A Question About Buying Kits

[red_death]

I think there is a difference between what a particular customer might want - I can perfectly understand a new modeller being reluctant or unable to go out and source a Fetch & Pickit 9-spoke brake wheel - and what a manufacturer is in a position to provide. Like everything in life there is a wide spectrum in what kit manufacturers are able to provide with their kits.

Instructions - I agree in an ideal world, but are people prepared to pay for them to be written up to a decent standard for a kit which may only ever be a short run?

I'm afraid when I see some of the statements on here I wonder why some of our small manufacturers even bother! It is hardly as if any kit manufacturer is going to get stinkingly wealthy from it! By all means encourage and help kit manufacturers to do better but it isn't worth getting irate about. If the kit manufacturer doesn't meet your spec then don't buy - that is absolutely your perogative - but please don't get so het up that the manufacturer throws the towel in and ruin it for everyone. 

Again, you might think I am being over-dramatic, but all this is based on real conversations I've had with some of the small model manufacturers.

Cheers, Mike

[Agrippa]

Another hornets' nest stirred up !

[EtchedPixels]

It comes down to time and money.

You can pick between
- complete set of parts
- low price
- availability of more unusual products
- good instructions

At best you can have three of those, most often two, or one for low volume stuff

What I think matters is that it is clear what you are going to get. If it's a scratch aid then it should be described as such.

Other things make it tricky

- some modellers will pay a lot for a full kit, but a lot more will pay a lot less for a more basic one. It's hard to cater for both at once

- some modellers like to buy a basic set of etches, build them and then when they are happy with the result go buy all the other finishing bits

- a lot of models had a wide range of details, liveries and the like. It pushes the price up massively if you need to ship the parts for all versions they might build

To put it bluntly to model rail kit mfrs - you want my money ?  Produce something I'm happy with, else I'll use your competitors - and not necessarily in this hobby !

See we don't care.. if it's more work than you'll pay for then it's better you go elsewhere  It's a mix of folks in business and breaking even, it's not a charity for modellers.

Alan

[Dorsetmike]

Well if we think of loco kits, are there any that come with thier own chassis and motor,  not including kits from Langley that are sold with say a Farish chassis and motor.

By far the greatest number of loco kits aere sold wqithout chassis and motor, you need to go out and buy your own, it is iften the case that the "recommended " chassis is not really suitable for the intended model,  example a number of kits produced to fit the Farish (Poole) black 5, in most cases wheels far too small and incorrectly spaced.

The biggesst problem with loco kits for N gauge is the non availability of loco wheels, AFAIK ABS/Beaver were the only source of drivers, now no longer available except for a few that occasionally appear on Ebay, the biggest drawback with them was quartering some of the early ones hasd squared axle ends, but later ones had nothing to help getting it right.

Valve gear is another stumbling block, maybe not such a problem for those with younger, steadier, hands and eyes

Coach and wagon kits should not have quite the same problems, probably because the wheels, bogies and underframe parts are easier to source and are often included in the kits, their cots being far less than a loco chassis, motor and wheels.

Decals for some rolling stock should be part of the kit, but to reduce cost to the kit manufacturer if say a coach originally of a pre-grouping company lasted through grouping and into BR days then when ordering the kit you should have the option to specify which period you require decals for.

Some loco classes had different tenders, if it was a major difference, say 6 wheel or 8 wheel then both tyoes should be available as an option when ordering, minor differences like coal rails, tool boxes, tank fillers could either be suppied or be easy to source or make.

[EtchedPixels]

The biggesst problem with loco kits for N gauge is the non availability of loco wheels

Yes it would nice to have supplies of a few sizes from somewhere, or even wheels + motor tender sets. One problem though is that volume dominates the costings. The  cost of "random least wanted livery full loco" is often lower or about the same as the price a manufacturer would have to charge for just the chassis as a product. From the suppliers point of view it's clearly simpler to just sell whole locos, and it also makes their dealers happy because there is a market to soak up the "oops.. wrong livery choice" models.

Coach and wagon kits should not have quite the same problems, probably because the wheels, bogies and underframe parts are easier to source and are often included in the kits, their cots being far less than a loco chassis, motor and wheels.

