Confused with variable fidelity products

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
1

Dear All,

Walthers announced a new EMD F7 in the Mainline class next to the already available (or easy to get) Proto 2000 F7. If I take the Alaska A unit as an example, Walthers list the Mainline DCC+sound version for $199.98, while they sell the P2K version for $269.98. Now the simple question, what can be so different that is worth $70 more? And the second question, why on earth do not they make a unified line of products, or offer a basic version and upgrade parts instead of this mess?

and then comes the Interemountain for $99 (DC)

Regards

Walid

2

I think that’s part of it. Walthers has the Mainline series to compete at the lower end for those who are willing to take less if they can pay less.

I did notice that the Proto models use Tsunami decoders while the Mainline models use ESU decoders, which might explain some of the price difference.

Generally the difference between Proto and Mainline is the detail level of the shells. The Walthers web site doesn’t show any Alaska F7s in Proto, and even the Mainline pictures are pre-release drawings, not photographs, so it’s hard to compare the two.

3

The Mainline units are not as detailed as the Proto 2000. They may be the older Proto 1000 units. I do see they are adding handrails to them. They most likely are going to be generic detailing for all roads. The Proto 2000 have specific road detailing for the the time frame advertised. For instance I have Proto 2000 Santa Fe F3’s with mid fifties details as well as F7’s with late sixties detailing such as nose ladder grabs different horns front nose lift rings etc which the mid fifties F’s do not have. There is probably not a lot of difference in running qualities between the two Walthers lines as the both have good reviews there.

The intermountain F’s are great runners but they all tend to be generic detailing from road to raod as well. But they do have great screen detail.

SB

4

Well, the ESU price is comparable to the Tsunami if not higher.

Here is the P2K version:

https://www.walthers.com/emd-f7a-w-48-quot-dynamic-fan-tsunami-r-sound-dcc-alaska-railroad-1506-1982-scheme-blue-yellow

I agree with you it is hard to judge pictures, and even photos. However, while the drawings indeed indicate a degree of genericness, they shows also nicely detailed trucks. And if the differences were really the lack of the prototype-specific details, would this mean 70 $US difference in the price? Moreover, if the prototype-specific production is so costly, why not keep it to minimum and leave the detailing for the user in a similar manner to AMT 2 in 1, or multi version Revell kits?

Regards

Walid

5

I’m sure it’s all about different levels of detail and electronics, to appeal to, and compete with, the different markets. Value price vs top of the line.

I don’t think it was always this way, but the huge growth in the electronic side of this hobby, has created so many different levels pricing to appease the shopper.

Mike.

6

Mike,

Both have the same drive. One has the ESU and the other Tsunami. Both are considered premium brands and top products in DCC sound technology. So I do not see how additional costs are generated here. I guess it is this prototype specific, limited run strategy which push the price, and I have been wondering why not leave it to the modeller? Add parts and instructions and leave it for him to build and customize as he-she wishes. Who is satisfied with the nicely paint, beautifully runs generic model will be happy, and the revet counter will be also happy, and I will be less confused

.

Regards

Walid

7

I get your point, Walid, although some may argue about the difference between Tsunami and ESU.

The one time I was going to pull the trigger on an ESU, for $120., nobody, non of the usuall on line retailers, had one in stock. I was actually relieved.

Mike.

8

I didn’t price them, so I don’t really know. And, if I had, my results would likely be different than the prices charged to Walthers by the manufacturers.

Certainly, Bachmann didn’t pay full retail price for the “Sound Value” decoders it has been putting in their bargain-priced engines.

So, all I can say is that I don’t know if the decoders account for part of the price difference.

9

Why don’t they make a unified line of products?

How much time do you have?

When compared to most consumer products, model trains are a very low volume specialty product produced by a cottage industry.

Do you realize that not one US based model train company is publicly traded? Most are totally privately held, only a few are part of larger companies.

And that world wide only a few are big enough to be on the stock markets of their countries?

Some of the tooling producing these models is brand new, yet other items are being manufactured with tooling that is 20 years old, 40 years old, and even older in a few cases.

Factors of tooling cost, high level of hand work assembly, limited market, unlimited number of possible items to be offered, all make this a very difficult business, mostly operated by modelers themselves to some degree or another.

And the customer base has a very wide range of needs and wants in terms of price vs features.

