webbcompoundI agree Bowser were only good for the PRR and maybe USRAs, but what puzzles me is why nobody set up to service modellers of any other roads to the same extent. Why was there no Bowser equivalent turning out Harriman steam for example, or Reading anthracite burners? jon
jon
Well, MDC / Roundhouse made a pretty extensive line of HO kits, including engines, based on SP / Harriman prototypes. Some I believe are still available thru Athearn / Horizon.
Part of the problem is just size. In the UK you had the "Big Four" for a quarter century, then British Railways / British Rail. During the same time the US had hundreds of railroads. For a manufacturer to specialize in one railroad, it would have to first be a big one like the Pennsy, and second, one that was located in the northeast quarter of the US, where most US modelers are...like the Pennsy!! Otherwise, the pct. of folks modelling one particular railroad just wouldn't justify the specialization.
If anybody spots or has an unbuilt PRR E6 Atlantic kit, I am on the hunt for one. I personaly like building the Bowser kits and have built several for folks that were unsure of building the valve gear. My first kit was a Challenger kit, the president of the local club was my "elmer" while building it, I was 18 yrs old at the time. I am now 36 and still love building them. I am a PRR nut so I guess I will start grabbing the PRR kits when I see them. Mike
LHS mechanic and geniune train and antique garden tractor nut case!
hi Paul
It is true that there are many more large home layouts in the US, but there are plenty of large layouts in UK clubs, and travelling the exhibition circuit. Mostly they seem to be the product of a team, with different people doing different bits.The biggest ones are static, but less frequest here, so yes there are many more smaller layouts, but people still have lots of stock, either to run different periods, or just because they like making it.
I agree a mainly RTR layout is a nice idea, and that is why I started to model the US, but I failed to check what was available before starting. Having said that I wouldn't have been happy doing the mid-late 20th. Sure the kits take time, but not too much, and whitemetal kits (like DJH) are pretty esasy and quick to assemble.Getting the chassis and valve gear right is the truicky bit, and here my choice of early date is partly because most of the locos have inside pistons.
The Bowsers I have made might have problems, but the chassis go together easily, and for my money this is half the battle. If I could get good running gear RTR and then build (scratch or kit) the superstructure this would be ideal. But i don't want to pay for an intricate and expensive top side that I have to destroy. Certainely if you model narrowgauge in 4mm or 7mm in the UK this is the norm. You take an RTR chassis, a quick assembly resin or whitemetal superstructure, and you have a loco in a couple of nights.
I agree Bowser were only good for the PRR and maybe USRAs, but what puzzles me is why nobody set up to service modellers of any other roads to the same extent. Why was there no Bowser equivalent turning out Harriman steam for example, or Reading anthracite burners?
One thing I have been told about current-day model production is that RTR and kits of the same thing (the same model sold as an RTR or as a box of unassembled parts) costs nearly the same to produce. Not only do you need to write assembly directions, but that pile of parts must be sorted, counted, packaged into packets, and shipped. Woe betide the manufacturer who includes one 1-72 (or 2mm) screw too few. In other words, it takes about the same cash outlay to pay your factory work force to produce, package, and ship a kit as it does to produce, assemble, package , and ship a kit. This pricing is based on in-country USA production, not Far East production.
Anyway, that is what I have been told by a guy who has been though it. He sold his business.
One thing I have noticed about "modelers" is that everyone wants Road specific details or at the very least "something close to" Road specific detail. Correct me if I am wrong, but Bowser seemed to have a lot of PRR steamers & not a whole lot of anything else. Kinda makes that hard for me to want to purchase something for my layout even when I loosely model the CPR & the D&H.
I myself, prefer the kits. Especially freight cars. I picked up 5 kits last weekend from Lark-Spur Trains in Merrickville, ON. They have a whole bunch of them.
To say that someone isn't a 'modeler' because they don't or can't build kits either freight cars or locomotives is like saying someone isn't a 'driver' because they can't drive a car with a manual transmission.
Gordon
Brought to you by the letters C.P.R. as well as D&H!
K1a - all the way
I don´t know if it´s been mentioned, but DJH in the UK makes a really nice 2-8-0 kit:
DJH kit
I haven´t built just that, but their Garratt, and I must say that they are lightyears ahead of Bowsers kits.
