lets hope we get it in N gauge too--pretty please.
Quote from: Bigmac on June 30, 2023, 12:53:14 PM
lets hope we get it in N gauge too--pretty please.
Rapido's OO locos are an eclectic mix and typically appear to be targeted at the collector as much if not more than the full on modeller. This may well be a good strategy in OO with it's larger market share but would this really work in N?
Of their current crop of OO steam locos (and assuming they were to choose one from it which is not nailed on)
were Rapido to go for one in N, personally I would think the GW Small Prairie a better bet than any of the others, that is if Dapol don't do a chassis upgrade of theirs as they have the M7 and are in the process of doing for the Ivatt 2 Tank.
That said, I wouldn't mind betting that with the Peak in development it will be a long time before we see another N loco announcement of any description from Rapido, they are very sensibly taking it slow and steady.
Roy
Quote from: Roy L S on June 30, 2023, 01:39:58 PM
Rapido's OO locos are an eclectic mix and typically appear to be targeted at the collector as much if not more than the full on modeller. This may well be a good strategy in OO with it's larger market share but would this really work in N?
Of their current crop of OO steam locos (and assuming they were to choose one from it which is not nailed on) were Rapido to go for one in N, personally I would think the GW Small Prairie a better bet than any of the others, that is if Dapol don't do a chassis upgrade of theirs as they have the M7 and are in the process of doing for the Ivatt 2 Tank.
That said, I wouldn't mind betting that with the Peak in development it will be a long time before we see another N loco announcement of any description from Rapido, they are very sensibly taking it slow and steady.
Roy
I personally think that any company that can produce a 2nd variant of a product to supply a totally different market would be foolish not to at least consider it, especially when your research can be used again thus reducing development time and costs. Same logic applies to their entire range. Anyone modelling a large WR terminus could well find a home for one of these if they came out.
Quote from: eddief83 on June 30, 2023, 01:47:03 PM
I personally think that any company that can produce a 2nd variant of a product to supply a totally different market would be foolish not to at least consider it, especially when your research can be used again thus reducing development time and costs. Same logic applies to their entire range. Anyone modelling a large WR terminus could well find a home for one of these if they came out.
In a very general sense for more mainstream locos I agree, but conversely there will be models which economies of scale (market size and type) make viable in OO but not in N and therefore even though the R&D has been done for OO there may not always be business case for the same model in N - if it will not generate sufficient sales to make it commercially viable.
In the case of the 15xx, personally I cannot see it being viable as an N model, even if every person modelling a large GW terminus in N bought one as you say, to be generous, realistically that could probably be measured in the low hundreds which wouldn't be nearly sufficient to cover costs without the individual price being eye-wateringly expensive.
Also factor in that this was a very small class of 10 which actually arrived after Nationalisation and that limits it too as do legitimate livery variants.
There are plenty of other examples of a OO model not being supported in N sufficiently to make it viable, things like the KR Models "Fell" or GT3 by way of just two examples where it was tried.
That's why I think the stand out Rapido OO steam loco that would suit the "Shrink Ray" (if there is one) would be the 44xx Prairie, simply because many more people would be able to find a home for one (possibly more than one) and that makes it more attractive commercially.
Regards
Roy
With the outside valve gear on the 15xx, I could see Rapido shrinking any of their other OO Gauge models first.
The L&M Lion probably wouldn't feature, but the Hunslet saddle tank, E1 or 44xx could be done.
They do a Wisbech & Upwell range - J70 (no longer available), Class 04, coaches - in OO.
Would love to see these in N - I know Farish have done the 04 previously - but looking at Rapidos prices, I'm not their target market.
well--i would certainly want one--that outside valve gear on a small tank loco...
it would be good to see what one the newer manufacturers make of it.
It cant see why it would be any less welcome than the j50.
Quote from: Roy L S on June 30, 2023, 02:14:28 PM
Quote from: eddief83 on June 30, 2023, 01:47:03 PM
I personally think that any company that can produce a 2nd variant of a product to supply a totally different market would be foolish not to at least consider it, especially when your research can be used again thus reducing development time and costs. Same logic applies to their entire range. Anyone modelling a large WR terminus could well find a home for one of these if they came out.
In a very general sense for more mainstream locos I agree, but conversely there will be models which economies of scale (market size and type) make viable in OO but not in N and therefore even though the R&D has been done for OO there may not always be business case for the same model in N - if it will not generate sufficient sales to make it commercially viable.
