I have been wondering about this for a long time and have this question for you guys. From a manufacturers standpoint how do they pick which model they are going to produce next? Wouldn’t they try to pick a model that thye think would sell well or do they base it off something else? And why is it when one manufacturer announces a model alot of times somebody else annouces the same model as well? Case in point BLI announces the High hood SD40-2 and then Athearn announces it also.
-Smoke
This subject has come up before, and been discussed pretty thoroughly, and I’ll have to admit that NOBODY really has come up with a clear answer. Perhaps it’s a ‘Jumping on the Bandwagon’ mentality with some MR manufacturers. “They did it, let’s do it better,” that kind of thing.
I know in my case, I got tired of waiting for the BLI F-3’s to come out, so I ‘settled’ for a Genesis A-B set in Rio Grande (but not the early scheme I wanted), and got an exquisitely detailed, very smooth running pair of diesels–without sound, but, hey, I can live with that. Now I understand that some people are having a lot of trouble with the BLI’s, since they came out–electrical problems, cracked gears–so maybe having had a choice and having made it, I lucked out.
Now I CERTAINLY have no use for a “Big Boy” on my layout, but for those who can’t live without one, they have the choice of Trix/Genesis/BLI or the newly re-released Hornby/Rivarossi. However, I certainly could use a USRA 2-8-8-2 that WASN’T a N&W prototype. Or a 4-6-2 that WASN’T a Pennsy. And I don’t need a UP-styled Challenger, either.
So I don’t “Jump on the Bandwagon.” But then, maybe enough of us do (and hooray for us if we do) to keep the manufacturers putting out a product that they’ve found out will SELL. And let’s face it, that’s the bottom line in manufacturing. If they buy it, we’ll produce it. Perhaps if enough of us start yelling for other types of locomotives, then they’ll hear us.
But I’m not betting the bank on it, LOL!
Tom [}:)]
In the case of one early importer, the owner (a Cadillac dealer in mundane life) wanted some custom built steamers run by his favorite prototype road. On a trip to Japan, he learned that a lot of 50 wouldn’t cost him much more than a single one-off, so he had them built in lots of 50 and sold off the 48 - 49 he didn’t need for his own modeling. In his case, the decision was, originally, which (anonymous RR) loco do I want this month. Later, he did the same for his friends who modeled other railroads. Later still, he waited until he got enough requests from cash customers to justify a run. Turned out that some of the models he imported were run several times and sold in the hundreds - because they were popular and the demand was there.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
I have heard from one employee that they prefer to make models that have the broadest appeal possible…but they also want to make models that no one else has done. This explains why we are seeing such oddballs as Erie Builts and U18B’s hitting the market while at the same time we’re seeing innumerable F-units and Big Boys.
Now take the Athearn RS-3. If you look at the roadnames they release, they are trying to get each region of the country represented with each run. Therefore, they are aiming at the broadest appeal in that they are trying to get something to market that would have equal sales potential nationwide.
But then you have the Atlas AEM-7 or the Bachmann EF-4 (E33). These have limited nationwide appeal because they only ran from Washington to Boston (AEM-7) or New Haven to wherever the PC ran 'em (EF-4/E33)…but they had never been done in plastic to scale. So they made 'em.
This is why we seem to have this random product selection by the manufacturers, as they have two philosophies when choosing the next model.
And as far as why they seem to release the same model at the same time, remember that product development time is months in advance of the actual public announcement. Once they’ve spent all that time secretly doing R&D, they are reluctant to cancel a product just because someone else announced a product close to theirs.
Paul A. Cutler III
Weather Or No Go New Haven
Having worked for a couple large manufacturers, I can tell you a few things. First, sufficient information must be available. In the early days, plans were often from magazines or Car Builders Encyclopedias. That is why there are some mistakes on certain models, or the models had a prototype that was never built.
Second, tooling is very expensive. It is generally made with inserts to fit a large mold base - so, a boxcar will have two sides, two ends, a roof and a core. So if you make different sides, you now have a different car for a lot less cost. That is why, for instance there are so many 40’ boxcars. Now, if you have a 50’ gon, you can make inserts for a 50’ flat. You get the idea.
