Revolution moves into TT:120 with MMA/JNA

[MartinRS]

15 minutes ago, Revolution Ben said:

 

Hi there,

 

Thanks for your kind words.

 

To avoid any confusion there is no chance of us producing kits/scratch aids etc - we are only interested in producing fully finished RTR models and are happy to leave kits to those with more experience and expertise.

 

Also, while we welcome input and suggestions for TT:120, in the forseeable future at least, there is little point in looking beyond what we have already produced in OO, or N, or both.  We are keen to do our bit and believe it has potential, but at this time the TT:120 market is far too much of an unknown for us to research anything that isn't already in our range.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

Thanks for your response, Ben, I won't pretend I'm not disappointed though I understand the logic in just producing models for which you have N or OO tooling. I was, at one point, thinking of pitching the idea to Osborns Models but I'm still waiting and waiting and waiting for my order for their (available shortly for the last year) GWR toad. If you change your mind I'm sure you will have a large, thankful market.

 

[Ravenser]

9 hours ago, Revolution Ben said:

 

Hello all,

 

Based on numerous factors we have made the decision to give TT:120 a try.  We think it has potential. 

 

There is the (huge) advantage of harmonising scale and gauge and being in line with the rest of the world plus, having seen layouts and handled products by Hornby, Arnold and others, the models have a very pleasing feel to them.

 

If this works then we will look to other models in our range; if it doesn't then we and the wider model railway community can draw conclusions.  This will become apparent over the coming 6 months or so; beyond that there doesn't seem to be much point in endless circular discussions about viability in this thread as there isn't any hard evidence regarding Revolution's entry.

 

What I can say is that pre-orders so far (admittedly less than a week in) have surprised us and are very encouraging.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

 

It's good to hear this initiative seems to have been well recieved in the market.

 

We need to remember that TT:120 is not a debate, but a modelling scale in which people do (or don.t) make railway models. None of us can argue TT:120 into or out of existence online. No amount of banging the drum, asserting or confuting percieved facts, trying to expose contradictions in people's arguments or tangle them up in their own words and all the rest of it, on either side have any force against the simple fact of whether the stuff is selling in the real world. If it sells and keeps selling, then the scale lives and all the hobby needs to do is make the best of the opportunities thrown up.

 

I take Revolution's point about only doing stuff they have already researched and developed in another scale. (Hornby said something fairly similar).  At this point, we have an 08 out, and a 66 months away: that's the basic traction package for 21st century freight operations . What's needed beyond that is a supply of appropriate wagons:  Revolution has a lot of suitable candidates in their existing range, things for which Hornby does not have CAD and therefore presumably is very unlikely to make. That would seem to be a fruitful vein to pursue

 

Modelling the late 20th century freight railway at home in 4mm was already challenging because of the space issue. The evolution of the freight railway over the last 30 years has made those difficulties considerably worse, and I'm starting to think that that the 21st century freight railway may have to b e modelled in the smaller scales, at least if you want to do it effectively at home. If N gauge doesn;t suit you, we now have TT:120

 

And while we are waiting for Revolution's wagons to reach us, perhaps we could relevantly discuss things to do with them - in the form of home layouts based on 21st century aggregates facilities (whether quarries or discharge terminals ) in 1/120 scale.

 

What that might look like is a good question , because in over a quarter of a century I can barely remember any such 4mm layouts appearing in the magazines. A couple of attempts at doing the Peak Forest area, something very loosely inspired by the Grassington area (I think) and an attempt at a corner of a southern quarry are all I can hazily drag to mind , plus one current finescale project towards a quarry based setting . There may have been more in N, but it looks like almost virgin ground to me.

 

In terms of parameters I;d be wondering what would go in a second bedroom (the second bedroom in my flat is 9'3 x 7'4") or maybe an 8' x 6' or 10' x 6' shed. Market Deeping MRCs Dawlish has shown that 1/120 scale can do impressive rockfaces , without overpowering the trains. Quarry rock faces are big , but maybe big trains can speak back strongly to them. It could be a scenically impressive layout in this scale

[irishmail]

3 hours ago, Revolution Ben said:

 

Hi there,

 

Thanks for your kind words.

 

To avoid any confusion there is no chance of us producing kits/scratch aids etc - we are only interested in producing fully finished RTR models and are happy to leave kits to those with more experience and expertise.

 

Also, while we welcome input and suggestions for TT:120, in the forseeable future at least, there is little point in looking beyond what we have already produced in OO, or N, or both.  We are keen to do our bit and believe it has potential, but at this time the TT:120 market is far too much of an unknown for us to research anything that isn't already in our range.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

I would be interested in the class 313 if and when you decide to do this in TT:120,  (for me persoanally, if produced I would have one numbered 313001- 313017) one in blue grey, one in NSE. 😁

[Hobby]

14 hours ago, MartinRS said:

I think whichever manufacturer is first to produce a TT120 chassis kit is likely to find a large market for the product. I just don't think Peco have any real incentive to create such a model.

