Poll: How old are you?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
0-20
1.69%
1 1.69%
21-40
23.73%
14 23.73%
41-60
45.76%
27 45.76%
61-80
27.12%
16 27.12%
81+
1.69%
1 1.69%
Total 59 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

The future of model railroading.
#46
I've changed Fred's reply back to the normal colour, which should make his words easily visible to those using the Big Blue Lite (white) background.

Wayne
Reply
#47
Quote:Garage craftsman kits are not cheap, and are not intended to be cheap. Typical cost is $30 per car when trucks, couplers, paint, and glue are included. Today's craftsman kits are intended to build high quality, highly detailed models. The savings comes in because it takes the customer significant time to build and finish a kit. I don't think I have ever completed more than one kit in a month. Approached in this fashion, a $40 a month hobby budget can work. OTOH, I will never build more than about 40 cars and a handful of locomotives and 20 structures in my foreseeable future (same was true for most model railroaders in the early '50s).

Exactly my point; however, the number of items any given individual intends to purchase is probably not relevant.

Quote:As for tooling costs, lasers, quality molds, photo engraving, lost wax casting equipment, and even 3D printers are far cheaper than cutting steel dies. Typically, less than $10K is needed for the tools to get started in producing low quantity craftsman kits for each of the production methods. Because of the comparatively low up-front investment, production runs of 50-200 items are entirely practical.

How many individual modelers or craftsmen with the prerequisite skills do you believe have $10,000 to invest in getting started? I certainly can't do that.

Quote:If you only produce 50 cars of a particular prototype (common run for a resin kit using 2 sets of molds), advertising can be as simple as an announcement on several specialty modeling forums. If you produce a model of a PRR box car from 1888, announcing on the PRR and Early Rail groups will probably sell out a run of 50 in short order. Advertising beyond getting the word out to likely customers is not needed.


The model for this concept is Trains of Time, which pre-sells everything and never has anything in stock. Consequently, I never buy anything from them. For an individual to run off a series of cars is a leap of faith into an uncertain market, and it will only take one such failure to undoubtedly shut down the business. I wouldn't risk my garage business on such a concept.

I agree, the magazines are losing advertising revenue when compared to the past. Internet ordering already has taken away the 2-4 page spreads of the big mail order companies of the 1980s and earlier. If you notice, Model Railroader has reduced its content to keep the approximate same ratio with its advertising. Many cottage manufacturers take out a small blurb that simply gives their web site address and maybe a sentence or two about what they produce. And since Model Railroader charges more than the other magazines, and is perceived to have fewer craftsmen modelers in its readership, the advertisements tend to be in the other magazines. Magazines (like newspapers) are in trouble across the board - the old business model just isn't working that well.

Quote:The problem area for which there is no solution to emerge yet is model locomotive production. I doubt that locomotive kits are ever going to come back - although I would like them to. The skill levels to build a good-running and nicely detailed kit are quite a jump for most beginning model railroaders. Low rate production locomotive kits would (and the very few that are made do) cost more than today's plastic production at list price. So I don't see locomotive kits coming back up until Chinese production ratchets up another $200 or more per locomotive.

just my thoughts
Fred Wright

The current trend is away from smaller scales and into production of ever increasing numbers of large scale kits, O and On3/On30 being the "new HO". This being the case, it's harder for garage entrepeneurs to make an impression on such a market, since larger scales demand greater detail, including DCC. Meanwhile, costs of even N-scale locos have gone up dramatically, but but in the process and entire era of railroading has almost completely disappeared - the 1800's to the early 1900's. No cars or loco's are sold to meet this market at all, apparently under the assumption that that era is restricted to narrow gauge. I guess no one reads railroad history anymore. Icon_lol

I had to buy sets in order to obtain proper passenger and freightr cars, and the freights frankly aren't that good. Even the Cabbose folks just shrug and walks away when questioned about lack of period models. Under those circumstances, I don't hold out much hope for the future.
Reply
#48
MountainMan Wrote:.....but in the process and entire era of railroading has almost completely disappeared - the 1800's to the early 1900's. No cars or loco's are sold to meet this market at all, apparently under the assumption that that era is restricted to narrow gauge. I guess no one reads railroad history anymore. Icon_lol

You're right: some eras are under-represented, while others are over-represented.