In the case of the 15xx, personally I cannot see it being viable as an N model, even if every person modelling a large GW terminus in N bought one as you say, to be generous, realistically that could probably be measured in the low hundreds which wouldn't be nearly sufficient to cover costs without the individual price being eye-wateringly expensive.
Also factor in that this was a very small class of 10 which actually arrived after Nationalisation and that limits it too as do legitimate livery variants.
There are plenty of other examples of a OO model not being supported in N sufficiently to make it viable, things like the KR Models "Fell" or GT3 by way of just two examples where it was tried.
That's why I think the stand out Rapido OO steam loco that would suit the "Shrink Ray" (if there is one) would be the 44xx Prairie, simply because many more people would be able to find a home for one (possibly more than one) and that makes it more attractive commercially.
Regards
Roy
I quite agree, you may struggle to sell sufficient, but thankfully in this day and age market research to find out the viability of a model selling is relatively easy to achieve - hopefully Rapido will do this and decide what from their range could be shrunk.
I would use kr models as a bench mark for lack of viability, they did not get a good reputation in N gauge especially after they said "N gauge modellers have short arms and deep pockets", can't vouch for others but I personally would not buy from a company who speaks about customers in that way. Thankfully they pulled the plug on n gauge so we will never see them in our scale again
I think there's a big difference between expressions of interest ad what will actually sell.
Something like the Fell or GT3 might not attract many pre-orders/expressions of interest yet I believe they'd sell enough to cover their costs (although the RRP might be higher than average to reduce the risk).
That KR Models couldn't make a go of the King says more about them than their choice of models.
Rapido appear confident to continue the development of N Gauge locos with the class 44 following on from the class 28. It wouldn't surprise if other models in their range get reduced, but I suspect the complexity of the 15xx valve gear in a very compact wheelbase together with the relatively limited number built and areas of operation means it's unlikely to be top of their list.
Steven B.
Quote from: Steven B on July 03, 2023, 12:02:47 PM
Rapido appear confident to continue the development of N Gauge locos with the class 44 following on from the class 28. It wouldn't surprise if other models in their range get reduced, but I suspect the complexity of the 15xx valve gear in a very compact wheelbase together with the relatively limited number built and areas of operation means it's unlikely to be top of their list.
Steven B.
But a GWR Small Prairie might - unless Dapol bag it quickly.
Bob
KR Models is probably a terrible example of what won't sell in N.
They haven't exactly endeared themselves to modellers with some of their attitudes in their communications and attention to detail.
Quote from: Kaput on July 03, 2023, 07:16:15 PM
KR Models is probably a terrible example of what won't sell in N.
They haven't exactly endeared themselves to modellers with some of their attitudes in their communications and attention to detail.
You make a fair point about KR but I think the principle still holds good, a GT3 or Leader may work in OO given the size of the market and level of pure collectors who would have one, but I doubt either would work for N with the comparatively smaller overall market to target and (possibly?) fewer who are purely collectors.
Regards
Roy
About a month ago, I sent an email to Keith Revell (Managing Director of KR Models Ltd.) asking the status of the once proposed Tyne Dock-Consett iron ore wagons in N gauge.
His reply was as follows:
"As the market stands right now, we would probably make a loss on any N scale models right now. So never say never, but we will not be making any N scale models right now
Kind regards, Keith Revell"
Ian
Why would a 15xx be viable (even though I would buy one) as Steve and Roy mentioned it is too niche. The likes of the King are brushed aside by the manufacturers. I think it is the big engines that are the most viable and they appeal to modellers and collectors alike. I am not known as an LMS fan but why no Streamlined Coronation? Is it because there would be a clamour for the coaches to go with it and the resultant tooling costs would be prohibitive. Personally I am relying on Dapol to eventually release the WC but then the cry will go out for new tooling matchboard Pullmans, (always a good seller in far of Graham Farish days though). When you think about it many of the models we crave today were available once upon a time including Kings, WC's, Merchant Navy's, 61XX and Matchboard Pullmans that were never upgraded. I wonder why.
Quote from: osborns on July 04, 2023, 12:34:38 AM
I am not known as an LMS fan but why no Streamlined Coronation? Is it because there would be a clamour for the coaches to go with it and the resultant tooling costs would be prohibitive.
You need to take a look at the Ross's Workbench thread... :D
Ditto Consett ore wagons.
