RTR vs Kits... Economics, Variety and Quality: a discussion.

[DaveF]

A quick note about kit instructions - from one who builds kits and is not a manufacturer.  Edit - It's longer than I thought, sorry.

 

In my working life I often had to produce "worksheets"for pupils to use when doing science practicals.  It almost always took several attempts to produce a sheet which always worked for all pupils even for a simple ten minute experiment.

 

If they had been properly costed, charging for my time, another teacher's time to check them and then the time to trial them it would have been at least £250 for each experiment. 

 

If you translate that to instruction sheets for kits you might say it would be much cheaper.

 

But - what is the minimum you would work for per hour?

 

The only way to write instructions is to write down everything you do as you do it, and take photos.

 

Then you need to build another model using only the written instructions, forgetting everything you know about how you designed the kit and everything you know about the prototype except what you have put in the instructions.

 

Repeat the build, using another of your kits, until you get it right.  Ideally get someone else to build the kit using only your instructions - they'll probably want to be paid for doing that.

 

Now work out the cost of your time and the kits you have used, divide it by likely sales and add that cost to the kit selling price.

 

If anyone thinks it is easy then design a simple building.  Build it, writing instructions as you go.

 

Now build another one, using only your instructions and deliberately not doing anything you didn't write down.

 

I tried it once, suffice to say the one I built from my instructions didn't work out at all well.

 

That's why I don't design and produce kits.

 

David

[hayfield]

On the (these days) not unreasonable assumption that the manufacturer is already in possession of a computer with word-processing software and a digital camera, where is the "cost", then, except in his own time and a ream of paper?

 

Of course, I may be presuming that our would-be manufacturer's skills in kit design and manufacture are accompanied by at least a degree of competence in written English, but if not, do they not have a mate in the hobby who can proof-read and ask intelligent questions to clarify the meaning of the text?

 

I doubt if many could produce anything that will match the instructions from the big companies, who have the resources to enlist those who may not be model makers but have the appropriate skills in publishing. I am not defending bad instructions but these smaller companies usually are one man enterprises where the person does everything including sweeping the floors

 

Coupled to this, I would assume the majority of customers are versed in the skills required. I have said though it would be good practice to have more comprehensive instructions available, perhaps online. One company I looked at today seems to have videos available on line, this may be an answer for the novice

[Andy Hayter]

and that is exactly the point.  Whilethe unwashed masses complain about prices, they also complain about lack of documentation.

[Phil Parker]

Yes, that's exactly my point.

 

In principle I would agree with Phil that a day's "work" ordinarily requires and fully justifies fair recompense. 

 

But the whole excuse that is so often made is that we should excuse poor, slipshod or inadequate "work" in the form of kits and the instructions etc. for them because the semi-amateur manufacturer doesn't seriously expect to cover their costs and make a profit in the same way they would if they were running a "proper" business; they are doing it "for love", or as a favour to like-minded enthusiasts in their segment of the hobby; or whatever other non-commercial motivation is claimed to drive them.  And if they are prepared (as it seems we're expected to accept they are) to spend many days or weeks or months using their skills in designing a kit, making castings, preparing etchings, packaging-up etc. etc. then I cannot see why they should not be expected to expend a little extra "love" to prepare a decent set of instructions - which the purchase may then choose to use, adapt or discard in the same way as they often do with the components of the kit itself.  In the "great scheme of things", if you've already spent say 30 man/days on the thing, what's another day or two - especially if you claim not to be counting the true cost anyway?

 

Can't have it both ways.

 

And neither can YOU have it both ways. 

 

You can't expect a manufacturer to do his job for the love of it - loads of hours work that will never be paid for just so you can have a cheaper kit.

 

Then demand that they put lots and lots more of those unpaid hours into the product to bring it up to Tamiya quality. 

 

Essentially, we get what we are willing to pay for. If someone releases a model for the love of it, they will do as much as they want because they aren't fussed about the number of sales. You can expect what you like, but unless you are paying for the time, you have to accept what you are given. You have the right not to buy after all. If they are running a serious business then things should get fixed. If doing it as an extension of a hobby, they will probably deicide it's not worth the trouble and the kit will (like so many) vanish from sale.

 

A good example of this is the MTK range. The first shots were usually pretty good as the maker wanted the model for himself. Further runs tended to be less good. I've got a parcels railcar which clips together, the part fit is that good. OK, the instructions are limited but it's a simple enough prototype that looking at photos, something I'd do even if reams of paper had been provided, will suffice.  I paid £17 for this kit second hand after a quick look in the box, for that money I'll take a bit of a risk. 