MountainMan Wrote:I had to buy sets in order to obtain proper passenger and freightr cars, and the freights frankly aren't that good. Even the Cabbose folks just shrug and walks away when questioned about lack of period models. Under those circumstances, I don't hold out much hope for the future.[/b]

One of the disadvantages of modelling those under-represented eras is the lack of available models which are correct and of good quality. If you're interested in scratchbuilding or kitbashing, though, that disadvantage can be good incentive to make use of the research possibilities afforded by the internet. This can be of use for re-working either poorly-done models applicable to your era, or models from a different era which, with some alterations, may fit your needs better. While scratchbuilding locomotives is beyond the abilities of most of us, freight cars and some passenger cars aren't too complicated. Even for those which are, the more you work at something, the better you'll get, so don't rule out such options.

Wayne
Reply
#49
MountainMan Wrote:Exactly my point; however, the number of items any given individual intends to purchase is probably not relevant.

From a manufacturer's perspective the number of items sold to a given individual is very important. Blackstone would not have had their success without many of their customers buying in mulitples. For a typical small basement-size layout, if I as a manufacturer can sell 2-3 copies of a given engine, and 10 examples of a given car type (box car, flat car, tank car, etc) instead of having the consumer buy 1 of each from different manufacturers, I can achieve mass production quantities more easily. And the layout is actually more realistic than the traditional "Heinz 57 variety pack" of rolling stock. Not that I personally have the budget or space for such consistency. But there are those that do, and they are much more important to manufacturing planning than single item purchasers like me.

Quote:How many individual modelers or craftsmen with the prerequisite skills do you believe have $10,000 to invest in getting started? I certainly can't do that.

You and I - perhaps not. But based on the number of cottage manufacturers I see advertising in the smaller circulation magazines, the number has to be in the hundreds. From what I can see most buy the tools for machining or photo engraving or laser cutting or resin casting as a side hobby, and a tool at a time. They then realize they can pay back some of the costs by using the tools to build a small batch of something instead of onesies or twosies, and selling the batch.

Quote:The model for this concept is Trains of Time, which pre-sells everything and never has anything in stock. Consequently, I never buy anything from them. For an individual to run off a series of cars is a leap of faith into an uncertain market, and it will only take one such failure to undoubtedly shut down the business. I wouldn't risk my garage business on such a concept.

It is indeed risky. Two runs of any kits that don't sell usually ends a cottage manufacturer's time as a manufacturer. I am thankful for those who are willing to take the risks, and produce unusual items I want such as a Sellers turntable kit (Freshwater Models).

Quote:The current trend is away from smaller scales and into production of ever increasing numbers of large scale kits, O and On3/On30 being the "new HO". This being the case, it's harder for garage entrepeneurs to make an impression on such a market, since larger scales demand greater detail, including DCC. Meanwhile, costs of even N-scale locos have gone up dramatically, but but in the process and entire era of railroading has almost completely disappeared - the 1800's to the early 1900's. No cars or loco's are sold to meet this market at all, apparently under the assumption that that era is restricted to narrow gauge. I guess no one reads railroad history anymore. Icon_lol

I had to buy sets in order to obtain proper passenger and freightr cars, and the freights frankly aren't that good. Even the Cabbose folks just shrug and walks away when questioned about lack of period models. Under those circumstances, I don't hold out much hope for the future.

I can't speak for N; I model 1900 and earlier in HO and HOn3. In HO standard gauge, there are plenty of 19th Century accurate and generic resin or wood car kits available from Alkem, BTS, Amesville, Silvercrash, Art Griffin, Bitter Creek, Labelle, Ye Olde Huff-n-Puff, Trout Creek, etc. In plastic, Roundhouse Old Time new RTR and old stock kits can be back-dated. Bachmann, Mantua, Model Power, and IHC train set cars can be easily modified for a more presentable appearance - replace trucks, couplers, grab irons, stirrups, brake wheels, truss rods with items closer to scale. Weather the paint a little, and there you are.

just my experiences
Fred W
Reply
#50
Fred,
The generation x or y ( have trouble keeping track of what is the latest designation for the current generation) is actually larger than the baby boomer generation. That could boost sales back up even when we recognize that model railroading is a minority hobby.

Mountain Man, why is your version printed in yellow? Everything on my computer for this site is white lettering on a medium blue background.
Reply
#51
[quote="pgandw"

I can't speak for N; I model 1900 and earlier in HO and HOn3. In HO standard gauge, there are plenty of 19th Century accurate and generic resin or wood car kits available from Alkem, BTS, Amesville, Silvercrash, Art Griffin, Bitter Creek, Labelle, Ye Olde Huff-n-Puff, Trout Creek, etc. In plastic, Roundhouse Old Time new RTR and old stock kits can be back-dated. Bachmann, Mantua, Model Power, and IHC train set cars can be easily modified for a more presentable appearance - replace trucks, couplers, grab irons, stirrups, brake wheels, truss rods with items closer to scale. Weather the paint a little, and there you are.

just my experiences
Fred W[/quote]

The assumption is that everything from 1850 to perhaps 1920 or so was narrow gauge, which is frustrating because Nn3 is a very limited market.