Swedish Custom painter and model maker. My Website:
My Railroad
My Youtube:
Graff´s channel
Jon,
Interesting observations. I suspect part of the reason for more kits in the UK is that model railroading is different there. From what I have observed in the hobby press - both ours and the occasional UK book or magazine - most layouts are very small in the UK compared to the US. I think this allows more time for model building of more difficult kits - the etched kits you speak of I have only seen pictures of, but they look to be fairly time consuming. When only a few pieces are needed more time can be spent on each. Here there is more emphasis on larger layouts which mean more locomotives, cars, buildings, track, etc. RTR becomes necessary to get it running. From a manufacturing point of view this seems to require more up front tooling of dies leading to less assembly issues by a semi skilled work force. But the up front cost requires larger runs to amortize which leads to fewer offerings as only the most popular locomotives are made to ensure large sales.
The situation is somewhat different with cars because resin casting can be used for smaller runs. Still there appears to be much more demand for RTR than kits. Also, the smaller run resin casting kits cost considerably more than the mass produced RTR.
Personally, I would like to see some of the etched kits done here, but realistically I won't have time until retirement to build any. I just bought a house which with a basement that will allow for 1000sq ft layout. So even though I have all 3 of the BTS Ma&Pa kits in S mentioned above, I don't expect to build them for many years. Instead I will use RTR diesels (Undecorated models of the first 4 diesel switchers used by the Ma&Pa are available) and an RTR B&O 2-8-0 steam locomotive. I will also make heavy use of RTR rolling stock, flex track, etc.
Enjoy
Paul
webbcompoundOr just keep buying Chinese plastic RTR, you just know you need another 1910-20 era articulated 2-8-8-2 pusher on your modern image or transition era layout.
Actually, most of those pre WWI and USRA era articulated's lasted well into the transition era in the eastern mountain regions of the US. Sure most where modernized some and relagated to lesser duties, but running none the less until EMD and Alco could build enough replacements.
But overall, Jon I agree with you. I does seem however that not enough younger US modelers are interested in developing the skills to build the kind of kits you discribe.
And older modelers who may have the skills, are frustrated by the lack of product improvement by companies like Bowser.
And, using myself as an example, while I have been modeling for some 40 years, have built kits of all types, and still build lots of stuff, my interests have shifted to the building and operation of a fairly large layout. This requires that at least a fair percentage of locos and rolling stock be RTR or of the "easy" kit variety.
As a freelancer I have the advantage of building a credible roster from what is available, and even at that everything requires some kit bashing and painting.
And, as noted over and over on this and other forums, the selection of medium and small "work a day" steam is poor considering the market.
BUT, Bowser loco kits, still basicly 1950's technology, and heavy in PRR, will not be missed by me.
Since it seems that assembly is the "expensive" aspect of model production that drives all these manufacturers to China, the question is raised why could kits not be made virtually the same way as the current RTR? Those little China girls can put them together, I;m sure a lot of modelers could too. Proper planning, common parts, lack of pre assembly should allow reasonable cost and lower production numbers for a smaller market. BUT, it will take more than $1,000 to be sure.
Sheldon
Hi fellow railway modellers
Ive followed this thread from the UK and finally joined. Looks like the US market model is broke and needs fixing. I do LNWR (the Premier line, London to Scotland and the American special non-stop corridor train to the US liners at Liverpool) 1906-1908 in P4 (thats 4mm scale 18.85mm track gauge) so everything needs building, and there are actually lots of kits on the market. Theres even a manufacturer who specialises in my line and period, though he does quite a lot of 1890 stuff that I can't use. Also for much shorter lines. My latest project is the Wrexham, Mold and Connah's Quay Railway 1906, and even there I've two loco kits, and a scratch job on an RTR to pick from to start my stud of locos (they only had 18 locos anyway).There are even several manufacturers specializing in the various lines and periods of the London Underground (A very pretty layout if you have a mirror on a stick to poke down the escalator)
I dabble in US. I thought it would be easy with everything being HO (no 00, EM, or P4 choices) and lots of RTR, but no. I model Erie, Illinois Central and Pennsy, Chicago 1938, hence my interest in Bowser. Big lines with large studs of locos. There are five RTR locos suitable: a K4 Pacific for PRR (Bachmann) (but I do freight not passenger) an M1 for PRR (BLI) (The decapods didnt really get far into Lines West, and the Q and T class are too late), a USRA 0-6-0 (proto2k) for PRR, USRA 0-6-0 and 0-8-0 (proto2K) and and a Russian decapod (Bachmann) for Erie. Not enough to run a railroad, and no Illinois Central in sight. So I'm kitbashing plastics (thanks for great assistance from Ray Breyer on IC YahooGroup) and scrounging Bowsers on E-Bay. My sole diesel is an Atlas HH600 and even that needs extensive surgery to be right. As for the freight stock.....