 

Another example is the DJH Beginners kit for a Barclay. That has superb instructions and is designed for very easy assembly. Price £180, but then DJH are doing this as a business.

 

A third option is the "Scratch aid" concept (also called a "Semi kit" in the model boat world) where a set of parts are sold with little or no instructions and the certain knowledge that the builder has to source other bits themselves. Builders can then decide if the parts are worth the money in the full knowledge that work will be required. For many prototypes, this can make a big difference. I built a Worsely Works 3mm scale steam railcar years ago. Price £18 and for that, I got sides, ends (one of which needed modification) and no castings or motorising parts. I could have complained that I wanted something as easy to build as an Airfix Spitfire, but since total sales over several years have barely scraped into double figures, the makers would have taken it off the market rather than thrown loads more time and money at it. I judged that etches sides that took cared of the panelling were better than no sides. 

[Clive Mortimore]

On the (these days) not unreasonable assumption that the manufacturer is already in possession of a computer with word-processing software and a digital camera, where is the "cost", then, except in his own time and a ream of paper?

 

Of course, I may be presuming that our would-be manufacturer's skills in kit design and manufacture are accompanied by at least a degree of competence in written English, but if not, do they not have a mate in the hobby who can proof-read and ask intelligent questions to clarify the meaning of the text?

Come on these days, most people have a PC and a mobile phone with a camera. Most etched kits are done on a CAD program. How many of us know where to buy typewriter ribbon from? Can you still get it?

Edited March 11, 2018 by Clive Mortimore

[truffy]

How many of us know where to buy typewriter ribbon from? Can you still get it?

I thought I understood (most of) this thread, until I read that.

[2ManySpams]

I'm not sure I buy this 'you have to be a big company to do good instructions' argument.

 

How many people does Jim at Connoisseur have working for him? I was under the impression he was a small cottage industry like many other kit producers. Yet he still seems to be able to turn out decent kits with superb instructions.

 

Talking to him in the past, he gets quite a few sales from beginners through recommendation because his kits have a good reputation and the instructions are good. Having listened in to conversations with prospective punters whilst waiting they value seeing copies of the clear instructions online and like his starter and skill-builder kits.

 

Undoubtedly all this takes him time to do but certainly seems to attract sales.

[Phil Parker]

I'm not sure I buy this 'you have to be a big company to do good instructions' argument.

 

How many people does Jim at Connoisseur have working for him? I was under the impression he was a small cottage industry like many other kit producers. Yet he still seems to be able to turn out decent kits with superb instructions.

 

Talking to him in the past, he gets quite a few sales from beginners through recommendation because his kits have a good reputation and the instructions are good. Having listened in to conversations with prospective punters whilst waiting they value seeing copies of the clear instructions online and like his starter and skill-builder kits.

 

Undoubtedly all this takes him time to do but certainly seems to attract sales.

 

You don't have to be a big company, but it helps. Not everyone has the range of skills to do everything to a high standard. I'd certainly expect a large company to produce a more professional job than some bloke operating out of a shed. 

 

Jim is a bit of an exception, but then he is doing this as a business and wants to ensure sales, which his well-designed kits and good instructions justifiably get. 

[Jeff Smith]

Surely a key element in good instructions is good exploded diagrams or in some cases some step by step illustrations. Lego kits could probably not be built without them but in fairness are comprised largely of standard pieces as against a loco, wagon or aircraft kit which has readily identifiable parts. I have seen some pretty awful diagrams but being a pre-CAD draftsman and artist I can appreciate that such isometric drawings are difficult for some.

 

DaveF makes a good point about 'testing' instructions. This goes on in the aviation maintenance business when writing maintenance manuals. A technician is watched when carrying out step by step printed instructions to ensure they work and leave nothing out.....there are usually several revisions....

 

Anyway, getting back to the Airfix Spitfire example, this works because it is diagram based and with the right symbols, ie 'do not cement' does not even need any written instructions at all!

[Davexoc]

Come on these days, most people have a PC and a mobile phone with a camera. Most etched kits are done on a CAD program. How many of us know where to buy typewriter ribbon from? Can you still get it?

That'll be from Russia, still using them because you can't hack a typewriter.

But you'll probably have MI5 knocking on your door assuming you're a Russian spy if you try to buy some.....

And in chemical suits....

