What To Do With Surplus Scratchbuilt Models

[FPH 603]

Hi all,

 

I have a small collection of scratchbuilt NSWGR Railmotors, made from Evergreen Plasticard. I have made two unfinished models of an outer suburban 620/720 class and a suburban 660/760 class. Both of these have no paint or vanish or any kind, and the 660 power car has a half finished roof, including radiators. I originally was proud of these models I had built (as a first scratchbuilding project!), but after visiting a friend and putting the 660 set against a Eureka Models 620/720 I found that my attempt was the most crude and out of proportion thing I own! I am looking for a new purpose for these models, as I don't want to throw them out, due to them being my first scratchbuilding project and I think if I can find a new purpose for them, I think they'd be ideal for the job.

Thanks to all that make a contribution.

 

EDIT: Photos attached.

 

EDIT 2: 'Crude' changed to 'Surplus' in thread title.

Edited December 25, 2017 by DoubleDeckInterurban

[JZ]

Well, your first attempt at scratchbuilding was somewhat better than mine. I can understand your reluctance to scrap it, so why not use it to practice your painting/airbrushing and weathering techniques.

[FPH 603]

Well, your first attempt at scratchbuilding was somewhat better than mine. I can understand your reluctance to scrap it, so why not use it to practice your painting/airbrushing and weathering techniques.

I think in the condition they're in they have potential for being like stripped bodyshells on scrap bogies. I do think my painting skills need improvement too.

[Il Grifone]

My early attempts (at least the ones that avoided the bin) have a special place in my collection.

 

1. I am still rather fond of them....

2. To remind me to do better next time!

[FPH 603]

Fortunately, I've decided to start work on these models once again. I've put in 'pins' to hold the bogies, started installing underframe parts and I've completed the roof. This has only been done on the 660 class power car. Please excuse my rather messy workbench in the photos attached below.

 

[SRman]

Reuse them as you have suggested, but definitely keep them as a reminder of how far you have come. I still have two scratchbuilt card buses I made when I was 13 and 14 years old. They weren't too bad but have suffered many knocks and bumps over the intervening decades. They weren't all that accurate either, but at the time I was working from a couple of fairly distant black and white photos.

Those you have done are not bad, but, as you say, they don't stand too close a comparison with the professional/commercial jobs; what you can say, though, with pride, is "I did that myself."

[Signaller69]

Looks good to me, I thought the windows/floor/roof line up well comparing with the other model. Its very easy to lose faith when using plasticard as it can end up looking messy due to solvent marks, filler, slight distortions caused by solvent etc. I find most of the time a blast with grey primer makes things look much better.

 

Stick at it, it is easy to be over self critical sometimes.

 

Martyn.

[Dava]

If you have space for a siding for withdrawn stock, shunt them in there after you've finished them. Often seen on prototype lines. The CN depot at Monckton, NB, hosted Budd railcars awaiting scrap or reconditioning for many years in a similar way. Possibly still there.

 

Dava

[Il Grifone]

That bench looks very tidy to me. Mine is full of part finished models, bits and pieces, tools and junk....

[FPH 603]

If you have space for a siding for withdrawn stock, shunt them in there after you've finished them. Often seen on prototype lines. The CN depot at Monckton, NB, hosted Budd railcars awaiting scrap or reconditioning for many years in a similar way. Possibly still there.

Dava

Firstly, MERRY CHRISTMAS PEOPLE!

 

Secondly, I'm thinking of recreating something similar to the picture attached below with 670/770. (Yes, the 660/760 set will be 670/770!) I feel like I should do something somewhat different to 670/770 with my other set, 636/736.

 

[FPH 603]

Looks good to me, I thought the windows/floor/roof line up well comparing with the other model. Its very easy to lose faith when using plasticard as it can end up looking messy due to solvent marks, filler, slight distortions caused by solvent etc. I find most of the time a blast with grey primer makes things look much better.

Stick at it, it is easy to be over self critical sometimes.

Martyn.

A little while ago I found the data sheets for the 620/720 class Railmotors in HO scale. The 600 class (my next project) has different interior and window arrangements, plus they have different engines and smaller radiators. I hope at some point during the Holidays I can make a visit to the Rail Motor Society in Paterson, so I can see a 600 class for myself.

 

http://grapevine.com.au/~datashet/set_dscat.html - The online preview is only a basic sample. The actual product has a lot more detail.

[Dava]

Budd railcars Monckton CN yard [you may need to scroll down, probably all gone by now]

 

http://www.canadianrailwayobservations.com/RESTRICTED/2016/March2016/loco.

 

Dava

Edited December 25, 2017 by Dava

[The Johnster]

That bench looks very tidy to me. Mine is full of part finished models, bits and pieces, tools and junk....