So my point is if you want to run anything seriously prototype RTR in the US it has to be modern as all those consols and shifters just don't exist. But in the UK you can run a decent prototype railway for any period from 1880 on because the kits are there. These are small scale, often hobby or retired owner businesses, but they dont care. They either make up a batch with some spare cash and sell them for years till they break even, or they only run the etches when they get enough orders. It is a different business model but it works. There are locos out there that only a dozen people want but they get made.
So something is wrong with the US market. Even the smaller roads should have plenty of supporters to make some interesting etched kits. Far East brass has never made an inroad into the UK because we make our own. This isnt the whole picture of course. Hornby and Bachnman (made in China nevertheless) churn out so many different UK post war steam and later diesel prototypes that I lose track, far more prototypes than the tired repeats of USRA steam I see in the US. It is actually reaching the stage here where they are running out of prototypes to model and having to start to turn out pre-war locos.
So what. So the railroad enthusiasts need to act for themselves. The cars available from Westerfield and FunaroCamurlego and American Model Builders (even Accurail) indicate there is a market.(I have no Sunshine stuff as they don't appear to live in the 21st Century) Someone just has to get out the CAD software, stump up the $1000 to get the first couple of dozen etched and away you go. In the UK the prices start at around $90 a kit, plus your choice of wheels and motor and go up. The wheels are more difficult, but you can use UK suppliers like Alan Gibson till your own industry gets going. Actually there are quite a lot of US manufacturers of stuff already, but there is room for a lot more. The USA is a big country, you used to have industry and enterprise. Time to get some back.
Or just keep buying Chinese plastic RTR, you just know you need another 1910-20 era articulated 2-8-8-2 pusher on your modern image or transition era layout.
Come on guys. Remember the Kid in Upper 4? Your railways helped to keep us alive when we were the last free outpost in Europe. Locos made in the US powered railways in Cardif, Southampton, Tehran, and eventually Rouen and Paris. Be kind of a shame if you can't even make model kits of them now.
Jon Price
modelling the Wirral 1906-1908 (P4), Chicago 1938 (HO) and Thuringia 1952 (Z).
blownout cylinder OUCH--who stepped on who here? Andre--did I just step on you? LOL!!!
OUCH--who stepped on who here? Andre--did I just step on you? LOL!!!
Not that I'm aware of.
Andre
andrechapelonfwright: In the Early Rail Yahoo Group, BTS has announced they are working on a 19th Century locomotive kit, an HOn3 W&W kit, and a replacement boiler for the Mantua/Tyco General. They have quietly already been making locomotive kits in S and On3 as a indication of what the kits might be like. Again, craftsman kits like these are not going to sell for less than $200 (and $400-$500 is probably closer to the mark). But these are not your father's Roundhouse kits, either. But look what craftsman structure kits go for these days, too. So add BTS to the list of small locomotive kit manufacturers. More, actually. Ma & Pa 2-8-0 #43 is right at $630 as a kit. It's in S scale, however. http://www.btsrr.com/bts6102.htm List of kits all in S except for the Wabash 2-6-2: http://www.btsrr.com/btsteam.htm I suspect that BTS' supplier of these kits is Railmaster Exports of New Zealand and that the agreement prevents Railmaster from offering the kits independently of BTS. Railmaster has quite a list of available kits: http://www.railmaster.co.nz/railway/loco.htm Photos of assembled and painted kits: http://www.railmaster.co.nz/gallery/sn3gallery.htm Paul Scoles is a well known Sn3 modeler and a number of his models appear in the gallery. Andre
fwright:
In the Early Rail Yahoo Group, BTS has announced they are working on a 19th Century locomotive kit, an HOn3 W&W kit, and a replacement boiler for the Mantua/Tyco General. They have quietly already been making locomotive kits in S and On3 as a indication of what the kits might be like. Again, craftsman kits like these are not going to sell for less than $200 (and $400-$500 is probably closer to the mark). But these are not your father's Roundhouse kits, either. But look what craftsman structure kits go for these days, too. So add BTS to the list of small locomotive kit manufacturers.
More, actually. Ma & Pa 2-8-0 #43 is right at $630 as a kit. It's in S scale, however.
http://www.btsrr.com/bts6102.htm
List of kits all in S except for the Wabash 2-6-2:
http://www.btsrr.com/btsteam.htm
I suspect that BTS' supplier of these kits is Railmaster Exports of New Zealand and that the agreement prevents Railmaster from offering the kits independently of BTS. Railmaster has quite a list of available kits: http://www.railmaster.co.nz/railway/loco.htm
Photos of assembled and painted kits: http://www.railmaster.co.nz/gallery/sn3gallery.htm
Paul Scoles is a well known Sn3 modeler and a number of his models appear in the gallery.