 

I asked Peco whether they were going to do a TT120 wagon chassis on it's own like they do in N at Warley and another show last year (Stafford I think), at Warley they just said thanks and at Stafford they made a note in a little book! I also suggested it to Andrew Burnham earlier on and he forwarded my email to the relevant part of the company. Since then... Nothing... Silence! I do feel they are missing a trick on sales, though, there are several companies already doing 4 wheel wagon bodies...

 

12 hours ago, Ravenser said:

We need to remember that TT:120 is not a debate, but a modelling scale in which people do (or don't) make railway models. None of us can argue TT:120 into or out of existence online. No amount of banging the drum, asserting or confuting perceived facts, trying to expose contradictions in people's arguments or tangle them up in their own words and all the rest of it, on either side have any force against the simple fact of whether the stuff is selling in the real world. If it sells and keeps selling, then the scale lives and all the hobby needs to do is make the best of the opportunities thrown up.

 

The best paragraph I've seen written on the scale, I feel we should cut and paste it every time one of those people pops up on one of the TT120 threads!

[Mike Harvey]

19 hours ago, irishmail said:

I would be interested in the class 313 if and when you decide to do this in TT:120,  (for me persoanally, if produced I would have one numbered 313001- 313017) one in blue grey, one in NSE. 😁

Were they the ones with the very large rooftop ventilators as originally built? I do not think that Revolution are tooling this variant in N.

[davepallant]

To be fair I wonder how much less than £16 or £17 (the cost of a full wagon) that Peco could do a wagon chassis kit for!

[MartinRS]

4 hours ago, davepallant said:

To be fair I wonder how much less than £16 or £17 (the cost of a full wagon) that Peco could do a wagon chassis kit for!

 

Peco's N scale 9ft WB with couplers and wheels is priced at £6.00 with the 15ft WB slightly less and their 10ft WB available for a similar price. Their O-16.5 (with just wheels) is £11-52. Model shops offer small discounts. I would expect a TT120 version to cost somewhere between these prices. The great thing about their N scale offerings is you just have to provide a body, be it an open wagon or a van. All of the 3d printed chassis from smaller manufacturers I have seen are supplied without wheels or couplers.

 

Anyone modelling British Railways in TT120 has a very limited range of rolling stock to choose from though this was an era when standard designs, former big four designs and probably earlier rolling stock could be seen on the network. Looking at Hornby's planned releases that might be the case for some time. With a little bit of skill in using a software paint program you could, for example, create a train of mineral wagons with each one weathered to look different, some with the small door, some without. I wouldn't care if the cost a chassis was something towards the upper end of the above price range. My experience with one supplier, which does stock both wheels and couplers, has certainly reduced (halted for now) my purchases from them. I'm concerned that having to buy a chassis from another supplier (without wheels and couplers) could leave me with what would be a useless collection of parts. I just want a chassis, with wheels and couplers, which is why I pitched the idea to Revolution Trains.

 

It's not about price, it's about convenience enabling creativity.

[Peachy]

@Peachy & @MacTrains interview with @Revolution Mike & @Revolution Ben now up on YouTube. 
(Peachy TT120 “Let’s talk TT”)

[Revolution Ben]

3 hours ago, MartinRS said:

 

Peco's N scale 9ft WB with couplers and wheels is priced at £6.00 with the 15ft WB slightly less and their 10ft WB available for a similar price. Their O-16.5 (with just wheels) is £11-52. Model shops offer small discounts. I would expect a TT120 version to cost somewhere between these prices. 

 

<snipped> I just want a chassis, with wheels and couplers, which is why I pitched the idea to Revolution Trains.

 

It's not about price, it's about convenience enabling creativity.

 

Hi there,

 

Your examples are from long-since amortized legacy tooling.  Plus all the evidence is that customers in all scales, but perhaps especially in TT:120, are more into RTR than kit building.  

 

So if you're tooling up a new offering in TT:120 the price would be higher, and you have no idea of the scale of the market so you'd need to price conservatively.  I'd estimate £25 for a simple wagon chassis.

 

But it's moot, for the last time Revolution isn't in the kits business and won't be producing kits.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

 

[britishcolumbian]

On 04/07/2024 at 14:49, Dunsignalling said:

a scale that represents a small market niche even where it is well-established

It is anything but a "small niche" in Central Europe. Even in Germany it's not small, and it is solidly #2 in Hungary, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia. And, from what I've heard, it might even be #1 in Russia.

[britishcolumbian]

Although it's much too new for my interests, I'm delighted that someone new is taking a step into TT. And - if you do eventually opt to do the 35t tank in 1:120, I'll definitely be interested.