RTR bogies are useful but Bachmann in particular are a complete PITA about it in N. They say 'we don't do parts' then do them in OO and go quiet when you ask them to explain that. Dapol in comparison have been very helpful. We do have a big problem with the lack of suitable wheels for scale width bogies or 3D print bogies.

Decals for some rolling stock should be part of the kit, but to reduce cost to the kit manufacturer if say a coach originally of a pre-grouping company lasted through grouping and into BR days then when ordering the kit you should have the option to specify which period you require decals for.

Pre-group decals are actually some of the simplest as they are out of copyright. The worst ones are modern ones. It can take weeks of negotiation. test prints and sign-offs to get decals approved by modern operators and while some small vendors simply "forget" it's not a good long term business model especially given the penaties for it are now potentially criminal.

The problem is also getting worse both because the operators are now all 'intellectual property, brand maximisation' etc not 'we run trains', and because for BR and grouping logos still in copyright the idiots in charge of our country abolished BR (Resiudary), which owned such stuff and split everything it did up into other bodies like DaFT. So it used to be easy to sort stuff, now its basically impossible. If you didn't have a licence pre-abolition you are *screwed*.

In many cases the licensing offered is a per unit royalty with a base cost, which makes it impossible to do your own decals commercially. It really in many cases is way cheaper to tell people "Get Fox sheet XYZ" than to do them.

Some loco classes had different tenders, if it was a major difference, say 6 wheel or 8 wheel then both tyoes should be available as an option when ordering, minor differences like coal rails, tool boxes, tank fillers could either be suppied or be easy to source or make.

A difference that big is basically two kits, and often from a design and stock perspective exactly that. It's a bit easier with 3D printing but still a lot of work.

Alan

[Nick]

I don't mind buying some parts/decals elsewhere at all, as long as suitable options/manufacturers/suppliers are made clear at the outset. Then I can work out how much the kit is actually going to cost me in total and I know what I have to do.

What I don't enjoy is to buy a kit and find I've actually ended up with a little/large project researching and sourcing bits & pieces with the feeling that everyone else buying it is doing a similar thing when the kit supplier (who almost certainly knows more about the subject anyway) could just have done it once and let us all in on the secret! Surely the kit was made with something suitable in mind and not produced in a vacuum (Well, unless it's a vacform... Sorry, I'll get me coat!)

Reasonable/good instructions are important to me - I want to buy a kit, not a 3D puzzle.  And anyway, I don't necessarily know that the left hand threaded thrangipangi was fitted on the right hand side if the prototype was built on an even numbered day and the left hand side on odd numbered days...

[BernardTPM]

If it's a kit then it should be just that - a kit. Not half a kit, nor a finished painted item. Imagine buying a model aircraft kit and having to add your own wings - engine yes but wings no.

Would you expect the aircraft to fly? If not then the parts for a static model could all be made in the same mould or material.
Would you expect a loco kit to be a static model though?

[MikeDunn]

I think there is a difference between what a particular customer might want [...] and what a manufacturer is in a position to provide. Like everything in life there is a wide spectrum in what kit manufacturers are able to provide with their kits.

Er - I said I was happy to go & get items not in the kit - as long as I'm told what they are !  That's the rub - quite a few mfrs don't bother to tell the buyer - is it because they've not researched the prototype properly ? 

Instructions - I agree in an ideal world, but are people prepared to pay for them to be written up to a decent standard for a kit which may only ever be a short run?

And if there were decent instructions, don't you think more people would be prepared to try it ?  And then more of the kit would be sold ?  Also - see later re modularisation.

I'm afraid when I see some of the statements on here I wonder why some of our small manufacturers even bother!

And when I see some kits, I think the same thing ...

What I think matters is that it is clear what you are going to get. If it's a scratch aid then it should be described as such.