It was a stroke of rare good fortune for me that BTS decided to produce kits for the Ma&Pa 41, 42, & 43 in S.
Note that only the EBT 6 and the Ma&Pa 41, 42, 43 have actually been produced for standard gauge, all in S scale. The 2 S scale and 1 O scale EBT locomotives in narrow gauge have been produced although the O one is between runs right now. The others are future plans.
The U.S. dealer for Railmaster is http://www.railmasterhobbies.com/
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
c:
The word on the street is that the Locomotive Co. kits were a decent idea horribly executed - the parts were rubber-molded, apparently, and the kits in the stores couldn't live up to the cherry-picked one sent for reviewing to a major hobby mag. I don't have any personal experience to back this up, but I think I do have the review around here somewhere.
The trouble, I guess, is that you need to know your trains, and know your manufacturing, and know your business, and probably be a bit of a lunatic as well, to succeed in such an enterprise. Most of the failures have missed one area or another.
Meanwhile, Cary was doing something not /entirely/ unlike Schleicher's concept for years, with success, producing boilers to fit the good-running chassis produced by the mainline kit-makers. Why Bowser didn't try and partner up with a resin caster to produce some superstructures for unusual prototypes, to sell with the mechanism kits they already made is kind of mind-boggling. Tool up a zamac slug to fit inside. There is so much they could have done over the last ten years to stir up interest. I've been reading lots of back issues lately, after buying about 60 at the train show () and it's really astonishing how much had been done with these locos, and equally astounding how suddenly it ran out of gas in about the mid-90s. It does feel like Lee English, for all the great things he's done for Bowser, just drew a blank with the steam line...maybe just kept it going for Dad's sake?
I mean, really, when they released the Bachmann repower kits, they should have thought, "Gee, you know, we can really run with this!" Naturally there would have been compromise involved, but I don't think a person who could suddenly get a cast-resin Seaboard or Burlington Mikado with a rugged, proven drive would be too inclined to count rivets! All the new and limited-run imported RTR locos out there now form a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the variety that existed when steam was king. USRA was far from the whole show!
I guess in reading my old mags I'm finding a silver lining, too. I'll probably try and pick up one more kit, but after that, I'm going to run my existing locos and save the money for a lathe. Maybe this will be the thing that really pushes me into "serious" scratchbuilding. It looks like great fun.
cuyamaThis is actually an older idea that has failed in the marketplace at least once. Robert Schleicher's The Locomotive Company offered a variety of generic HO steam chassis of various wheel arrangements to which different boilers and detail parts (also supplied by the company) could be added. This was at least 15-20 years ago, perhaps before he was involved with the now defunct Model Railroading and Railmodel Journal magazines. These were pretty demanding kits -- I've only ever seen a couple of them built up and the models I have seen did not run well. The company had ambitious plans, but faded from sight fairly quickly
If I'm not mistaken the issue may have been the tooling used. The other problem was that the quality seemed a little off. I've got a few of the Railmodel Journal and they did have some fine articles in them but then again---some people might suggest that model building was on the decline even then--
And then one might not see that approach--specialize the market to a point that one can pick from any number of suppliers of details, boilers and etc---it still comes down to how you configure the business model.
I'd be looking at a different model approach or even the same approach---we've pretty much used the same business models for some time and other companies seemed to have done well----who knows just what happened---I do not have their books nor do you--all we know is that it faded. If the quality of the product is done right then just maybe------?
cuyama blownout cylinder I've been thinking of a modular type of kit building system that starts with a basic kit--say chassis, driving wheels, can motor etc--then building up to a more detailed set up to a fine scale model type of thing---I'm kicking the economics around for that---oh frabjious joy---- This is actually an older idea that has failed in the marketplace at least once. Robert Schleicher's The Locomotive Company offered a variety of generic HO steam chassis of various wheel arrangements to which different boilers and detail parts (also supplied by the company) could be added. This was at least 15-20 years ago, perhaps before he was involved with the now defunct Model Railroading and Railmodel Journal magazines. These were pretty demanding kits -- I've only ever seen a couple of them built up and the models I have seen did not run well. The company had ambitious plans, but faded from sight fairly quickly.