[Peachy]

3 hours ago, britishcolumbian said:

It is anything but a "small niche" in Central Europe. Even in Germany it's not small, and it is solidly #2 in Hungary, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia. And, from what I've heard, it might even be #1 in Russia.

Totally agree @britishcolumbian in the past 48hrs I’ve noticed a marked increase in views from Europe and several German & Hungarian subscribers.
I’m not surprised, as the quality of Revolutions models far surpasses mainland Europe models at a similar price bracket. 

& before I get jumped on, yes I know there are quality manufacturers in mainland Europe, but their pricing can be considerably higher in comparison to the UK market. 

[Hobby]

10 hours ago, britishcolumbian said:

It is anything but a "small niche" in Central Europe. Even in Germany it's not small, and it is solidly #2 in Hungary, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia. And, from what I've heard, it might even be #1 in Russia.

 

Well said, BC, I do wonder why people continue to make that comment, is it through ignorance or spite, it's been answered so many times on the other two threads there's really no excuse for us to have to clarify it yet again, so I can only assume it's due to the latter of the two options!

Edited July 14 by Hobby

[Roy L S]

On 11/07/2024 at 05:43, MartinRS said:

 

Peco's N scale 9ft WB with couplers and wheels is priced at £6.00 with the 15ft WB slightly less and their 10ft WB available for a similar price. Their O-16.5 (with just wheels) is £11-52. Model shops offer small discounts. I would expect a TT120 version to cost somewhere between these prices. The great thing about their N scale offerings is you just have to provide a body, be it an open wagon or a van. All of the 3d printed chassis from smaller manufacturers I have seen are supplied without wheels or couplers.

 

Anyone modelling British Railways in TT120 has a very limited range of rolling stock to choose from though this was an era when standard designs, former big four designs and probably earlier rolling stock could be seen on the network. Looking at Hornby's planned releases that might be the case for some time. With a little bit of skill in using a software paint program you could, for example, create a train of mineral wagons with each one weathered to look different, some with the small door, some without. I wouldn't care if the cost a chassis was something towards the upper end of the above price range. My experience with one supplier, which does stock both wheels and couplers, has certainly reduced (halted for now) my purchases from them. I'm concerned that having to buy a chassis from another supplier (without wheels and couplers) could leave me with what would be a useless collection of parts. I just want a chassis, with wheels and couplers, which is why I pitched the idea to Revolution Trains.

 

It's not about price, it's about convenience enabling creativity.

If the design of the Peco short wheelbase wagon makes the "chassis" unsuitable as a stand alone component, the most immediate solution to widening the range of available subjects would appear to be 3D printed bodies onto Hornby chassis. Of course to achieve that would mean buying a whole wagon and discarding the body, but given that TT120 is still in it's infancy (and will be considered such for some time to come) it is perfectly understandable that no manufacturer would take the financial risk of tooling a wagon chassis speculatively for as yet non-existent kits (made on a commercial scale). 

 

Off topic perhaps, but we are talking RTR wagons with commercial "legs" I would point towards the LNER/BR 16ft wheelbase "Toad" Brake van as one to put near the top of the list - loads produced, plenty of liveries, lasted a long time, preserved examples, edit: and of course fitted/unfitted variants too.

 

Roy

Edited July 14 by Roy L S

[47606odin]

Personally I’d say if looking for an alternative wagon for a future project, either the PCA or caustic tank wagons currently on the books would be a sensible smaller wagon. 4 wheeled so no bogies reducing costs as fewer components, and can be sold in sets of 3’s with differing numbers to make up a nice little train.

 

the Zander wagon also, simple open mineral wagon which also gives an entrance into an earlier period. I’d definitely have those as I’m looking at late 70’s era

Edited July 15 by 47606odin

[bobslob]

On 06/07/2024 at 10:26, Dunsignalling said:

I fail to see that it's either.

•   TT:120 is here to stay (so long as Hornby stick with it) - FACT
•   The OO producer most likely to be adversely affected by TT:120 is Hornby - FACT
•   Hornby are predominantly repeating their most popular OO models in the new scale - FACT
•  The range of models available in TT:120 will remain small in relation to both N and OO for the foreseeable future. - FACT
• The only thing that would change that substantially would be for another brand to go into head to head range competition with Hornby in the new scale. - FACT
• None of the above come without risk to TT:120, and even Hornby itself. - FACT.
• I've spent tens of thousands of pounds with Hornby over the years, but much less of late because others are offering things I want more.
• Hornby's best stuff is the equal of (and often better than) anything  else on the r-t-r market, but they have made some shocking howlers too, and they do have difficulty competing on price.

I'm sorry if that offends those with quasi-religious views as to Hornby's divine right to success, but how many times do they need to prove otherwise? 

