votes for each item vary widely, disputing the notion that people vote for 'everything' in a region.

[Ozexpatriate]

I'm not sure how you can know that "too many are putting their cross in every box" without having data from individual contributions that I suspect even the Poll team lack. I am firmly in the "I vote for what I would buy" camp, and suspect many others are too. If, for example, the GER supporters who were on parade earlier would buy every item that they voted for, where's the distortion?

Ian, indeed so.

 

Perhaps you recall that Andy produced a histogram of the number of votes per voter from (here it is for 2012). The variation was huge and to my mind completely dispels the notion that people routinely vote en bloc.

 

While I voted for many GWR items (and the Merchant Navy I have to confess) I didn't vote for everything, or indeed anything that was outside my period of interest. Nor did I vote for the Adams radial tank. Once it materializes it might tempt me.

 

EDIT: added reference to the 2012 distribution of votes per voter.

[Ozexpatriate]

Ah, but can I come out of the closet as a LSWR fan too, Ian?

While I caught the God's Wonderful Railway religion affliction, I too am an LSWR fan. After all they're both West Country railways and even if commercial rivals they intersected each other and even shared metals occasionally. That's my excuse. It works for me and plausibly so without reliance on rule number 1.

[Ozexpatriate]

Why is the original Merchant Navy always held out to be a problem around here?

If the initial trials smoke lifting variations are excluded there are no more variations than on a number of already produced classes. Series 2 and 3 are effectively identical apart from the tenders. Series 1 needs a different body and tender but if the later cab style is used and the first three locos are ignored there is really no great problem.

People have been trotting out this view for years as a kind of spoiler on this much wanted loco but provided the later body styles used it is a perfectly reasonable project - and we're going to see it in N gauge now anyway.

This is exactly the issue. The models with the greatest 'wow' factor are the first locomotives introduced with the widow's peak illustrated in GrahamMuz' excellent blog on the subject here.

 

The question is very much one of what to make - the original Flannel Jacket, or those with variants that were more commonly seen.

 

Certainly for BR(S) enthusiasts the later variants are more practical but there are very few visual clues for the novice enthusiast to distinguish a later Merchant Navy from a Battle of Britain class which I think lessens the visual appeal to many who might purchase one as a "one-off" like people purchased the Wainwright C class from Bachmann.

 

I would purchase the original version without hesitation. Less so for the later ones, hence the questions about "which Merchant Navy?".

[Ozexpatriate]

It's no good if, say every GWR inclined person votes for Toplight coaches and they are too expensive to develop once the options are considered or the manufacturing costs make them unmarketable. 

Thanks Mike

 

I would fully agree that the Toplights - despite being way up high - would be almost impossible to produce commercially due to there being so many variants. See extract from the Q&A below (my text highlight). 

Brian,

 

Understanding that it is hard to be everything to everybody, there is an issue with inconsistency in the poll on this topic.

 

On one hand you like to be precise - to the extent of providing drawing numbers. This is very good because it avoids confusion. On the other hand there were so many requests for 'industrials' you responded with blanket categories (which I think was a perfectly reasonable compromise in that case).

 

In the middle of these two ends of the spectrum there are 'squishy' items, like the Merchant Navy variants, and certainly Churchward Toplight coaches in all their conflicting details. The D16 falls victim to this as well. A D16/3 was announced so the Claude Hamilton was duly removed from the 00 poll, despite the very attractive Holden GER design (with the cut-outs in the splashers) being no longer available for voting.

 

Having said that, i don't think that anyone who voted for Churchward Toplights expects every variant to be made available and is, along with the complexity, presumably why in their case drawing numbers were not specified. Obviously I can't speak for others, but I'd be happy with a few representative examples from which reasonable formations can be made.

 

Surely ANY form of GWR coach would be welcome - as the GWR didn't, for the most part, run any form of uniform trains, anything to mix in with the current meagre range available would do! A full range of whatever variant would not be needed - just choose the odd one that had a fairly long life (I realise there would be detail differences - those that worry about them probably have the knowledge and ability to modify them): someone, please, just offer one, any one, try just one - when it sells, as I'm sure it would, do another one next year - it doesn't matter which diagram!

Agreed.

[The Stationmaster]

Brian,

 

Understanding that it is hard to be everything to everybody, there is an issue with inconsistency in the poll on this topic.

 

On one hand you like to be precise - to the extent of providing drawing numbers. This is very good because it avoids confusion. On the other hand there were so many requests for 'industrials' you responded with blanket categories (which I think was a perfectly reasonable compromise in that case).

 

In the middle of these two ends of the spectrum there are 'squishy' items, like the Merchant Navy variants, and certainly Churchward Toplight coaches in all their conflicting details. The D16 falls victim to this as well. A D16/3 was announced so the Claude Hamilton was duly removed from the 00 poll, despite the very attractive Holden GER design (with the cut-outs in the splashers) being no longer available for voting.