[jjb1970]

This may be blunt, but ultimately the reasons why a product may be poorly produced are not that relevant, product quality, instructions etc should be commensurate with the cost. These kits aren't been given away, most people expect a premium product if it carries a premium price, and the bench mark for that (to me anyway) is the kits I buy and build in other subject areas. If locomotive kits cannot be produced to the same standard as Tamiya and need to cost more I can fully understand the reasons for that. I can live with paying a higher price to offset small production numbers, quality is another matter and some of the posts on this thread are just trying to rationalise poor production values. Looking at some of the product lines referenced in this thread it is clear that some kit producers do make the effort to produce high quality goods, develop instructions etc, if they can do then so can others. 

[Clive Mortimore]

A picture says the same as a thousands words.

If I can illustrate how I make my models I am a sure today's kit builders can do the same.

[dibber25]

If you manufacture and sell kits, whether you do it in your spare time because you want the models or whether you do it as a business, if you are asking your customers to pay you for the kit, you are in the model manufacturing business. If you choose to price your kits so that you don't make anything out of it, that's your choice. Your customer has the right to be able to build that kit and unless it's very simple, he's going to need a decent set of instructions. I've seen some very good quality cast and etched kits which were hopelessly let down by poor instructions. And many of those kits are still out there. I built two, only last year.

As to MTK, well Colin may have wanted models for his own use - he tried to persuade me to part with a scratch-built Class 22 partly because he wanted it but also because he wanted to copy it for casting patterns - but he was very definitely running a business. Nevertheless, despite the generally poor quality of his kits, he considered it to be the customer's fault if he couldn't build them. I recall a Class 121 that was impossible to build - despite him making (at my request) a second set of castings from a new mould. 

Across the whole range of kits in 'OO' (and at its height, there were a lot of them) the quality of the parts and the instructions were variable and so were the skill levels required to make a good job of them. At the top end were superb well-designed kits of good quality parts but the skill level required (and sometimes the price, too) was often beyond the 'average' modeller. So the average modeller went for the apparently less-demanding, less expensive kits but found himself unable to complete them to a satisfactory standard because of his own shortcomings and those of the kit. Small wonder that when really good, superbly finished ready-to-run locos that performed as well as they looked, came along, he simply turned his back on kits. (CJL)

[Paul Cram]

It would be nice if someone could name these poor kits and or instructions as I am struggling to understand what they are with the exception of MTK.  have built a good number of kits without problem and wouldn't claim to be  abrilliant modeller.

[bike2steam]

For many years spent trawling model railway shows for s/h kit-built (?) locos, more often than not ,put together with some horrendous glue, take home, and dump in a tin full of paint stripper. No instructions, but plenty of good practise.  

[PatB]

To be fair, it's not uncommon for people to complain about good, or at least adequate, instructions. In another field of interest, I've heard so many people complain about Haynes workshop manuals, whereas, in my own (fairly extensive) experience, they're fine as long as you actually follow them. I've come across exceptions but that's  kind of my point; they are exceptions. Applying this to kit instructions, it's entirely possible for individuals to perceive failings in a set of instructions which may not be there in reality.

 

How foolproof must a set of instructions be made? What level of prior knowledge must be assumed by the kit manufacturer? Can different kits be assumed to have different requirements in this respect? Phil's Worsley Works 3mm railcar is a good example at one end of the scale. realistically, it's rather unlikely that a raw beginner will be choosing a  3mm steam railcar as their first attempt at building something (why it's unlikely is another can of worms entirely and I'm not going to go there right now ). I would see it as entirely reasonable that WW should supply it as a few etches with no instructions. It's components really, rather than a kit, and who expects instructions with, eg, a cast dome or chimney? At the other end of the spectrum, the DJH Barclay is marketed as a beginners kit. The manufacturer has to assume that builders may have no previous kitbuilding experience of any kind. Sure, we all know it's sensible to do a few wagon kits or similar before attempting a loco, but if you append the word "beginners" to a kit, someone will (not unreasonably really) take it literally. If the manufacturer makes their experience as painless as possible, not only will they be more likely to build more kits, but those kits are more likely to be from the manufacturer who provided the initial good experience. The effort expended on kit and documentation design is likely to pay off in future sales.

 

Something else which I think is a selling point for the inexperienced, is completeness. Whilst I understand the reasons for supplying loco kits sans  wheels, motor and gears, choosing and sourcing these bits is not a trivial task for the beginner. Manufacturers/sellers who offer an option (or even easy to follow advice) of supplying a set of bits which will work have, I think, an advantage. DJH's beginners kits do this, of course. Jim McGeown gives precise recommendations for bits that can actually be obtained. Roxey and, IIRC, Slaters offer wheel/gear/pickup options in their online shops. Yes, they can do it because they're big (by model manufacturer standards), but did they become big because they have a history of offering customers what they want?