Agreed - and this isn't as prevalent as it should be 

- some modellers will pay a lot for a full kit, but a lot more will pay a lot less for a more basic one. It's hard to cater for both at once
- a lot of models had a wide range of details, liveries and the like. It pushes the price up massively if you need to ship the parts for all versions they might build

In that case - why isn't there an option for the modeller ?  Such as the basic kit, then additional packs (either for fine detailing or for the different liveries) ?  The mfr can ship out the basic kit quickly, then the extras (if not in stock) a short while later.  I see this in other areas of the kit building hobby, but rarely in model rail ...

To put it bluntly to model rail kit mfrs - you want my money ?  Produce something I'm happy with, else I'll use your competitors - and not necessarily in this hobby !

See we don't care.. if it's more work than you'll pay for then it's better you go elsewhere 

So why should I care about the mfr ?  If it's more work than they're prepared to put in (they only have to write the instructions once, for crying out loud !  And if they're sensible they'll modularise the etch as much as possible - and that goes for the instructions too), I'll pay my money to the guy who treats his potential customers as important people - after all, without them he won't sell anything ...  If that means you go bust - tough luck.  We're not idiots - don't treat us as such.

Real life example (I gave one earlier about a mfr who either doesn't care about his potential customers, or didn't research the prototype properly - or both !) : I'm building a set of coaches from a very small mfr.  While the instructions aren't brilliant, they're good enough to get along with (albeit I'm re-writing them as I go along for my own benefit - as I say, I'm building a set one coach at a time, and won't necessarily remember a trick I used on a previous coach).  No paint or decals included, but I'm told where I can get them and what I need (PP & Fox, as it happens).  There are a number of items sourced in (bogeys, wheels, articulation) so I don't have to go out & track these down - makes the kit more expensive, but it's all in one place (I'd be happy to source myself, as long as I knew what the mfr had designed against).  End result : I'm happy with the kits and have spend a fair bit with him, with a similar amount to go on my next order when I finish the ones currently with me.

Another example - I know a small naval kit mfr : they do small runs of product; modularise both etches and instructions to make life easier for them & their customers; provide details on what is and isn't in the kit & where to get what's needed; provide the kit in several levels (basic; intermediate; and full - the difference is in how many packets you get; more packets are included the further up the chain you go); and also sell the additional packets separately for those who don't want / can't afford to get the full kit in one go.  They have created a range of high-end products and are doing well off it.  So I know the business model works for those willing to invest into it.

If it's a kit then it should be just that - a kit. Not half a kit, nor a finished painted item. Imagine buying a model aircraft kit and having to add your own wings - engine yes but wings no.

Would you expect a loco kit to be a static model though?

I'd expect to either get the mechanism or be told what mechanism was suitable ... depending on how much the kit was !


Reading the various comments, I'm struck that we seem to have two main camps :

• Mfrs not willing to be more flexible (because it's more work for them ?)
• Modellers wanting mfrs to provide better kits (whether in the kit itself, the instructions, or both

and a small scattering between the two.  I hope (but won't hold my breath) that those in the first camp will listen more to those in the second - because that's the group of people with the money the mfrs want ...

[BernardTPM]

If it's a kit then it should be just that - a kit. Not half a kit, nor a finished painted item. Imagine buying a model aircraft kit and having to add your own wings - engine yes but wings no.

Would you expect a loco kit to be a static model though?

I'd expect to either get the mechanism or be told what mechanism was suitable ... depending on how much the kit was !

I would expect that too, but I don't think you can fairly compare a kit for a static model with one that would be expected to operate. A fairer comparison for aircraft would be flying models - I doubt all of those come complete with motor and radio control partly because people tend to have their own favoured options/makes.

For loco kit manufacturers now the big problem comes when the chassis the kit was designed for goes out of production. While Farish was producing at Poole the chassis tended to remain in production (sometimes with minor improvements/modifications) for many years, indeed there were a lot of common parts. That's much less the case now. There's always the second hand market, of course, but you won't find those as stock items in shops.

[Nick]

I would expect that too, but I don't think you can fairly compare a kit for a static model with one that would be expected to operate. A fairer comparison for aircraft would be flying models - I doubt all of those come complete with motor and radio control partly because people tend to have their own favoured options/makes.