 

Having said that, i don't think that anyone who voted for Churchward Toplights expects every variant to be made available and is, along with the complexity, presumably why in their case drawing numbers were not specified. Obviously I can't speak for others, but I'd be happy with a few representative examples from which reasonable formations can be made.

 

Agreed.

The Toplights I think also illustrate not only the problem of variation within the type but the matter of 'time in their life' which is represented because of the way they changed over the years.  this is another bear trap for manufacturers and it has been said by many, rightly or wrongly, that Hornby walked right into it with the Hawksworth stock.   No need to debate that one way or the other but what does seem to count at the moment in the market is that things which ran in the late(ish) steam era into the early diesel era stand probably the best chance commercially.

 

Here I think the poll can't get too proscriptive or else it could be come unwieldy - it's one thing for specialised vehicles such as TPOs but something else perhaps for long lived coaching stock which lasted in service for several decades and changed in appearance over its lifetime.  Here again I think we come back to manufacturers etc making choices for their production which look at far wider factors than simple wishlist results.  

 

The alternative is of course for a group of like minded folk to get together and go for a kickstart type project should they happen to be convinced that the market is there.

[The Black Hat]

While I caught the God's Wonderful Railway religion affliction, I too am an LSWR fan.

 

Oh god your not are you! GWR I could understand.... but have lost all faith now!

[Ozexpatriate]

The alternative is of course for a group of like minded folk to get together and go for a kickstart type project should they happen to be convinced that the market is there.

Mike, that's certainly something I would readily participate in, though I don't have the materials to meaningfully contribute to research.

 

My instinct tells me that 'now' might not be the right time to push a manufacturer with a proposal. There is a huge glut of commissioned and catalogue models yet to see the light of day and it feels like some material progress on tooling and EP samples need to be in the pipeline before the kind of companies who might take this on would have the bandwidth to consider such a project but I'm no expert on this.

 

Now might be the right time to start identifying a subset of candidate diagrams to propose. 

[Raised On Steam]

It does give hope that the next range ready to be made is the NE Region, but will see what the future holds.

 

I'd go for that!

[Boco_D1]

Firstly my thanks to the poll team, I do enjoy particapating and always find the results intresting (certainly beats any x-factor results in my book  ). It's intresting to see comments on the results, I wouldn't agree that limiting votes would give accurate results, I'm one of the GER crowd there's more than 4 locos I'd like (and would buy) and apart from the E4 (please sir), I have no particular prefrence in which order they are released (just as long as they are all released).

 

For future polls, I think I may have seen this mentioned before, but could we have joint line catagories? I apprechaite the S&D is catered for by LMS stock, but In particular I would like to see something for the Midland and Great Northern, just so I could let manufacture's know at the very least I would purchase M&GN branded wagons.

 

P.S Any chance of the LMS Articulated 3 car railcar next year?

[Forester]

This is exactly the issue. The models with the greatest 'wow' factor are the first locomotives introduced with the widow's peak illustrated in GrahamMuz' excellent blog on the subject here.

 

The question is very much one of what to make - the original Flannel Jacket, or those with variants that were more commonly seen.

 

Certainly for BR(S) enthusiasts the later variants are more practical but there are very few visual clues for the novice enthusiast to distinguish a later Merchant Navy from a Battle of Britain class which I think lessens the visual appeal to many who might purchase one as a "one-off" like people purchased the Wainwright C class from Bachmann.

 

I would purchase the original version without hesitation. Less so for the later ones, hence the questions about "which Merchant Navy?".

 

And here is the problem: The "WOW" factor.

It obsesses Hornby to the detriment of the whole hobby.

 

The fact is most of us don't want the "Wow" factor: we want locos we can USE.

 

Please give us the "USEFUL" factor.

 

Those who collect the oddities of railways, like the P2, the Duke etc may want the Widows Peak -  and in six months it will be forgotten by most and dispatched to eBay or whatever.

 

But the overwhelming majority of SR and BR(SR) modellers want models they can use - and those are the later style of MN body which were around and doing incredible work for many years. To 1959 to be precise.  Those modellers will be buying original MNs for the forseeable future. They are the bread-and-butter of railway modelling not people who endlessly keep pushing forshort-term "Wow"

 

Sorry!

[Karhedron]

Having looked through the sections that are of interest to me/I have most knowledge about, the thing that stands out is the relatively low standing of the Electrostar, based on what I would have expected. It still came 9th in the EMU category but was beaten by much older unit types to varying degrees. Perhaps this reflects the age of the people voting in this category.

Tricky to judge. I don't think it is simply an age issue. The Pendolino is a similar vintage and was the highest scoring EMU in N gauge.

 

What suprised me was how highly the various PEP-derived units scored.

[Karhedron]

Good to see Etches Park's finest (the Cl.120) top of the tree.