[Barry O]

I am not sure about videoing people building kits as all of the professional builders I know have different techniques for building kits.

There is no "best" way.

While the kit instructions need to be clear some are complex and exploded diagrams sometimes don't help.(Ever tried getting the wing angles correct on the Airfix Spitfire XI kit?)

 

There are individuals on RMWeb who have started to build kits and have taken to it like a duck to water. Others struggle. No matter how good the instructions are you need to be able to convert these and the kit parts into a nice(to you) model.

 

I have, over the years built a number of kits (including some Modern Shrapnel dmus). The worst ones include a Scammel Commander and Scammel REME recovery vehicle..both had adequate instructions but awful castings. They will be completed as I don't give up easily.

 

One question though, Are modern RTR models becoming kit like due to the carp QC allowing you to fasten lots of bits back on with no understandable instructions?

[145 Squadron]

I appreciate all of those in this hobby who are prepared to produce and sell kits and parts to support those of us who would like models of prototypes that are not currently produced RTR.

 

At one end of the spectrum you have producers such as Mousa Models whose coach sides I have used, and at the other Rumney Models milk tank ladders, which come with 21 pages of instructions and photos! In both cases I have no connection with the supplier other than as a very satisfied recent customer and have completed models using both approaches.

 

I think as long as long as you have put in sufficient of your own time to understand the prototype, read kit reviews and understand your own limitations any kit is a bonus in avoiding having to scratch build yourself.

 

If not, you can always pay someone else to build it for you or wait for the RTR version (which has happened to me several times).

 

For me the hobby would be both much poorer and less interesting if all the smaller suppliers were to disappear.

 

Tony

[hayfield]

It would be nice if someone could name these poor kits and or instructions as I am struggling to understand what they are with the exception of MTK.  have built a good number of kits without problem and wouldn't claim to be  abrilliant modeller.

 

 

Some have expectations higher than others, there is no way that Joe Bloggs working from his spare room can match the pictorial instructions which the large plastic kit manufacturers produce, lets face it they have large art studios to do the work. Even after having easy to build kits and good quality instructions, some modellers still make a gigs ear from a silk purse. Having good instructions is not a short cut to making a good model

 

We see the equal to these checkbook modellers on the golf course, "all the gear, with no idea"  !!

 

Having said that the smaller manufacturers as a rule add far more historical information, and those who invest in learning and practice their skills, manage to make excellent models 

[2ManySpams]

I think instructions are a key part to a good kit but I fear not the main issue that results in kits being abandoned.

 

For me it's the physical accuracy and fit of the parts that's just as important. Solder A to B is fine, particularly if you have illustrated destructions showing which way round the parts go. The issue comes if Part A doesn't fit with Part B. A bit of overlap can be sorted with a file, but it's much harder if there's a gap between the parts.

 

On various build threads there have been examples of this, an ACE K Class mogul springs to mind. Etched axle holes not being in the right place or not matching the connecting rod spacing is another example (better still if left and right sides are different!). Parts of the motion that come into contact with the body and stop the wheels rotating are fairly common.

 

All these sort of issues are just another challenge, or even part of the fun, for an experienced kit builder backed by a stocked workshop. For the novice though they can stop the build in its tracks.

 

There's nothing more frustrating though than spending a load of time and money building something, getting it looking OK but finding it runs like a pig. Are railway modellers fairly unique in needing their creations to work as well as look good. Not a problem for the military modeller of planes and tanks. Airfix kits aren't expected to fly (not even from a bedroom window!).

 

The two big advantages RTR has is that the finish and lining are generally good and the models work. In either case if there's a problem you can exchange a RTR or get a refund. Not the case with a kit, if if doesn't run or looks naff you have an expensive paperweight.

[JSpencer]

I am not sure about videoing people building kits as all of the professional builders I know have different techniques for building kits.

There is no "best" way.

While the kit instructions need to be clear some are complex and exploded diagrams sometimes don't help.(Ever tried getting the wing angles correct on the Airfix Spitfire XI kit?)

 

One question though, Are modern RTR models becoming kit like due to the carp QC allowing you to fasten lots of bits back on with no understandable instructions?

 

Agree on "best way", my first 2 white metal kits built back in the 90s were soldered because this is what most published things said and what many of the long lived modelers I knew did. The alternative was araldite, but few (if anyone) liked that stuff. However one person I knew who built a scale model of Waterloo station in his attic, and would build classes of locos said use super glue.

 

Now the thing with soldered white metal is that if you solder it in the wrong place, it is pretty hard to un-solder and fix (the differences in melting points between the solder and white metal is not great). With super glue, you can just break it apart, clean it up and re-assemble it correctly. My 3rd kit, a Q1 was a mix of both solder and super glue, but I quickly found super glue was faster to use.