And as for Pullmans, AFAIK the K series are still on Revolution's radar.
Richard
Quote from: osborns on July 04, 2023, 12:34:38 AMI think it is the big engines that are the most viable
Sonic 56xx and J50 seem to have disproved that... :hmmm:
The key with both of those is that they have never been done before, and they are both distinctively different to anything else currently available. The 15xx being so different to any other Pannier meets those criteria.
Quote from: osborns on July 04, 2023, 12:34:38 AMThe likes of the King are brushed aside by the manufacturers.
Is the King as distinctly different to a Hall or Castle?? The King has also been sullied by two badly organised attempts to crowd-fund which on the face of it showed that there wasn't sufficient demand and will make any other manufacturer extremely wary (though it's impossible to say for certain whether it was it the model, the funding method or the manufacturer that was the killer...)
Quote from: PLD on July 04, 2023, 07:55:06 AM
Quote from: osborns on July 04, 2023, 12:34:38 AMI think it is the big engines that are the most viable
Sonic 56xx and J50 seem to have disproved that... :hmmm:
The key with both of those is that they have never been done before, and they are both distinctively different to anything else currently available. The 15xx being so different to any other Pannier meets those criteria.
Quote from: osborns on July 04, 2023, 12:34:38 AMThe likes of the King are brushed aside by the manufacturers.
Is the King as distinctly different to a Hall or Castle?? The King has also been sullied by two badly organised attempts to crowd-fund which on the face of it showed that there wasn't sufficient demand and will make any other manufacturer extremely wary (though it's impossible to say for certain whether it was it the model, the funding method or the manufacturer that was the killer...)
I agree as regards the King, but differ re: the 15xx.
The 56xx and J50 are not really good comparisons to the 15xx in terms of viability as both were larger classes of loco with a much wider geographical spread, greater number of livery variants and a longer service life. The 15xx was a very small class of locos that didn't travel anything like as widely and being introduced after nationalisation, limited livery choices.
While never done as mainstream RTR models before, both the 56xx (Langley and ABS Beaver) and J50 (Graham Hughes and N Brass) have been done as kits, and in fact the N Brass J50 was also available as a very limited run RTR loco.
At the end of the day we don't make the decisions, manufacturers do, and they will have to be satisfied that any model will "wash it's face" financially based on their own sales projections. I would think there are a number of models in their OO range that would be much further up the list for a trip through the "shrink ray" than the 15xx, something like the 16 inch Hunslet or even the LBSCR E1 tank loco to go with their wagon packs by way of just two examples.
Regards
Roy
A r.t.r. Streamlined Coronation is another matter surely and whilst I am sure the All steel 'K-type' Pullmans from Revolution will be most welcome I was referring to the earlier build match boarded type once produced by Farish
Quote from: PLD on July 04, 2023, 07:55:06 AMit's impossible to say for certain whether it was it the model, the funding method or the manufacturer that was the killer...)
If a manufacturer takes on a project that has a model that depicts an item that was running on the national network for around 50 years, would have been seen all over the country and carried numerous liveries, if that project fails to deliver then you have to question the manufacturer and their approach. I am of course referring to kr models and their attempts to produce a shark ballast brake using the djm CAD's. This is the one model they should have made real progress with, I appreciate EFE got the model out using the tooling the factory had but they never showed much in the way of progressing this. That EFE has done 2 runs suggest it was a success
Quote from: PLD on July 04, 2023, 07:55:06 AM
Quote from: osborns on July 04, 2023, 12:34:38 AMThe likes of the King are brushed aside by the manufacturers.
Is the King as distinctly different to a Hall or Castle?? The King has also been sullied by two badly organised attempts to crowd-fund which on the face of it showed that there wasn't sufficient demand and will make any other manufacturer extremely wary (though it's impossible to say for certain whether it was it the model, the funding method or the manufacturer that was the killer...)
I agree that the King is not very different to the Castle. For me the main difference is the front bogie on the King. It's so ugly :(
For me, the advent of Revoution trains, Sonic models and Rapido have greatly added to my stock of locomotives and wagons and with the advent of the K type Pullmans, coaches. this at a time when both Dapol and Farish are offering "retreads" albeit with Dapol acually upgrading some of the chassis.
I fervently hope that the three manufacturers above have given a healthy "kick up the arse" of the type that Dapol gave to Farish with the advent of the 14xx and Autocoach that started me off in N gauge. heres hoping
Regards,
Alex