Indeed they don't, but they do normally come with enough information to judge what size powerplant is suitable - too small and your pride and joy will never take off, too big and it'll be uncontrollable, or you'll rip the wings off when you throttle up! Ditto, the radio gear - the airframe designer should give you an idea of what strength and weight of servo is appropriate if there's any reason to doubt that the "standard" servo won't suit.

For loco kit manufacturers now the big problem comes when the chassis the kit was designed for goes out of production. While Farish was producing at Poole the chassis tended to remain in production (sometimes with minor improvements/modifications) for many years, indeed there were a lot of common parts. That's much less the case now. There's always the second hand market, of course, but you won't find those as stock items in shops.

I've every sympathy with the problem, which is by no means confined to railway modelling in this age of instant obsolescence. (I've just been grappling with it in buying a Skype camera for a TV <1 year old...) But, as a customer, I don't want it thrown on me. IMHO, the chassis for which the kit's designed should be specified, and if that's no longer available, an alternative given. Or it should be made plain that there is none. Then I can make my own decision as to how to proceed. Am I prepared to kitbash or scour the second-hand market? Surely, it can't be good business practice, commercially or ethically, to alienate your customers by leaving them to find out the hard way that a vital element of their model is no longer available? Or to have to spend time and effort in pre-purchase research that the vendor/supplier knows the answer to full well.

[Pixie]

I can see the appeal of an all-in-one-package idea, but there's also people out there who might not want everything in that package. For example (as a 2mm modeller) the bogies/chassis/wheels/couplings that come in a lot of N wagon kits aren't much use to me. On a wagon kit their inclusion in a kit isn't a massive influence on the price (and manufacturers do kindly supply kits without them), but in loco kits they could form a big part of the price tag. I guess making a couple of options at the point of purchase is the best option.

Pix

[red_death]

And if there were decent instructions, don't you think more people would be prepared to try it ?  And then more of the kit would be sold ?  Also - see later re modularisation.

In that case - why isn't there an option for the modeller ?  Such as the basic kit, then additional packs (either for fine detailing or for the different liveries) ?  The mfr can ship out the basic kit quickly, then the extras (if not in stock) a short while later.  I see this in other areas of the kit building hobby, but rarely in model rail ...

So why should I care about the mfr ?  If it's more work than they're prepared to put in (they only have to write the instructions once, for crying out loud !  And if they're sensible they'll modularise the etch as much as possible - and that goes for the instructions too), I'll pay my money to the guy who treats his potential customers as important people - after all, without them he won't sell anything ...  If that means you go bust - tough luck.  We're not idiots - don't treat us as such.

You want beautiful clear instructions - well think about the cost of doing so for a small run of say 25-50 kits and how much it adds to the price...

I think you are missing one crucial group, which is hobbyist mfrs who provide the stuff they make for themselves to others.  It isn't a case of not willing to be flexible or provide better kits - for both of those read more time and/or money which they may not have. For many of those people it isnt their livelihood and if they don't sell much it doesn't make too much difference to them - criticising them for not doing what *you* want hardly encourages people to provide what *they* can.

I still think you are comparing apples and pears...

[EtchedPixels]

I'm afraid when I see some of the statements on here I wonder why some of our small manufacturers even bother!

And when I see some kits, I think the same thing ...

A lot of oddities and one off kits get done because someone asked for them. Several of the small manufacturers actually exist solely because people kept saying "Can I get one as well" to things like 3D printed DMU bodies.

They could of couse simply have said "No" instead.

Similarly a lot of kits assume the builder knows about or will go order or borrow drawings/books etc for the prototype. Case in point being the Worsley Works scratch aids. They assume you know the prototype or are prepared to go order the drawings and/or books on it. In some scales such as O or 3mm being prepared to go get the drawings is the default, ditto to a large extent in 2fs.

A lot of "serious" kitbuilders treat instructions as firelighters in the first place. Doesn't help newcomers I know!

- some modellers will pay a lot for a full kit, but a lot more will pay a lot less for a more basic one. It's hard to cater for both at once
- a lot of models had a wide range of details, liveries and the like. It pushes the price up massively if you need to ship the parts for all versions they might build

In that case - why isn't there an option for the modeller ?  Such as the basic kit, then additional packs (either for fine detailing or for the different liveries) ?  The mfr can ship out the basic kit quickly, then the extras (if not in stock) a short while later.  I see this in other areas of the kit building hobby, but rarely in model rail ...