 

As is mine.  A tidy bench is evidence of a sick mind...

 

Or one that has never been used.

 

Though it is worth having a tide occasionally, if only to find the huge amount of useful stuff/expensive tools/scale model masterpieces hidden in there!

Edited December 25, 2017 by The Johnster

[FPH 603]

The only thing I could suggest is to keep going because to me, a 1st project be it a unit, loco kit or even a loco built from commercially available parts is always going to have a special place on a layout no matter how it turns out.

 

I built a garratt recently using 2 x 9F 2-10-0 chassis and used a body from the same type of loco as the boiler section.

 

After getting some advice on RMWeb I changed the boiler section only last week to that of a flying scotsman type body because after looking at pictures and video footage of the big Australian garratt 6029 City of Canberra I saw that the cab windows needed to be higher up so a crew could see over the leading drive unit.

 

The loco looks a bit odd at the moment because the boiler section needs to be repainted to match the drive unit bodies.

 

The general point is, if you had scrapped the project you would have regretted it because you would never have known how it would have turned out.

 

Don't give up on it.

  

The reasons I originally scrapped this project was because of the crudity of the models compared to that of RTR ones. Like I mentioned before I was going to make a third, but I'll use the scale drawings I've got lying on my workbench. These original models are being repurposed.

Budd railcars Monckton CN yard [you may need to scroll down, probably all gone by now]

http://www.canadianrailwayobservations.com/RESTRICTED/2016/March2016/loco.

Dava

  

The link comes up with a 404 not found.

As is mine.  A tidy bench is evidence of a sick mind...

 

Or one that has never been used.

 

Though it is worth having a tide occasionally, if only to find the huge amount of useful stuff/expensive tools/scale model masterpieces hidden in there!

Maybe that's why I'm so indecisive about my layout! Maybe I should try telling that to the rest of my family! But yes every so often you may need to at least sort out the junk sitting on the workbench...

[Robin2]

I find it very disheartening when nobody is satisfied with anything DIY unless it is as good as the best you can buy.

 

The hobby seems to have changed from railway MODELLING to railway BUYING.

 

I suspect if you finish off your models they will be perfectly usable as normal rolling stock.

 

...R

[FPH 603]

I find it very disheartening when nobody is satisfied with anything DIY unless it is as good as the best you can buy.

 

The hobby seems to have changed from railway MODELLING to railway BUYING.

 

I suspect if you finish off your models they will be perfectly usable as normal rolling stock.

 

...R

I think it's more the amount of detail and the general build quality of the model. Mine have dirty sides and roof covered in smudged glue and model filler. The roof looks wrong from the front despite all my efforts to get it right, and the bodysides are the wrong profile with some pretty poor looking windows. I find the 'satisfied with it when it's good as the best you can buy' is more of an ultimate goal rather than a straight out target. It was more the poor windows, profile and build quality that let down my model. It was actually the expense of RTR that got me into scratchbuilding, and hopefully soon I can get more plasticard so I can commence the build of my 'Mk2' model. I think no matter what at this stage at least the 660/760 model will be finished as partly stripped and withdrawn stock. Not sure with my 620/720 yet though, although I would preferably like to finish this one too. I don't like resorting to overpriced RTR either, unless I absolutely feel like I actually want to have it. Other than that scratchbuilding is the way to go.

[Signaller69]

I think it's more the amount of detail and the general build quality of the model. Mine have dirty sides and roof covered in smudged glue and model filler. The roof looks wrong from the front despite all my efforts to get it right, and the bodysides are the wrong profile with some pretty poor looking windows. I find the 'satisfied with it when it's good as the best you can buy' is more of an ultimate goal rather than a straight out target. It was more the poor windows, profile and build quality that let down my model. It was actually the expense of RTR that got me into scratchbuilding, and hopefully soon I can get more plasticard so I can commence the build of my 'Mk2' model. I think no matter what at this stage at least the 660/760 model will be finished as partly stripped and withdrawn stock. Not sure with my 620/720 yet though, although I would preferably like to finish this one too. I don't like resorting to overpriced RTR either, unless I absolutely feel like I actually want to have it. Other than that scratchbuilding is the way to go.

I think you have hit the nail on the head; as we only have ourselves to satisfy, if you know YOU are not satisfied with it then you will not be happy with it when finished most likely. I still think your original looks good (I have no knowledge of the prototype), but if cleaning it up and correcting the errors is not practical or possible then at least it can still feature as a withdrawn/scrap scene - and hopefully the original will inspire you at least as much as starting from scratch - If you build a mk.2 version it will be easier in the sense you know where the pitfalls are so can avoid them next time round.