 

Just your opinion and not actual facts. - FACT

Edited July 21 by bobslob

[Hobby]

Gawd, you don't give up do you! Please give it a rest, you've repeated (note the word "repeated") yourself on this thread (which isn't even about Hornby!) and all the others with the same stuff, sometimes reworded, but the same. We all know your views by now, you've no need to keep repeating them, doing so doesn't make them any more valid than those from any other posters. You're just spoiling it for those of us who are actually interested and even modelling in the scale.

 

EDIT: The above was in reply to a now deleted post, not to Bob's, hopefully we can get back to the subject of the thread and I applaud Mike's post below!

Edited July 22 by Hobby

[Revolution Mike B]

Folks, if you really wouldn’t mind, could we keep this thread to discussing our forthcoming introduction to TT:120 with our Ealnos MMA/JNA wagon please. If you wish to discuss anything relating to other manufacturers, it would be more beneficial on their respective threads. 

Cheers

Mike B

[Covkid]

On 08/07/2024 at 08:20, Hobby said:

 

I asked Peco whether they were going to do a TT120 wagon chassis on it's own like they do in N at Warley and another show last year (Stafford I think), at Warley they just said thanks and at Stafford they made a note in a little book! I also suggested it to Andrew Burnham earlier on and he forwarded my email to the relevant part of the company. Since then... Nothing... Silence! I do feel they are missing a trick on sales, though, there are several companies already doing 4 wheel wagon bodies...

 

Very definitely agree "Hobby".  A "standard" aurbrake underframe for going under the OAA OBA OCA VAA VBA VCA VDA SAA and FPA would cover a huge number of bases and allow cottage industry 3D bodyshells. I can think of a number of trains which could be formed of these vehicles, from Kellogs cornflakes to Trafford Park to Rowntrees chocolate from York to Penkridge and Eastleigh.  Then there were the Cawoods coal container from South Wales to Immingham riding on FPAs etc etc. Surely a "supervan" underframe could be knocked out relatively easily  

[Revolution Mike]

I think you have to also think about motivation ie why would a RTR manufacturer produce a chassis for kit builders? Kits sell in small quantities compared to RTR and you still have high tooling costs to tool up a chassis. 
 

Also bear in mind that a lot of kits were tooled by very skilled “hobbyist” tool makers of which there are diminishing numbers. Many of the toolmakers that produced kits are either retired or sadly no longer with us. 
 

cheers Mike

[Hobby]

True, Mike, but Peco must have made their costs, and more, back, with the N gauge one, and people using the chassis aren't just restricted to N gauge sales. They are making the TT120 wagons which use a separate chassis so production of the chassis alone shouldn't be an issue, especially as I believe that Peco make their stuff in house?

[Mike Harvey]

I am sure if there is someone who enthusiastically supports this and believes that it is a good business proposition, they would be happy to commission someone to make what they want. It would be a surefire business success for that person. 😀  And almost certainly easier than trying to convince someone else to spend their money on it.  They might only need to convince a bank to lend them the start-up capital...........and away they go.

[Jeff Smith]

On 23/07/2024 at 06:09, Hobby said:

True, Mike, but Peco must have made their costs, and more, back, with the N gauge one, and people using the chassis aren't just restricted to N gauge sales. They are making the TT120 wagons which use a separate chassis so production of the chassis alone shouldn't be an issue, especially as I believe that Peco make their stuff in house?

Peco produce coach and wagon kits for 0-16.5 and makes both chassis available as separate kits.  These are very old kits but the principle is the same!

[britishcolumbian]

On 23/07/2024 at 09:15, Revolution Mike said:

I think you have to also think about motivation ie why would a RTR manufacturer produce a chassis for kit builders? Kits sell in small quantities compared to RTR and you still have high tooling costs to tool up a chassis. 

Well, FWIW I think the only way that this would make sense to me and my minimal understanding of doing business is if the chassis is something that's already tooled up for a full RTR wagon... and then sell it at a price less than the RTR vehicle, but not drastically so - grabbing numbers from out the air, if the RTR wagon is priced at £30, sell the chassis kit for £20. Sure some will bawl "why so much when it's only a small part of the whole", but I think most people who would want to build on the chassis would contently pay that price, since it's both a reasonably significant savings, and you're not left with unnecessary plastic left over. And, again I'm not a businessman, but it seems to me that there'd still be a decent return on each chassis kit sold, and the builder might be much more inclined to build a rake of six at £120 than at £180 - might opt only to build one or two at the higher price...

[Hobby]

The key thing as Jeff and I have pointed out is that it's not just modellers in the main scale that use it. I suspect a reasonable percentage of the 9mm gauge chassis are used by 009 and 09 modellers. Anyhow it's down to Peco, I've asked and unless they're keeping it under their hat it seems that's the end of it.