Many of the bigger companies Bachmann, Walthers, Athearn, try to serve all of these market levels, so they have high end, mid range, and budget models in their lines.

AND, they have just recently realized the need to clearly define those levels to their customers. The historic reasons behind the growth and evolution of this hobby and its business side would take pages to explain - but I could fill you in. I grew up in and round this hobby and business, started working in my first hobby shop in 1970, at age 13. By age 21, I was managing a train department…

Just know and accept as few basics and you will figure it all out.

First, not every product from a given company will be of the same quality, detail, and prototype accruacy. Again they are getting better about defining detail/accuracy levels, but there are still variations.

Second, because of the private ownership of US railroads, there are endless numbers of locomotives and railroad cars to model spread over the 160 plus year

10

Sheldon,

Actually your explanation is contradiction in itself. Let me put it into two simple points:

1-How would the installation of something like 4 grab irons increases the price by 60-80℅?

2-If the costs in 1 are unavoidable, why not make a single model and make it modular to accept custom details? If Bachmann managed to cut the costs down to 80$ by generic base models, why not do the same but a bit more clever? Make it basic but ready for upgrade, and in all cases a SINGLE version of the same engine, not a Roundhouse and a Genesis at the time.

Regards

Walid

PS. IMy apology if some words sound rude.

11

To prove the concept, and more importantly to have some fun, I started to construct a GP30 shell from blue prints myself. The main objective was to make as universal as possible so that it can be customized to fit anyone’s (and hopefully everyone’s) wish.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1524794017642836&set=a.1524793977642840.1073741833.100003367580840&type=3&theater

I was not sure what to do then with it… send to whom it may concerns and interests… 3D print it myself… or perhaps send it to shapeways if the price and quality are reasonable…

All I know about US diesels that they are colorful and look nice. So this lack of knowledge about the prototypes made it meaningless to continue. If I cannot figure out the variations it must fulfill I cannot go on with the construction.

I hope the picture downloads

Regards

Walid

12

The answer to question two is simple, the current crop of new customers is not interested in installing those parts if that is what you mean by modular.

I could expand on this further, but obviously you have made up your mind.

Can I assume you are not from the US? It is then unlikely that you will understand the state of the hobby in North America or the wide diversity of the customers here.

Sheldon

13

Hey, we are exchanging personal opinions and views, not discussing to prove who is right and who is wrong in a hobby that is purely personal, and where “Right” and “Wrong” do not exist. However, if you feel I offended you personally in anyway I repeat my apology.

Yes, I am not from the US. But, diversity exist everywhere. What I am wondering about is why the needs of this diversity is not met in a different way.

For example, Athearn makes two classes of the F-units. An accurate representation, the Genesis, based on the Highliner shell (or whatever). The other, the ancient model, which is, IMHO, useless (again, it is personal view). Why not use one and the same shell on one and the same chassis (the better ones of course). Prepare the shell to accept the details. Give the owner instructions about the prototype, provide him with parts and templates to fit them, and leave it to him to install whatever he likes, be it prototypical or otherwise. Those you mentioned who do not care would be satisfied, the revet counters would be also satisfied, and those who cannot build it themselves will certainly find tons of shops to build it for them for the same 20 or 30 more that they were going to pay more for the Genesis.

Do not you think it is simpler this way?

Regards

Walid

14

Using your own example, the Athearn F7, the Genesis shell requires the assembly of dozens of parts just to assemble tbe basic shell, long before fine details. Have

15

It really boild down to there are some consumers who want to buy the model with all teh detail already one, out of the box, and not have to add it themselves, or are not satisfied with a more generic model. They will pay for the more expensive version. For those that want to do the details themselves, or don’t care, they will buy the lower cost one. There’s really nothing complex about it.

It costs a lot of money to make new tooling. So a model build with all new tooling is going to have to be priced higher for the manufacturer to recoup the costs of the tooling. This hobby doesn’t sell in the multi-million unit quantities, so increased production costs are much more visible than if you did make millions

Frankly, if the choice is one model with Tsunami, and one with ESU, I’ll take the ESU one, far superior decoder. Details, I can add myself - I have plenty of Stewart F units made the same way, and you can get all the grabs and lift rings and ladders easily enough to add on.

Never thought I’d see someone argue for LESS choice.

–Randy

16

Sheldon, I see we are converging slowly.