It means more product lines, more stock, more product codes, more catalogue entries. It rapidly adds up when you've got 800 already and it would add another 250 or so!

I can't speak for other manufacturers but I know in my case its not worth the effort for the miniscule extra return it would produce. Much easier and more efficient to field the odd email saying "I want to build XYZ" or "I need all the Ultima parts to finsih a Worsley Works blah"

To put it bluntly to model rail kit mfrs - you want my money ?  Produce something I'm happy with, else I'll use your competitors - and not necessarily in this hobby !

See we don't care.. if it's more work than you'll pay for then it's better you go elsewhere 

So why should I care about the mfr ?  If it's more work than they're prepared to put in (they only have to write the instructions once, for crying out loud !

Cost of instructions divides by units sold. Shift 200 kits and the cost of instructions is low. Shift ten and the cost of instructions is significant.

Another way to look at it is this. A basic scratch aid coach in some styles with low volume can be put together so it sells at maybe a tenner. In low volumes with instructions, all the bits bundled, interior, decals etc you'd be looking at over £50. In which case the volume sold will be zero.

At commercial rates if it takes 2 hours to write the instructions thats £50 to split between the units sold. More importantly most N manufacturers are hobby or at most part time. Thats 2 hours they could spend on their layout, in the pub or even designing another kit.

Options
a) drink beer with friends
b) write instructions all evening for minimal extra sales

guess which is going to win!

range of high-end products and are doing well off it.  So I know the business model works for those willing to invest into it.

Reality check - anyone willing to actually invest in N gauge model railways who is doing it for money not just for love goes to O gauge instead. I could turn Ultima into a full time job in O, I could make it squeak by as a full time job in OO, I can make it break even in N and maybe pay for some of the beer. That's fine for me as its my hobby.

N has a very small following, of which many many are collectors, the other big chunk are 'RTR only' and very few are actually kit builders and most of them are not big spenders in the way you get in O gauge (and if they had all that money many would probably be doing O instead...)

Seriously - the first business answer to the question "how do I increase my turnover or margin" is "drop N gauge"

Alan

[Adam1701D]

I produced a 4-page set of instructions with my recent Class 312 conversion kit, including roof plans as a downloadable PDF, with the option to have a printed set for an extra pound or two to cover costs. On the whole, I produce fairly generic instructions for most of my products, with specific details where needed.

[ScottyStitch]

I'm afraid when I see some of the statements on here I wonder why some of our small manufacturers even bother!

And when I see some kits, I think the same thing ...

A lot of oddities and one off kits get done because someone asked for them. Several of the small manufacturers actually exist solely because people kept saying "Can I get one as well" to things like 3D printed DMU bodies.

They could of couse simply have said "No" instead.

Similarly a lot of kits assume the builder knows about or will go order or borrow drawings/books etc for the prototype. Case in point being the Worsley Works scratch aids. They assume you know the prototype or are prepared to go order the drawings and/or books on it. In some scales such as O or 3mm being prepared to go get the drawings is the default, ditto to a large extent in 2fs.

A lot of "serious" kitbuilders treat instructions as firelighters in the first place. Doesn't help newcomers I know!

- some modellers will pay a lot for a full kit, but a lot more will pay a lot less for a more basic one. It's hard to cater for both at once
- a lot of models had a wide range of details, liveries and the like. It pushes the price up massively if you need to ship the parts for all versions they might build

In that case - why isn't there an option for the modeller ?  Such as the basic kit, then additional packs (either for fine detailing or for the different liveries) ?  The mfr can ship out the basic kit quickly, then the extras (if not in stock) a short while later.  I see this in other areas of the kit building hobby, but rarely in model rail ...

It means more product lines, more stock, more product codes, more catalogue entries. It rapidly adds up when you've got 800 already and it would add another 250 or so!