Historically, it is impossible to understand, because the major railroads were using standard gauge everywhere except in the mountains, and often standard-gauged their mountain routes to make them more profitable. When the gold fields surrounding Cripple Creek opened up, the first railroad was narrow gauge, but two competing standard gauge lines immediately entered the competition and eventually drove the F&CCRR out of business.

Yet despite the overwhelming history, only larger scale narrow gauge rolling stock is available except for the Bachmann starter sets I mentioned. But don't talk to the LHS's about it, or the manufacturers either. They just mumble incoherently and wander off to polish up their larger scale merchandise.

Sure, I can scratch build, but I'm already going to have to scratch build a major portion of my layout structures and quite a few pieces of rolling stock as well, so I don't relish the extra burden on my time in the absence of any sort of coherent reply from the market.
Reply
#52
Russ Bellinis Wrote:Fred,
The generation x or y ( have trouble keeping track of what is the latest designation for the current generation) is actually larger than the baby boomer generation. That could boost sales back up even when we recognize that model railroading is a minority hobby.

Mountain Man, why is your version printed in yellow? Everything on my computer for this site is white lettering on a medium blue background.

It isn't my computer. The forum admin acknowledged the color as well and changed it back.

Quote:Postby doctorwayne ยป Mon Feb 06, 2012 11:16 am
I've changed Fred's reply back to the normal colour, which should make his words easily visible to those using the Big Blue Lite (white) background.
Wayne


Perhaps it had something to do with my use of the Lite version rather than the dark blue back ground.
Reply
#53
MountainMan Wrote:The assumption is that everything from 1850 to perhaps 1920 or so was narrow gauge, which is frustrating because Nn3 is a very limited market.

Historically, it is impossible to understand, because the major railroads were using standard gauge everywhere except in the mountains, and often standard-gauged their mountain routes to make them more profitable. When the gold fields surrounding Cripple Creek opened up, the first railroad was narrow gauge, but two competing standard gauge lines immediately entered the competition and eventually drove the F&CCRR out of business.

Yet despite the overwhelming history, only larger scale narrow gauge rolling stock is available except for the Bachmann starter sets I mentioned. But don't talk to the LHS's about it, or the manufacturers either. They just mumble incoherently and wander off to polish up their larger scale merchandise.

Sure, I can scratch build, but I'm already going to have to scratch build a major portion of my layout structures and quite a few pieces of rolling stock as well, so I don't relish the extra burden on my time in the absence of any sort of coherent reply from the market.

Most of the narrow gauge available in almost all scales focuses on the post-1920s rebuilds of the Colorado railroads - because that's what still around to measure and photograph. And bigger is easier to make and sell than smaller models. The 1870s - 1900 narrow gauge (the golden years of narrow gauge) is as poorly served as its standard gauge cousin.

But we can sit around and whine, or do something about it. In HO, there are maybe 400 active 19th Century prototype modelers - and over half of them are Civil War buffs. My best guess is that the numbers in N are considerably smaller. In either case, the numbers are not enough to support traditional detailed molded RTR plastic production. To amortize steel dies takes production runs in the thousands, not hundreds. Or smaller runs with incredible prices (Rapido and Blackstone are examples), with passenger cars fetching close to $100 each. And Blackstone and Rapido passenger cars come from runs of over 1,000 from my educated sources. So e-mailing or requesting or sitting around waiting for a plastic manufacturer to produce your choice isn't going to solve the problem.

What we did in HO was form a group to explore how to get car kits produced at reasonable prices. We ended up commissioning an 1880s gondola in resin as a 1st trial, with everybody kicking in advance orders to fund the project. We figured 60 advance orders (at a discount price) were necessary to get the project started. After 18 months of issues and problems, I took delivery of my 2 kits. And they couldn't include the lead sheet for weights for some technical reasons. But the chain of events directly led to the start of Silver Crash and Amesville production of early rail resin kits.

I submit the same ideas could be successful in N early rail. But it takes a committed group effort.

Another other option is to rework those despised train sets into better quality representations. Again, easier in HO than N. Which is why many early rail modelers move up in scale. The much smaller size of the prototype lends itself to moving up in scale. For Civil War era, O is seen as a better choice than HO for many. HO models of that era are just too small for accurate models with decent drive trains. For N, a true-to-scale 1870s 4-4-0 that runs well is quite a technical achievement. Same with a 4 wheel ore jimmy.

just my thoughts and experiences
Fred W
Reply
#54
pgandw Wrote:
MountainMan Wrote:The assumption is that everything from 1850 to perhaps 1920 or so was narrow gauge, which is frustrating because Nn3 is a very limited market.

