My ideas for needed models

If they're finished, running models then they are RTR. Even Bachmann and Hornby products are, ultimately, a kit of parts assembled by the manufacturer. The price of the Silver Fox products merely reflects the fact that they are not manufactured in volume using cheap far eastern labour.
Well that logic makes even you a kit of parts, on the chromosome level...
One is mass produced, and benefits from the cost savings mass production give, the other is a kit that will have been individually hand built, which is more labour intensive and thus costs more - as the price-point amply shows!
Reply to
:Jerry:
Loading thread data ...
In message , ":Jerry:" writes
In that case, don't make one of these ancient 4-4-0s at all. There are other ex-GW locos that could be made, of which more than a few were in use in the 50s and 60s.
Reply to
Jane Sullivan
Your point being what? Wouldn't that also achieve what I'm worried about above, a few well known or well used prototypes - anyone want yet another "Black Five" and another "Flying Scotsman"?...
Reply to
:Jerry:
Why?
These old 4-4-0s are right for any layout from the turn of the century to BR days, and as such have a wider market than engines built in the 1930s.
They're also more suitable for the typical layout - we don't all have room for a Castle and ten carriages. One of these or a mogul plus three or four makes a prototypical train .
They make a perfect companion for the Dean Goods.
And as I've pointed out, two sets of body tooling and one of chassis provides at least four different engines. More with minor additional parts.
Reply to
Christopher A. Lee
What relevance does my method of posting have?
That's just silly!
That's basically what I said.
Do you think there is no hand building in mass produced RTR? Do you think that they are not made from a selection of individual parts? What's the difference, other than one is never offered to the public as a box of bits?
MBQ
Reply to
manatbandq
What relevance does my method of posting have?
That's just silly!
Not at all, I'm just throwing your (ill)logic back in your face, everything is basically a kit of parts, other than single cell organisms that reproduce themselves asexually!
That's basically what I said.
Do you think there is no hand building in mass produced RTR? Do you think that they are not made from a selection of individual parts? What's the difference, other than one is never offered to the public as a box of bits?
You are obviously clueless as to the savings that mass production gives and the possible quality differences between an injection moulded parts and a resin cast parts.
Finally, to answer your first question, because it's breaking the standard nntp follow up formatting, as you might have noticed my comments become merged with comments that you have made which makes things very confusing - especially if the reader doesn't understand the finer points of how to distinguish between who said what.
Reply to
:Jerry:
?
What? I'm perfectly clueued up about the savings that can be made through mass production, thank you. The only difference between Bachmann, Hornby, etc., (the mass market RTR) and a Silver Fox RTR model is the economies of scale due to differing manufacturing methods. They are *all* put together *by hand* from component pieces (i.e., taken to the extreme, a "kit of parts"). One is high volume low cost labour, the other (to the best of my knowledge) low volume high cost labour.
Quality difference can occur, regardless of the materials or manufacturing methods.
No one else seems to have a problem in quoting my posts correctly.
MBQ
Reply to
manatbandq
Ok so people like you would buy the one example, those who would buy a Dukedog and it's variants could well buy two or more as that is what would have been seen, how many City of Truro's have you seen passing in the station?...
Reply to
:Jerry:
I do think there is a fundamental difference between a product designed to be assembled in a factory, and one designed to be sold as a kit - except, as pointed out by someone else, CKD (which applies to Land Rovers as well as Hornby!).
Cheers Richard
Reply to
beamendsltd
I'm sure any M/R marketting person will tell you that the packaging of the individual parts of the kit and special box costs almost as much as assembling the model and placing it in a standard box. That presumes that the assembly line and finished model packaging already exists. OTOH, the cottage industry creating a kit doesn't produce parts ready to snap together nor do they have a production line and staff sitting waiting for productive work.
Regards, Greg.P.
Reply to
Greg Procter
Not even then, as a look at certain car parts catalogues, there are often differences between factory assembled vehicles and those designed for CKD, and it's not just due to different markets/assembly methods.
Reply to
:Jerry:
Several possibiliyies there: - Some markets don't want the cigarette lighter/motorway overdrive/cocktail cabinet options on their Landrovers. - Some manufacturers put different numbers/colour schemes/detail options on their kits/RTR to tempt customers to buy one of each.
Reply to
Greg Procter
"Christopher A. Lee" wrote
If you mean that abortion churned out by Hornby, then I'd want a different Dean Goods to go with any proposed 4-4-0.
John.
Reply to
John Turner
Obviously I can't say about others, but Land Rover are identical, except that some additional part numbers for sub-assemblies that are applicable to CKD which make no sense for the factory
Cheers Richard
Reply to
beamendsltd
1 more than Dukedogs
Seen it in Gloucester with a rake of raspberry ripple mark 1s
Traveled behind it on SVR, and the GWR Videoed it double heading with Defiant on the GWR
Seen it at Toddington most recently
Reply to
Martin

Site Timeline

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.