The tooling, while not indestructable, is generally around for a long time if cared for. So for instance, Concor has tooling from Revell, McKeen, Roco and Lilliput. The Mantua heavyweights are the old Lindsay tooling. Accurail started with tooling they got from others Some of the old Varney tooling is at Lifelike, others at Bowser. There are lots of other examples.
Today, much tooling is cad cam and even cut in aluminum so may not last as long, but more tooling can be produced in a shorter amount of time. Aluminum tooling is easy to damage which may account for some of the “retired” models.
I was wondering this the other day. In the last year, it seems like everyone and their brother has produced a 2-10-2, an RS3 and a SD-45. A few years ago everyone made GP-38-2’s. Don’t know the reason. It’s almost like they are trying to tell us what we should buy.
Is tooling REALLY that expensive to make anymore? It seems like anymore you just put the products data into a cad program and a laser or sonic etching computer does all the detail work. Come on! We’ve got rapid prototyping computers that can spit this stuff out in no time. It seems like they’re just using that excuse as a crutch to keep their prices up.
Unfortunatly, yes. Good quality tooling is expensive. It is not just a simple matter of a cavity for the part. The mold “block” itself is somewhat complicated. Our molds in our shop have heater lines running thru them for the to stabilize the mold temperatures. This is done with hot oil. The amount of machining work that has to go into one of these takes weeks to do and this is not including the cavity itself. Most molds are multi plate molds which have ejector pin plates to allow for the part to be pushed out of the cavity or off of the insert side of the mold. Machining tolerances are very tight to allow for minimal seam lines. Another problem crops up when undercuts have to be molded. Look at the sides of a newer model of a SD unit. There are a lot of overhangs involved not to mention all of the small door hinges and latches. All of these need to clear the mold sides when the part is ejected. How is this done? By sliding the parts of the mold cavity that are in the way. Now keep in mind that this is all done for one part. I recently put a model together that had about 50 different parts to it. Each part has to at least have its own cavity in the mold. Now, here is where it gets interesting. Each part, depending on its size is going to have a different shrink factor. All of this needs to be accounted for in the process of making the cavity for that particular part.
The data that you refer to has to be generated somehow. This requires a draftsman and engineer to do the proper calculations and 3D drawings for these machine to work from. T
I won’t pretend to understand the complexities of marketing within the model railroading industry but the one thing I have noticed is that the MR poll for most wanted engines seems to be a good guide; if you see an engine mentioned as winning that poll, you can bet good money it will be coming to a hobby shop near you within the next year. Case in point: the DL109.
Cheers!
~METRO
One aspect I have always wondered about is the road name selection. I know that if they pick a big road such as NS, CSX etc it is a no brainer that they will sell. What I am currious about though is some of the more obscure names that have been released lately. One that comes to mind is the recent Atlas release of the C424 in the Livonia Avon & Lakeville RR. I can’t imagine there is going to be a “goldrush” of people going after this one. I am sure the fans of this railroad are glad to see it out (in two numbers no less). What I would like to know is, is there some survey that was done, or are they being done on a pre-order basis? If it is the pre-order basis then it is almost as if they are being, for want of a better term, “custom painted”. I would think if they released these the same as they did the D&H bicentennial units they will have shops sitting on excess inventory of them that they can not move. I know I saw a lot of the D&H units at the last show I was at. I would be willing to bet that there was at least 20 of them on various vendors tables selling anywhere from $69.00 - over $100.00. Anyway, just curious
Pike-62-Thanks for the detailed reply. I’d like to see those pics if you have time. I was watching some show on injection molding and they were using that EMD method. The mold makers were bragging about how fast they can make molds now compared to 10 or 20 years ago. I don’t remember what they were making or the detail level. These guys were talking like mold making was simple these days. It just struck me kind of funny.
The reason you see multiple announcements is that everybody operates in secret. So if you have committed $$$ to the molds and you hear XYZ is coming out with that item you have no choice but to announce yours also. If you didn’t your customer base would not know to spend their money with you. Now if their’s has some new feature you have two choices. You either pull the plug if not too much has been invested or you need to add something to your model to make it the survivor in a limted marketplace. So your pour more money than you originally thought into it to get the better review and saher of the market. the end result is we see higher prices for exquisite detail that can’t be seen when the train is moving any way.