Take exactly this shell, add the basic parts like steps and so on. leave the variable parts like anntenas and roof details. Paint everything and put in the box. Add all other details like grab irons, hand rails, horns, A/C units …etc. to the same box. Put instructions and templates to drill holes if necessary. Add information about the prototypes for those who do not know but must have a prototypical model. Seal the box and ship it to the customer. He/she can do with it whatever he likes. Those who cannot build or do not want can order the locomotive assembled by the dealer, or whoever who can. By this way the production process will be standardized, meaning costs down. 2-The assembly steps are eliminated, meaning costs down further.

Randy mentioned he is used to upgrade models. Give him a good drive and accurate shell to start his upgrade instead of a crude, outdated useless shell that is good for nothing. Put the detailing parts (or most of) in the same box instead of letting him get them from detail west - or prepare the model to accept detail west parts.

You asked me if I saw a highliner shell, and I am asking in turn have you seen an IKEA closet?

Regards

Walid

17

Life-Like pretty much did that with their Proto 2000 line. Lots of the Geeps came with a package of different MU receptacles, winterization hatches, all-weather windows, sun visors and maybe a few other things. The E units came with different pilots and fuel tanks. As I recall it was Life-Like with their Proto 2000 line that really “raised the bar” on road-specific details. Not always 100% accurate but, for the average modeler, more accuracy than what could be had previously.

Even their Proto 1000 which offered slightly fewer add-on details were still pretty good and they made some models, C-Liners, Erie Builts to name two, that had never been done before in plastic.

Life-Like actually started out making foam picknick coolers!

When Athearn decided to “up their game” with the Genesis line, in order to stay in the running with the Proto 2000 detailed locomotives they made the fast-track route by getting the licence to use the aforementioned Highliners shell.

Even though these companies introduced their “premium” line they still had tooling and parts for the “heritage” cars and locomotives. No reason to stop producing them, simply make them available at a lower price-point.

Then along comes DCC and that adds another variable to the product line, then DCC Sound — yet another choice and a whole logistics question of just how many individual SKUs can a manufacturer produce. All those choices add cost since production, labeling, shipping and distributind so many different products adds even more cost.

Jason Shron at Rapido has lifted the veil on some of the production stumbling blocks that can come up, including having to find a new factory, in some of his YouTube videos.

18

It aren’t just the detail parts driving the price. The more elaborative printing like labels, tags etc. that are missing on the less expensive models adds to the costs.

Look at the ScaleTrains GE ET44s.

Rivet Counter model: $224.99 https://www.scaletrains.com/collections/rivet-counter-ho-scale-ge-tier-4-gevo/products/rivet-counter-ho-scale-ge-tier-4-gevo-bnsf-heritage-3

Operator model: $149.99: https://www.scaletrains.com/collections/operator-ho-scale-ge-tier-4-gevo/products/operator-ho-scale-ge-tier-4-gevo-bnsf-heritage-3

Look at the differences in printing between the two models, best BNSF and you see what I mean. You can get a set of detali parts for the Operator model for $29.99 but you can’t get the additional labels.
Regards, Volker

19

As a rule, choice is good. The corollary: as a rule, lack of choice is not good. But choice puts a premium on being an informed consumer.

Prototype specific details are wonderful models for everyone – nobody hates an accurate model, all other things being equal – but the cost increment you pay for that is a burden for those to whom the accuracy is a “nice to have” but not “need to have.” And not all existing tooling is equally amenable to prototype (or road number!) specific detailing, either.

It seems to me most firms with varying levels of quality/detail/cost do take steps to “brand” the levels in fairly obvious ways, although they do not always succeed in that. Platinum/gold/silver is pretty obvious. But quickly now: is “Trainline” higher or lower level than “Mainline?”

Going way back, Ambroid had kits that they kept in standard inventory production and then they had Ambroid “One in Five Thousand” limit runs, more specialized, more costly. I suppose the irony is that they might never have sold five thousand of the standard production in which case the joke would have been on the customer.

PFM had ways of conveying different levels of quality in their brass imports. “Crown” as I recall was the highest. Amusingly, “Crown” RTR freight car Athearn clones from Mantua were the lowest level available. So much for the meaning of words.

As someone once pointed out, go to the freezer section of the food store and price frozen peas. Now price frozen buttered peas. The cost different is what some folks are evidently willing to pay to have someone else butter their peas for them …

Dave Nelson