[The Johnster]

Even the very best of RTR, and that is very good indeed, can be worked on a bit; details added, repaints, weathering, renumbering, crew, tools for steam locos, lamps.  There is always modelling to be done and it will improve you models which will hence be more satisfying to own, operate, or display. 

 

It is entirely possible to produce a very realistic layout using nothing but out-of-the-box RTR and RTP, but, even with factory weathering, it will not be as good as the same layout with a bit of working up.  Some of the best scenic modellers on this forum use RTR models, but they never look quite the same as they did when they first came out of the box!  I'm not sure I buy (perhaps the wrong word in this context) this 'modelled good RTR bad' argument; for most of us the way to obtain the best possible model is to buy RTR and work it up, or kit build if no RTR is available for what we want, or scratchbuild if no kit is available; one expects that the increasing flakiness and probable imminent demise of the kit market may mark a resurgence is scratchbuilding for prototypes not available RTR (or we may be going down a 3D printed route; hasn't happened yet, though.  3D printing may turn out to be best for components in kits, or a bit like the wonder material of a few years back, graphene, which apparently has no practical application yet known to mankind).

 

I enjoy modelling, making things, but have to say that my Bachmann 64xx is much better than the Westward one I built years ago.  It has a better level of detail, it's motor and gears are completely hidden, and is finished better, and although the Westward was a much better runner with 40:1 Romford gears, the Baccy is not half bad!

[Robin2]

for most of us the way to obtain the best possible model is to buy RTR and work it up

I guess the point of my Reply #16 was to pose the question "do we really need the best possible model?"

 

Almost all the fine detail and precision with dimensions is completely invisible from a normal viewing distance of (say) 3 or 4 feet - especially so when the train is moving.

 

...R

[The Johnster]

I would say we need the best possible model, but are in many cases happy to settle for the best available model (I am speaking for myself here and do not claim to be a spokesman for anyone else).  I cannot claim scale modeller pretensions as I run a Hornby 2721, a model with terrible and insolvable problems of scale; it is a 1970s toy, not even particularly good by Hornby's standards of the day when it was released, and those were far short of todays standards even in the Railroad range.  It is too long, too high, has plastic skirts beneath the beneath the boiler and tanks.  I have worked it up to the extent of replacing the upside down flower pot that masqueraded as a chimney with one from my now sadly moribund Westward 64xx; this is a turned brass thing of a provenance I cannot remember because I bought it many years ago at a show, I have replaced the rather sad safety valve cover with the Westward 64xx one, and have added such detail as I can, along with a repaint into the black wartime austerity livery with small G W R initials, sans serif from Caerphilly works (called 'grotesque' but it was actually quite neat) and a good bit of weathering, glazed specatles, a crew, fire irons and real coal in a half empty bunker.  It may at some future time get a new cab roof of more appropriate thinness.

 

Even with a 'modern' Hornby chassis and a lot of work fettling it up, it is not a reliably good runner, but I like it.  It sort of symbolises my approach; the best I can do even if it isn't perfect.  It gets an occasional run on the miner's workmans, or a pit prop special.  Hornby numbered it 2761, a Tondu loco in the late 40s withdrawn in 1950 so just in my period, but turned it out in a green livery which is correct for the period but not for this loco; it is, until my renumbering program is instituted (job for 2018?) my only correctly numbered Tondu resident loco, with it's not unreasonable looking cabside plates which are at least raised moulded and thus better than many other RTR GWR offerings!

 

Of course, a kit 2721 would be better, and I probably still possess the skills to build one, but the cost and effort seem hardly justified for a model only occasionally used and at the extreme early end of my time period.  It runs, incorrectly, at the same time as some post 1956 liveried locos and stock, but I try not to think too much about this; my approach is broad brushed enough to tolerate the anomaly.  The best I can do even if it isn't perfectly perfect.

Edited December 26, 2017 by The Johnster

[Mark Saunders]

Keep it to remind yourself of how not to do it next time!

 

Mark Saunders

[FPH 603]

A fair amount of work has been done on this model over the past few days, I think this is becoming an old model restoration sort of thing.

An overall view of the model, on a much messier workbench!

The radiators have been improved by cutting out the originals and putting strips of plastic on the inside of the bodyshell.

The front has been improved with brass handrails and new jumper cables. I've also replaced the end communication door.

The chassis has received a fair bit of treatment too, the interior dividers being moved to the chassis as well as underframe detailing, including one engine. (The model is supposed to be in a withdrawn guise, and in photographs I found evidence of one of the two engines fitted to the underframe).

After completely stripping out the interior of the bodyshell, I can finally see through the roof mounted radiators.