In this case, and similar ones, Atlas already has the C424 tooling paid for by previous big name runs, now they are going in and picking off the smaller owners of the prototype with minimal additional cost - paint masks and pad printing tools are very low dollar items.
To add a bit more to pike-62’s post on tooling. The importer is spending between $100K and $250K for tooling in China for each model. With EDM, steel tools do not take significantly longer than aluminum, and with the way aluminum prices are today, there is no really cost difference. The details done in POM (Delrin®, Celcon®, Acetal) are in steel tools, POM is not friendly to aluminum. First shots are six to ten weeks are first cutting the tool. Then there will two to five “adjustments” each taking two to four weeks before the importer will accept the parts. After this comes the painting masks and pads, assembly fixtures, packaging design, and finally packaging testing.
Tooling suppliers run thier equipment 24/7, EDM and other CNC machines are EXPENSIVE. Polishing and detail work is done by thier best people. Molds are built so that blocks can be removed for rework or replacement.
I suspect the example tomikawaTT described remains a very common approach to determining which models will be produced.
My father is a machinest. Not one of the new button pusher types but the old school micrometers and caliper types. He learned the trade back in the 60’s when there was no such thing as Computer Numerical Controls or digital calipers. I used to sit in the garage and watch my dad machine parts for Boeing aircraft, one at a time and hours apiece. When I was a teen I worked in the same shop as he did and they were bring in some CNC machines (brand new). My father did not know how to use these machines but likewise the “Machinests” that could use the CNC could not run the machines my father can. There is advantages and disadvantages to both generations of machinests. My father can make changes or corrections on the fly as he goes if he notices that the cutter is not making a cut like it should or what ever reason. The CNC’ist will have to stop the program, re write the program and maybe get it right the next time. Now once the CNC is running right then the computer runs and runs till the program is done, changing bits as it goes and some machines can even turn the part for cuts on other sides. The Old school way is to manually do bit changing (Tho some machines have multi heads that would already have the other required bits in place). Some machines could also make multiple parts at the same time just as CNC usually does but under manual control. All and All for a short run of parts a CNC Vs. Old school would be pretty close in time because of the software development time for the CNC that is not needed old school. For long runs the CNC will win out every time and thus cost less money.
CNC I know is here to stay, People that know the old ways are still needed for things that just need to be done by hand (like some tool making). Today we have one or 2 old schoolers working in a machine shop and most of the rest are CNCists, yesteryear you had 1 or 2 CNCists, and a shop full of old school. We can make pa
Pike-62,
A question: roughly what would be the cost to create the tooling for something very simple like rerailer ramps?
If it were to be a machine finish surface, meaning the tooling marks would be present and not polished out, and two cavities… I would have to guess about $15,000-$20,000. Again this is a rough guess. A lot of the determination on pricing something like this construction materials, finish required, material to inject, etc. Another big factor is the machine shop. In this case you get what you pay for. another local shop here went with a “cheap” cost mold one time and suffered dearly in lost production time due to poor tolerances in the mold itself. They had a lot of sticking ejector pins due to expansion when the mold was heated to temp. They also had a bad flashing problem in one of four cavities due to a warp condition that showed up at temp.
Tooling small parts is not cheap, either! …and I speak from some authority here. Rerailer ramps may not be that expensive depending on how much detail you want. Some of our smaller parts are a few thousand dollars once you factor in building, moulding, packaging and marketing…and we do most of our work in-house. A set of diesel sideframes just for the tooling alone is $14-18,000.
Loathar: The costs of making tools has gone up like anything else. Molds done here cost a lot- and the few here in the states that know how to build Model railroad parts or tools charge accordingly. I know about 6 who can do state-of-the-art stuff and they are worth every penny. Although any good machinist can cut tools, it takes someone with Model RR know how to know some of the little problems that arise and how to make parts that fit with others in harmony such as on a locomotive.
The Chinese toolmakers know this and they are also charging big bucks. Their prices are not that much cheaper than US toolmakers…and they are getting to be very good at their craft.
I know it is not common knowledge, but, we used to make tools for some of the large manufacturers back in the day. We still keep up with this world as we might do more in the future. We have priced certain items and thought about bringing them to market. Only time will tell…
Thanks, Keith Turley/ Details West