blownout cylinder I've been thinking of a modular type of kit building system that starts with a basic kit--say chassis, driving wheels, can motor etc--then building up to a more detailed set up to a fine scale model type of thing---I'm kicking the economics around for that---oh frabjious joy----
I've been thinking of a modular type of kit building system that starts with a basic kit--say chassis, driving wheels, can motor etc--then building up to a more detailed set up to a fine scale model type of thing---I'm kicking the economics around for that---oh frabjious joy----
This is actually an older idea that has failed in the marketplace at least once. Robert Schleicher's The Locomotive Company offered a variety of generic HO steam chassis of various wheel arrangements to which different boilers and detail parts (also supplied by the company) could be added. This was at least 15-20 years ago, perhaps before he was involved with the now defunct Model Railroading and Railmodel Journal magazines. These were pretty demanding kits -- I've only ever seen a couple of them built up and the models I have seen did not run well. The company had ambitious plans, but faded from sight fairly quickly.
As I recall, the downfall of the company was that the quality of the kits left a great deal to be desired. Basically, 2 wheel arrangements were offered, a 2-8-0 and a 4-6-0 based on 19th century prototypes. The boilers were modularized.
When the kits were first announced, it sounded like a revolutionary idea. Unfortunately, the execution of the idea was counter-revolutionary.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Maybe what could be looked into is a way to produce basic kits that can be added to as the modeller becomes more adept at building UP the kit. I've been thinking of a modular type of kit building system that starts with a basic kit--say chassis, driving wheels, can motor etc--then building up to a more detailed set up to a fine scale model type of thing---I'm kicking the economics around for that---oh frabjious joy----
If anyone thinks of like possibilities go for it--have fun----
andrechapelon One more thing and I will close this out. I remember when DJH from Great Britain attempted introduction into the American market. If I remember correctly their models go favorable reviews in the hobby press but I never saw one of their kits until I found one--a USRA Mike{?)--in the silent auction at a recent NMRA convention. Maybe these models had some kind of hidden faults but when I looked at this one up for auction it looked like a well designed kit to me but then, as stated before, I am one of them thar close-enought-for-government-work modelers. The problem with the DJH kits was not that they were bad, but that they were relatively expensive, especially at a time (late 80's-early 90's) when the pound was gaining at the expense of the dollar. If you look at the links Ray Breyer posted, those kits cost over $400 US and that doesn't include shipping. It was only a few months ago that the British pound was nearly 1 for 2 compared to the US dollar, which would have brought the price closer to $600 US. In a hobby (at least in this country) that seems to want Wal-Mart prices while demanding Nordstrom's quality, paying the amounts listed above just doesn't fly, especially when you have to assemble and paint the thing yourself. Andre
One more thing and I will close this out. I remember when DJH from Great Britain attempted introduction into the American market. If I remember correctly their models go favorable reviews in the hobby press but I never saw one of their kits until I found one--a USRA Mike{?)--in the silent auction at a recent NMRA convention. Maybe these models had some kind of hidden faults but when I looked at this one up for auction it looked like a well designed kit to me but then, as stated before, I am one of them thar close-enought-for-government-work modelers.
The problem with the DJH kits was not that they were bad, but that they were relatively expensive, especially at a time (late 80's-early 90's) when the pound was gaining at the expense of the dollar. If you look at the links Ray Breyer posted, those kits cost over $400 US and that doesn't include shipping. It was only a few months ago that the British pound was nearly 1 for 2 compared to the US dollar, which would have brought the price closer to $600 US.
In a hobby (at least in this country) that seems to want Wal-Mart prices while demanding Nordstrom's quality, paying the amounts listed above just doesn't fly, especially when you have to assemble and paint the thing yourself.
DJH is one of - and probably the best known - producers of very high quality, low production rate, craftsman kit locomotives. The kits typically contain accurate etched brass and cast resin parts, top of the line drive trains, and build into the equivalent of quality brass locomotives. The technologies work reasonably well for low capitalization, low rate production compared to the hundreds of thousands of upfront dollars required for steel dies for die cast and plastic production similar to what Roundhouse, Mantua, and Bowser used to do (and Bachmann and BLI now do in China). The drawback for these craftsman kits, as Andre stated, is that the prices are breath-taking for those of us used to under $100 die cast kits.
There is a huge difference between the two types of kits in quality and prototype accuracy. But even so, the manufacturers know there will likely never be a mass market for locomotive kits again. Too many model railroaders are unwilling to develop the skill sets to enjoy these kits - especially when something that sort of matches what one is looking for is available RTR (with sound) on sale from Bachmann or BLI or even IHC (if they come back from Mehano's bankruptcy) for half the price.
