Powered/Unpowered locos

[Newportnobby]

When DJ Models announced the class 17 I immediately signed up for a weathered green twin pack (1 powered, 1 dummy) which, if I recall correctly, was priced around the £150 mark. Now EFE are releasing it under the Bachmann banner there is no such option. Out of curiosity I mailed Bachmann asking if there was a glimmer of hope for a dummy version. I'm not allowed to copy or share their response but yesterday a kind, well worded negative response was received. It basically echoed the response from RevolutioN when they are asked about dummy locos. @Ben A @red_death 
Now to the point of this post:-

I'm convinced if D.J. Models had survived and should they ever have attempted the class 28, they would also have offered a twin pack.
There are certain locos/units that lend themselves to running in pairs, which the class 17 and class 28 frequently did.
Dapol have produced unpowered versions of classes 26, 27, 35, 73, 86, 121, 122 and 153.
Is someone going to tell me they lost money on every sale owing to the fact it's almost as expensive to produce as a powered version? I would find that impossible to swallow.
If, and I'm pulling figures out of the air here, a model costs £120 of which the motor is £20 then an unpowered one would be expected around the £100 mark but how has it been done successfully?
Similarly I would ask - if a class 28 was to be made with an MOQ of 1000 units but only 850 orders had been received, could 150 unpowered units actually help get the model over that line?

I appreciate the market for unpowered models is probably a mystery, but given the right model could it be done? Too late now, but what if Farish had ever offered dummy class 20s in liveries from BR blue onwards?

[ntpntpntp]

I wonder why Bachmann wouldn't want their response in the public domain?  It's a reasonable question to ask of a manufacturer (though really it should be posed to EFE in this case).

Some of the cost must depend on the approach taken to create the dummy:  is it just a case of leaving out the motor and a few gears, or is it a case of creating an entirely different chassis block (say from plastic to save weight)?   Is lighting and/or a decoder socket required in the dummy?

[Newportnobby]

I'd love to get Dapol's take on this question, Nick, as they've done dummy locos with and without lights. Having never been inside any of my locos I've no idea what, other than the motor gets removed. Possibly the gears to make the dummy free wheeling?
Another candidate has sprung to mind - a class 76

[Chuffington]

I would rather pay £120 for a loco that works than £100 for a loco that doesn't.
Manufacturers don't pay anything like £20 for a motor.
The dummy concept might be OK for something like the Dapol 121 or 122 but I don't see the point otherwise.
Maybe dummy loco sales have been poor ?

[joe cassidy]

A dummy class 20 would be good too.

[Newportnobby]

I would rather pay £120 for a loco that works than £100 for a loco that doesn't.
Manufacturers don't pay anything like £20 for a motor.

Maybe you missed the bit where I said I was pulling figures out of the air. Feel free to add your knowledge.

The dummy concept might be OK for something like the Dapol 121 or 122 but I don't see the point otherwise.

That's just your choice. The fact remains classes 17, 20, 26, 27 and 28 very often ran in pairs.

A dummy class 20 would be good too.

As mentioned in my post, Joe, but maybe too late for that one now. Maybe the market has gone.
Happy to be proved wrong but I just don't think Bachmann buy into the concept.

[Bob G]

Interesting that the price of dummy locos has gone up. I'm not sure their popularity has.
I remember them at £25 or so for Hymeks. Now the Hymek and class 26/27 dummies are around £50, and the powered locos more than double that.
Then there was a glut of dummy 27s and Rails was selling them £29 each or two for £50. Literally half price.
That can only be to get cash flow. No other reason.

I'm not at all convinced, in a DCC age, that dummies are wanted, except for 121s perhaps, where the dummy is in fact pretending to be a trailer coach.
Or when I've bashed my finger with a hammer.

Bob

[Newportnobby]

I'm not at all convinced, in a DCC age, that dummies are wanted, except for 121s perhaps, where the dummy is in fact pretending to be a trailer coach.

But the fact remains Dapol have done it 8 times. Did they get the market that wrong? If dummies aren't wanted that suggests people are happy to pay full whack for another loco just to double head. That's their choice. As a DC user I object to even paying for a damned speaker cube in a DC loco.
I'm really struggling to find the rationale between one company doing it 8 times, a defunct company offering twin packs and others not even contemplating it. Interesting that twin packs of powered 50s are now being produced but, again, for a DC user, not much use and far too expensive despite the fact I frequently saw them in pairs.

[Steven B]

Apart from one half of the the HST power car twin sets there are no dummy locos/DMUs listed in the current Dapol catalogue. I'm guessing they were slow sellers - they do appear to have been a favourite product of Dave Jones though.

There is a market for them, but at what price? The Dapol DVT and Farish Mk2 DBSO form a similar role as a dummy locos, being fitted with lights & DCC decoder at one end. Both have RRP of over £50. Should it happen, the Revolution Train Inspection Saloon "Caroline" is going to be over £100. I can't see a dummy loco selling for less than £70. At that price I'd imagine most would stump up the extra cash and have another fully working loco.

Steven B.

[Yet_Another]

From what I can gather, the cost of the development & moulds/machine parts etc. Is amortised over the first 1 to 3 production runs, after which they only have the development cost for different liveries, or minor amendments.

Consequently, once you've got the cost of development out of the way, you can 'afford' to produce dummies at just the production cost plus profit, which with less parts is lower in several respects to a motorised model.

But it very much depends on the profit/loss/cost model that the manufacturer is using.

[Foxhound]

I run DC only and I'd welcome a dummy 67 (for top and tailing) and a dummy 22 for double heading/piloting. It seems an opportunity lost to me.

[red_death]

Dapol didn't produce a dummy 68 (which often run in pairs) or dummies in OO which might give you a hint that there have been changes to the economics of doing so.

As Nick mentions, you've got two routes to a dummy loco:
- literally a full loco without motors (and possibly gears). Cost saving marginal.
- tool a simpler chassis, no lights etc but for everything you save in components you are losing on the additional piece of tooling.

I don't know how Dapol did it, but my suspicion is that the economics were very different 5-10 years ago hence why we're not seeing new dummy locos being tooled.

[jpendle]

Hi,

As a DCC user I see no point in dummy loco's. As I have two many grey CL86's I swapped the bodyshell from my dummy Freightliner 86 so that I could get more haulage power by double heading. I also top and tail a couple of 68's on a flask train.

The only dummys that I'll be using are two dummy CL156's to form 4 car units with my two powered versions.

As others have said, I rather have two powered loco's so that I can more easily run long trains.

Regards,

John P

[guest311]

I got some of the Dapol class 26 / 27 dummies, but for 37s , 47s and 50s, I waited till I got a poor runner, or one went u/s, and just stripped it for spares, leaving me with a dummy.

waste not - want not.

[Steven B]

The only dummys that I'll be using are two dummy CL156's to form 4 car units with my two powered versions.

Multiple units are interesting. The underframe from a powered half of a class 156 is externally the same as the non-powered half - both cars on the real thing have engines fitted.

If you're tooling a dummy chassis then producing a larger batch of them to make a non-powered two-car unit.

Interestingly when Bachmann/Farish made the class 101 parcels unit it was fitted with two motors - the real thing was a power twin (i.e. engines in both cars) so Farish fitted motors to both on the model rather than tool a dummy powered unit. The price difference between a power/trailer class 101 and the power twin wasn't that much.

There's still the question of selling them though...

Steven B.