 

I have a Crownline etched metal Merchent Navy to build (since 20+ years -- delayed thanks to meeting my wife), while the instructions show where every bit goes, it is not clear where the - for example - tender sides should join the tender rear. Do the sides just overlap the rear edges or vice versa? The sides need to bent into a curve too, and that curve changes depending on what overlaps what...

 

Being etched, I could use solder and un-solder if required as the melting point of nickel is far higher than the highest temperature of the Iron, but the stuff will need to be really clean first.

[Clearwater]

Whilst I agree that there’s no right and wrong way,indeed Comet’s instructions frequently say where practice can be different, a video of someone who knows what they’re doing can be very useful to point a way that works. To use a cricketing analogy, you might note a certain batsman’s technique isn’t MCC coaching manual but if they have 5000 test runs at 50, it palpably works for them. That doesn’t mean you wouldn’t teach someone a more coaching manual style. The trick, as with all teaching, is to provide the student with a base to learn from and discover their own skills and abilities.

[hayfield]

 

 

Now the thing with soldered white metal is that if you solder it in the wrong place, it is pretty hard to un-solder and fix (the differences in melting points between the solder and white metal is not great). With super glue, you can just break it apart, clean it up and re-assemble it correctly. My 3rd kit, a Q1 was a mix of both solder and super glue, but I quickly found super glue was faster to use.

 

Being etched, I could use solder and un-solder if required as the melting point of nickel is far higher than the highest temperature of the Iron, but the stuff will need to be really clean first.

 

I have not tried 100 degree solder, but use 70 degree all the time. If I do something wrong I just boil the kettle and the parts come undone in the steam, easy peasy. A quick clean and re-do, no waiting or mess as with glue. Agreed if you use a higher melting point solder you may risk melting the castings,  so use the correct solder.

 

Buy the way I use an Antec 25 watt iron which is fine for all but the smallest parts

[BMacdermott]

Hello everyone

 

Positives and Negatives of Kits and RTR - V2

 

Many thanks to those who have made suggested additions and amendments to the original Draft. 

 

As noted on the original, the aim of this PDF (attached) is to provide a clear, unbiased appraisal of the pros and cons - particularly aimed at those who want to 'cut to the chase' and not wade through nine pages of debate. There are some 'gems' in there but they are often hidden.

 

As you will see, the 'positives' for both are about equal, but there are a handful of extra 'negatives' on the kit side. If you are considering taking up kit building, don't let that put you off! Many will already have a well-ventilated work area and a minimum of tools to work on basic wagon kits.

 

We have noted that some kit providers have poor instructions, so it might be worth contacting your chosen company before you commit to buying and check what instructions - if any - they may have.

 

I checked some companies purely at random...

 

Mercian Models and Genesis both have a policy that if you damage any parts they will replace them if you supply an SAE. Mercian added a rider: We want you to succeed! DJM has a video guide to loco kit building by Tony Wright - all 5 hours 38 minutes and 30 seconds.

 

Whatever route you take, I hope you enjoy it.

 

Brian

The Positives and Negatives of KIts and RTR V2 12.3.18.pdf

[Clive Mortimore]

Hello everyone

 

Positives and Negatives of Kits and RTR - V2

 

Many thanks to those who have made suggested additions and amendments to the original Draft. 

 

As noted on the original, the aim of this PDF (attached) is to provide a clear, unbiased appraisal of the pros and cons - particularly aimed at those who want to 'cut to the chase' and not wade through nine pages of debate. There are some 'gems' in there but they are often hidden.

 

As you will see, the 'positives' for both are about equal, but there are a handful of extra 'negatives' on the kit side. If you are considering taking up kit building, don't let that put you off! Many will already have a well-ventilated work area and a minimum of tools to work on basic wagon kits.

 

We have noted that some kit providers have poor instructions, so it might be worth contacting your chosen company before you commit to buying and check what instructions - if any - they may have.

 

I checked some companies purely at random...

 

Mercian Models and Genesis both have a policy that if you damage any parts they will replace them if you supply an SAE. Mercian added a rider: We want you to succeed! DJM has a video guide to loco kit building by Tony Wright - all 5 hours 38 minutes and 30 seconds.

 

Whatever route you take, I hope you enjoy it.

 

Brian

Hi Brian

 

What about the advantages and disadvantages of scratchbuilding?

 

Advantage, fun to do.

Disadvantage, can't think of one.

 

Go on everyone have a go at making something.