Historically, it is impossible to understand, because the major railroads were using standard gauge everywhere except in the mountains, and often standard-gauged their mountain routes to make them more profitable. When the gold fields surrounding Cripple Creek opened up, the first railroad was narrow gauge, but two competing standard gauge lines immediately entered the competition and eventually drove the F&CCRR out of business.

Yet despite the overwhelming history, only larger scale narrow gauge rolling stock is available except for the Bachmann starter sets I mentioned. But don't talk to the LHS's about it, or the manufacturers either. They just mumble incoherently and wander off to polish up their larger scale merchandise.

Sure, I can scratch build, but I'm already going to have to scratch build a major portion of my layout structures and quite a few pieces of rolling stock as well, so I don't relish the extra burden on my time in the absence of any sort of coherent reply from the market.

Most of the narrow gauge available in almost all scales focuses on the post-1920s rebuilds of the Colorado railroads - because that's what still around to measure and photograph. And bigger is easier to make and sell than smaller models. The 1870s - 1900 narrow gauge (the golden years of narrow gauge) is as poorly served as its standard gauge cousin.

But we can sit around and whine, or do something about it. In HO, there are maybe 400 active 19th Century prototype modelers - and over half of them are Civil War buffs. My best guess is that the numbers in N are considerably smaller. In either case, the numbers are not enough to support traditional detailed molded RTR plastic production. To amortize steel dies takes production runs in the thousands, not hundreds. Or smaller runs with incredible prices (Rapido and Blackstone are examples), with passenger cars fetching close to $100 each. And Blackstone and Rapido passenger cars come from runs of over 1,000 from my educated sources. So e-mailing or requesting or sitting around waiting for a plastic manufacturer to produce your choice isn't going to solve the problem.

What we did in HO was form a group to explore how to get car kits produced at reasonable prices. We ended up commissioning an 1880s gondola in resin as a 1st trial, with everybody kicking in advance orders to fund the project. We figured 60 advance orders (at a discount price) were necessary to get the project started. After 18 months of issues and problems, I took delivery of my 2 kits. And they couldn't include the lead sheet for weights for some technical reasons. But the chain of events directly led to the start of Silver Crash and Amesville production of early rail resin kits.

I submit the same ideas could be successful in N early rail. But it takes a committed group effort.

Another other option is to rework those despised train sets into better quality representations. Again, easier in HO than N. Which is why many early rail modelers move up in scale. The much smaller size of the prototype lends itself to moving up in scale. For Civil War era, O is seen as a better choice than HO for many. HO models of that era are just too small for accurate models with decent drive trains. For N, a true-to-scale 1870s 4-4-0 that runs well is quite a technical achievement. Same with a 4 wheel ore jimmy.

just my thoughts and experiences
Fred W

Pretty much the same reply as before, just differently worded. IOW - do it myself, which I'm already faced with and which does not alter in any way the fact that the early days of railroading have been ignored by N-scale. But if you're right about lack of information and photos, how is it that the larger scales have that information and can produce earlier versions? I don't think that reasoning holds up, since even subscribers to NG&SLG routinely post builders' drawings of 19th century rolling stock and locos. Enough information exists from the Civil War alone to satisfy that requirement. Bachmann itself still issues a 2-4-0 Prairie loco from the 1800's, and cars to go with it - but no caboose - as a starter set, and it's a nice looking set for the money. So they can do it, but apparently don't wish to.
Reply
#55
pgandw Wrote:. For N, a true-to-scale 1870s 4-4-0 that runs well is quite a technical achievement. just my thoughts and experiences, Fred

If the technology now exists for "T" scale locomotives, anything larger should now be a "piece of cake"!
That said, it becomes a matter of just how much "detail" you are willing to sacrifice, to model that era in that scale.
I can put a lot of detail into a 1/700 scale ship model, but that detail doesn't have to "move"! :o 357

Mountainman wrote:" IOW - do it myself, which I'm already faced with and which does not alter in any way the fact that the early days of railroading have been ignored "