I can't speak for other manufacturers but I know in my case its not worth the effort for the miniscule extra return it would produce. Much easier and more efficient to field the odd email saying "I want to build XYZ" or "I need all the Ultima parts to finsih a Worsley Works blah"

To put it bluntly to model rail kit mfrs - you want my money ?  Produce something I'm happy with, else I'll use your competitors - and not necessarily in this hobby !

See we don't care.. if it's more work than you'll pay for then it's better you go elsewhere 

So why should I care about the mfr ?  If it's more work than they're prepared to put in (they only have to write the instructions once, for crying out loud !

Cost of instructions divides by units sold. Shift 200 kits and the cost of instructions is low. Shift ten and the cost of instructions is significant.

Another way to look at it is this. A basic scratch aid coach in some styles with low volume can be put together so it sells at maybe a tenner. In low volumes with instructions, all the bits bundled, interior, decals etc you'd be looking at over £50. In which case the volume sold will be zero.

At commercial rates if it takes 2 hours to write the instructions thats £50 to split between the units sold. More importantly most N manufacturers are hobby or at most part time. Thats 2 hours they could spend on their layout, in the pub or even designing another kit.

Options
a) drink beer with friends
b) write instructions all evening for minimal extra sales

guess which is going to win!

range of high-end products and are doing well off it.  So I know the business model works for those willing to invest into it.

Reality check - anyone willing to actually invest in N gauge model railways who is doing it for money not just for love goes to O gauge instead. I could turn Ultima into a full time job in O, I could make it squeak by as a full time job in OO, I can make it break even in N and maybe pay for some of the beer. That's fine for me as its my hobby.

N has a very small following, of which many many are collectors, the other big chunk are 'RTR only' and very few are actually kit builders and most of them are not big spenders in the way you get in O gauge (and if they had all that money many would probably be doing O instead...)

Seriously - the first business answer to the question "how do I increase my turnover or margin" is "drop N gauge"

Alan

Alan,

I think there is a lot of truth in what you say, and I certainly agree with much of it, but having read your post I did have a couple of thoughts.

Your earlier comment, "See we don't care.. if it's more work than you'll pay for then it's better you go elsewhere", I think is an unfortunate thing to say, especially on a forum which I would think comprises a good chunk of your N gauge business? Customers, I'm sure, don't appreciate being told by a manufacturer or shop, that their needs/wants/opinions aren't valued.

Your point about increasing the cost of your kit from £10 to £50 when you add all the extra parts needed to complete it; Apart from the cost of instructions, that £50 total exists for the modeler regardless because he has to source those extra parts him/herself, no? But I'd have thought the modeler would be more inclined to buy another kit from you because he/she knew it was all there to start with and that he/she could trust you to provide a complete product.

Secondly, I wonder how many more kits you might sell if it was known that some clear instructions were provided? A lot of people are put off kit building, particularly in model railway terms, precisely because of the fact that it is a daunting enough prospect for many to take a kit and produce a good job of it. Provide no, or unhelpful, instructions, and that feeling is multiplied. Any help the manufacturer can give is surely a win-win. The modeler gets a helping hand, the manufacturer gets repeat business. Even something as simple as "assemble these components first. Next, attach this component." I don't think it needs to be a series of exploded diagrams, a la Hasegawa.

Part of a forum members gripe to the NGF in letter form, was the fact that kit building or "real" modeling was in decline. I think more people would build more kits if they were more accessible.

For the record, all of my stock is RTR so far, but I certainly intend to build kits of stock, particularly if it isn't available RTR. I've already purchased my first kit, a Parkwood diesel brake tender.

One final thought, and this isn't related directly to your post but merely an observation with regard to kit built locomotives.

When the bulk RTR producers present us with a new model, there are countless comments regarding the inaccuracies of the model, sometimes with regard to the minutest of details, paint shades, etc.  However, when it comes to kit locomotives, it seems that the same people are happy to use an "approximate" chassis or an inappropriate bogie for that locomotive body, and wide bristle paintwork. I genuinely wonder why this is..... 

My last is not meant as a criticism of any person or group of persons, merely something that perplexes me.

In fact, none of what I've written is meant as criticism, just my thoughts.

Scotty