Superdetailed RTR Locomotives - All or Nothing?

[potlatcher]

I brought this issue up a few weeks ago, but it was buried in another topic and I didn't get much feedback.

I attended the National Train Show in Seattle last summer and had an opportunity to speak with a gentleman at the Proto 2000 booth. I have been hoping that someone will produce a mass-market (not brass) HO model of the early Alco High Hood switchers (HH-600, HH-900, HH-660 and HH-1000). With P2K having recently released accurate models of the S-1 and S-3, I asked if they would consider producing the HH series.

The gentleman replied that they would not build the HH's because there were too many detail differences between the various models and phases of the prototypes. He explained that P2K could not justify investing in the tooling required to produce four different hoods and two different cabs to make accurate railroad-specific models of an obscure locomotive (obscure is debatable since almost every mainline railroad had a few HH's on their roster in the late steam era). This was disappointing to me, since I feel all the HH's looked similar and I would be happy to have one generic model of an HH that I could rework if needed to better resemble my specific prototype.

To generalize, it seems that lately every model that hits the shelves has already been superdetailed to match a specific railroad's version of that locomotive. I understand many folks don't want to take the time to add details to a generic model, and they are apparently willing to support the ready-to-run market. If I ever decide to buy a GP-38-2 or SD-70MAC, I will probably buy one of these RTR's.

What bothers me is that a manufacturer rules out producing a model because they believe the market expects them to produce all versions and that modelers will not be satisfied with one generic version. For many years, modelers had to be satisfied with generic models. To compensate, the dealers' shelves were full of superdetail parts and conversion kits, and the magazines were full of kitbashing articles to help us turn generic into specific. It was (and is) a lot more fun that way.

I think P2K's all-or-nothing attitude is bogus. Hopefully they, or someone else, will see things differently in the future.

Tom

[jsoderq]

Market history over the past few years tends very much to support Lifelike's theory and pretty much over rides your opinion.

[potlatcher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jsoderq

Market history over the past few years tends very much to support Lifelike's theory and pretty much over rides your opinion.

I guess I just have a hard time believing that their perception of the market is correct. Do modelers really insist on having their locomotive "exactly right" out of the box? If we need a certain type of engine for our layout would we really rather get along without that engine than make do with one that is pretty close?

Tom

[davekelly]

Tom,

I agree with you. For some models a "generic" model would be great. If I want it to be a more exact model then give me an article in a mag showing how to do it. I prefer this than no model at all.

While I would like to think that your thought is what most modelers want, I believe that jsoderq is probably correct. Just look at some of the threads here. When Blue Box Athearns are being bashed (not kitbashed, but bashed) for not being detailed enough, I think that pretty much says it all. I do also think that LifeLike will continue to make highly detailed models so that they never again get the rep that they had previously.

[Anonymous]

From what I understand, Fairbanks Morse did not have catalog engines like GM and others did, with standard designs that they offered to all. FM built all of their locos to customers' specifications, and as a result most were all different from one another. That's probably what the LL rep was referring to. Whatever they would make, it would only be accurate for a very small portion of the engines.

In the recent past Life Like Canada offered RS-18 diesels in HO scale. These were the Canadian version of the ALCo RS-11 model. Both Canadian National and Canadian Pacific had these engines, each with their own detailing. LL Canada touted these models as being the most prototypically correct models ever made of Canadian diesels.

When they came out there were many details that were wrong for each particular railroad's models - horns facing the wrong way, bells in the wrong location, missing air intake louvers, and I think incorrect fuel tanks. There was quite a howl from Canadian rivet counters, making all sorts of complaints about the models. Part of the problem was also their high prices - listing around $200.00 Canadian. And this was from the relatively small Canadian maket.

Imagine if LL made some of the models you mentioned and modelers of specific railroads were not happy because their version wasn't correct. So I really think LL would be justified in not wanting to produce these models with so many variations.

One can always hope I guess. Or buy the hand made brass models.

Bob Boudreau

[Anonymous]

potlatcher:

IMHO, Life Like's approach to their business is the result of the ever-increasing sophistication of the typical model railroad enthusiast. This sophistication has been brought on by our own demand for more and more accuracy, and further fueled by the model railroad media.

Again, IMHO, I feel that the average consuming modeler will no longer be as tolerant of lesser, or more generic, efforts. (To wit: The "I've Bought My Last Athearn" thread as well as other threads.)

It would seem this (i.e. Life Like's business model) is a side effect of such increasing sophistication.

In addition, it makes good business sense to utilize expensive core die molds by making as many variations as practical by only changing a few details without having to recreate expensive core dies for the model.

Andre

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FundyNorthern

Imagine if LL made some of the models you mentioned and modelers of specific railroads were not happy because their version wasn't correct. So I really think LL would be justified in not wanting to produce these models with so many variations.

This is how I see it. If LL made a generic model they would get crucified by modelers about how "wrong" the model would be. Just like BLI gets crucified by some for thier mistakes...

[potlatcher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FundyNorthern

Imagine if LL made some of the models you mentioned and modelers of specific railroads were not happy because their version wasn't correct. So I really think LL would be justified in not wanting to produce these models with so many variations.

I agree that P2K, or any other manufacturer, is justified in not producing all versions of the HH series. I just think it's too bad that we modelers have become so elitist that we can't be satisfied with a "close enough" model that we can either accept as is or modify to make it just right.

Maybe Life Like could produce a generic HH in their P1K series so that our expectations wouldn't be so high.

Tom