"do it myself" AKA Scratch building/ kit bashing, has been a major component in this hobby, for longer than I have been in it.
Even with all that is currently available, there are still many things that have to be scratch built, because they do not exist in kit, or RTR form. Reproducing these things, in scale, is really the heart and sole of the hobby of model railroading, as it is for just about any modeling hobby.
When everything that could be possibly conceived, becomes available as RTR, the "hobby" will cease to be Model Railroading, and become Miniature Railroading. As far as I am concerned, may that day never come!!
We always learn far more from our own mistakes, than we will ever learn from another's advice.
The greatest place to live life, is on the sharp leading edge of a learning curve.
Lead me not into temptation.....I can find it myself!
Reply
#56
Sumpter250 Wrote:
pgandw Wrote:. For N, a true-to-scale 1870s 4-4-0 that runs well is quite a technical achievement. just my thoughts and experiences, Fred

If the technology now exists for "T" scale locomotives, anything larger should now be a "piece of cake"!
That said, it becomes a matter of just how much "detail" you are willing to sacrifice, to model that era in that scale.
I can put a lot of detail into a 1/700 scale ship model, but that detail doesn't have to "move"! :o 357

Mountainman wrote:" IOW - do it myself, which I'm already faced with and which does not alter in any way the fact that the early days of railroading have been ignored "

"do it myself" AKA Scratch building/ kit bashing, has been a major component in this hobby, for longer than I have been in it.
Even with all that is currently available, there are still many things that have to be scratch built, because they do not exist in kit, or RTR form. Reproducing these things, in scale, is really the heart and sole of the hobby of model railroading, as it is for just about any modeling hobby.
When everything that could be possibly conceived, becomes available as RTR, the "hobby" will cease to be Model Railroading, and become Miniature Railroading. As far as I am concerned, may that day never come!!

Yep...which is what I have been saying for some time now.

However, the issue wasn't do-it-yourself-, but "The N-Scale Lost Era Of Modeling". 8-)
Reply
#57
MountainMan Wrote:Pretty much the same reply as before, just differently worded. IOW - do it myself, which I'm already faced with and which does not alter in any way the fact that the early days of railroading have been ignored by N-scale. But if you're right about lack of information and photos, how is it that the larger scales have that information and can produce earlier versions? I don't think that reasoning holds up, since even subscribers to NG&SLG routinely post builders' drawings of 19th century rolling stock and locos. Enough information exists from the Civil War alone to satisfy that requirement. Bachmann itself still issues a 2-4-0 Prairie loco from the 1800's, and cars to go with it - but no caboose - as a starter set, and it's a nice looking set for the money. So they can do it, but apparently don't wish to.

I did not say there was a lack of information about earlier eras. What I said was examples from the 1920s and later still exist without being changed by restoration. With these, manufacturers can get somewhat accurate colors and paint schemes, and placement of fittings and accessories. Unless an old photo is dated or was taken as the car or loco left the builders, and the model is specified as such, there is significant risk that details will be wrong when compared to other photographs. Steam locos and wood cars were rebuilt extensively during their lives, often changing their appearance. It shows in different photos of the same subject. On30, because it's already compromised on gauge, gets away with a lot more whimsical or generic production than would sell in the HOn3 market.

Yes, you will have to build or bash your own models (or join together and commission model production) to get accurate models of early rail, especially in N. There just aren't enough souls modeling that era to justify large scale RTR plastic production. I had hoped that the Civil War 150 year anniversary would create more interest in early rail, like the 100 year anniversary did in the early 1960s. But I don't see much attention to the Civil War in the mainstream media, nor production of any models or movies or TV shows. The old geezers do their re-enactments (or play with their toy trains), and the rest of the country could care less.

my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
Reply
#58
That's why interest is dying out. History isn't taught all that much in our schools these days. Sad
Reply
#59
MountainMan Wrote:That's why interest is dying out. History isn't taught all that much in our schools these days. Sad

I don't know that history being taught or not will have too much to do with it. I was taught history in school back in the 1960's and the total railroad history consisted of the transcontinental railroad, and perhaps the De Witt Clinton. They covered the civil war, but not a single mention was made of the railroad involvement in the civil war. In any event, Colorado narrow gauge was not covered. It might have been covered in Colorado schools, but not outside of the state to my knowledge, definitely not in California. Model railroading is somewhat of a niche hobby, and 19th century historical railroading is a niche within the niche.
Reply
#60
MountainMan Wrote:That's why interest is dying out. History isn't taught all that much in our schools these days. Sad

There are more ways than just schools to learn...

Here's a link to my club's annual "open house" event. Lots of kids visiting (and learning without knowing it...).
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.hotrak.ca/Members/OVAR_Rally_Lanctot.html">http://www.hotrak.ca/Members/OVAR_Rally_Lanctot.html</a><!-- m -->


Andrew
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)