Interesting in the number of file downloads; around 400 for 4mm and 60 for 2mm. Is this the approx proportion of 00 : N modellers?

I think it is a little higher than that. At one of their recent events, Bachmann mentioned that N gauge sales were now approaching 30% of their 00 gauge counterparts.

 

I would definitely love to see the 120 too.

[BMacdermott]

Firstly my thanks to the poll team, I do enjoy particapating and always find the results intresting (certainly beats any x-factor results in my book  ). It's intresting to see comments on the results, I wouldn't agree that limiting votes would give accurate results, I'm one of the GER crowd there's more than 4 locos I'd like (and would buy) and apart from the E4 (please sir), I have no particular prefrence in which order they are released (just as long as they are all released).

 

For future polls, I think I may have seen this mentioned before, but could we have joint line catagories? I apprechaite the S&D is catered for by LMS stock, but In particular I would like to see something for the Midland and Great Northern, just so I could let manufacture's know at the very least I would purchase M&GN branded wagons.

 

P.S Any chance of the LMS Articulated 3 car railcar next year?

 

Hello Boco

 

Thanks for the comments - appreciated. The M&GN locos are already on the Agenda and I will add the LMS 3-car Articulated to it for you.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

[Forester]

This is exactly the issue. The models with the greatest 'wow' factor are the first locomotives introduced with the widow's peak illustrated in GrahamMuz' excellent blog on the subject here.

 

The question is very much one of what to make - the original Flannel Jacket, or those with variants that were more commonly seen.

 

Certainly for BR(S) enthusiasts the later variants are more practical but there are very few visual clues for the novice enthusiast to distinguish a later Merchant Navy from a Battle of Britain class which I think lessens the visual appeal to many who might purchase one as a "one-off" like people purchased the Wainwright C class from Bachmann.

 

I would purchase the original version without hesitation. Less so for the later ones, hence the questions about "which Merchant Navy?".

 

BTW.

 

35001 "Channel Packet" had a working life of 23 years. It ran in unrebuilt form for 18 of those 23 years. Its life in rebuilt form was only 5 years. it had the Widows Peak for barely 2 years.

 

"One offs" do not sustain the model railway industry. Repeat purchases do.

[Oldddudders]

 

 

"One offs" do not sustain the model railway industry.

Not always true. DoG, Tornado, Flying Scotsman, CoT, Midland Pullman.....

[BMacdermott]

Thanks Oz and Mike (#88 and #89)

 

The people that are likely most acutely aware of ‘inconsistency’ is the The Poll Team itself. We have grappled for years to try to smooth out the anomalies, but – as Mike alludes to – the question of evolution snags us very often.

 

Whilst we can be relatively precise with, say, the three incarnations of the Bulleid Tavern Cars, many other items will defy any logical attempt to rationalise. What we make as an assumption is that if a maker makes a product, they will extract every ounce of potential from it over a period of time.

 

I know that’s not always the case, though! For example, Bachmann, I feel, would be unlikely to tool up for S&D 7F 2-8-0 No.53807, even though they have made the others of her type. This loco had a unique smoke-box saddle and that (I am told) would cost a lot of money for tooling.

 

I do, however, take the point made by Oz. Rest assured that it has been taken in the spirit intended and we are looking into the matter even as I write.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

[Andy Hayter]

Peter Kazmierczak, on 08 Nov 2014 - 00:00, said:

Good to see Etches Park's finest (the Cl.120) top of the tree.
Interesting in the number of file downloads; around 400 for 4mm and 60 for 2mm. Is this the approx proportion of 00 : N modellers?

 

I think it is a little higher than that. At one of their recent events, Bachmann mentioned that N gauge sales were now approaching 30% of their 00 gauge counterparts.

I would definitely love to see the 120 too.

 

 

So if Bachmann share the market equally with Hornby (who until the Arnold Brighton Belle arrives are not in N), then the 30% Bachmann share becomes 15% between the two companies - identical to the poll results.

 

Yes I know that other UK companies have not be covered (eg Dapol), but I think it shows that 15%-ish is probably a close approximation to the truth.

[Forester]

Not always true. DoG, Tornado, Flying Scotsman, CoT, Midland Pullman.....

 

Sorry? Flying Scotsman? One off?

 

CoT has a long term future as other Cities have been produced,

But people are already tired of DoG and offloading them on eBay. Few have the layouts to run them and no-one needs two. Likewise soon Cock o' the North.

 

If companies like Hornby are to survive in the detailed model railway business they need to be encouraged to produce a proper and sustained range of products that future modellers will want to buy in large numbers. Encouraging them to produce unusual locos or those in experimental form may please the modeller who has everything else but does nothing for the sustainable future of the hobby.

MN 35001 in experimental form? How would you react if you read Hornby are going to produce an updated super-detail Stanier Princess Royal but the only loco in the class that it would ever produce will be 6202?

 

There needs to be a bit more of a responsible attitude around here about the models we ask for.