The final issue is because of the low production rates (and sales), and relatively low profit margins for these manufacturers, you won't see them advertised in Model Railroader or featured in the MR reviews. Nor will they be stocked by the big discount mail and on-line retailers - they don't sell fast enough or in enough volume. Even the terms Walters offers to distribute the product are too often too onerous, so the product doesn't make the Walters catalog. As a result, many model railroaders never even hear about these kits, even if they might be interested in stretching themselves. Most of the market for these type kits are the craftsmen who tend to favor the more specialized periodicals and information sources like Narrow Gauge and Shortline Gazette and favored Yahoo groups.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
Lee English was kind enough to send me a brief email stating that most of the steam locomotive parts are available "at this time" (and verifying that the steam kits are "finished"). If you think you are going to need parts for repair, scratchbuilding, or kitbashing purposes now would be the time to buy them. My old K-4 and E-6 both could stand totally new valve gear as the existing stuff is looking either broken or fragile. On the other hand I really am no longer a Pennsy modeler
Dave Nelson
Eddie_walters I can confirm the comments that have been made about Bowser kits being gone - there have been some misconceptions about Eddystone Locomotives http://www.eddystonelocomotives.com/ upgrading and carrying on the Bowser line - I'm afraid this isn't so. What they have is an arrangement in place to use Bowser components in future custom built models - to quote David Grover of Eddystone Locomotives in an e-mail to me today: "I too have heard it already distorted that I " will produce the Bowser KITS..." Simply not true, rubbish in fact, if Bowser can't make a go of it anymore, how could I? Yes, by all means counter the rumor." Sorry guys!
I can confirm the comments that have been made about Bowser kits being gone - there have been some misconceptions about Eddystone Locomotives http://www.eddystonelocomotives.com/ upgrading and carrying on the Bowser line - I'm afraid this isn't so. What they have is an arrangement in place to use Bowser components in future custom built models - to quote David Grover of Eddystone Locomotives in an e-mail to me today:
"I too have heard it already distorted that I " will produce the Bowser KITS..." Simply not true, rubbish in fact, if Bowser can't make a go of it anymore, how could I? Yes, by all means counter the rumor."
Sorry guys!
From an earlier page of this thread. Eddystone isn't going to carry on the line.
Gary
andrechapelon As someone in our group pointed out, there is no doubt that the profit per steam kit was not able to compete with purchasing a current loco and reselling it. As much as we like to have something for all the different modelers, keeping the money coming in is definitely a priority with most businesses. Lee did offer to sell Bowser to us, but the amount is not feasible for us (or probably any other company at this time) to invest, especially during this financial time in our nation. I am not looking at purchasing Bowser, and he does not intend to sell just a part of it (i.e.: tooling for steam kits) at this time. When a rumor was brought to me about Lee making an "arrangement" with another company to carry on kits, I again visited with him, and he informed me, "I have not made any arrangements with anyone". He has stated that he does not intend to do so. That conversation took place yesterday. The post is dated March 5.
In other words what is in front of us is a position that opens the doors to other people to come in to fill the space---opportunity is there----
richg1998 I just copied this from another froum. You might consider it "juicy rumor". -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There is a posting on the Tyco Collector's board that has a letter from Eddystone Models. Apparently this company, that now makes drives, is buying the Bowser steam engine line.Good news for the old fossils like me that insist on building their own! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to the Eddystone site, they already build Bowser locomotives by request I guess.. Here is a link to the site. http://www.eddystonelocomotives.com/ Rich
I just copied this from another froum. You might consider it "juicy rumor".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a posting on the Tyco Collector's board that has a letter from Eddystone Models. Apparently this company, that now makes drives, is buying the Bowser steam engine line.Good news for the old fossils like me that insist on building their own!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the Eddystone site, they already build Bowser locomotives by request I guess.. Here is a link to the site.
http://www.eddystonelocomotives.com/
Rich
Eddystone uses Bowser chassis as a starting point and puts cast resin shells on them for most of their offerings.
I would discount the the statement about Eddystone. Lee English offered to to sell Bowser (the whole thing, not just the steam engine line) to Dan Bush of Yardbird Classic Trains. My understanding is that Lee English does not want to sell Bowser off piecemeal and that's backed up below.
Here's an excerpt from Dan Bush's posting on the Yardbirdtrains forum on Yahoo:
Heard same story--now to see whether it will happen----
If you ever fall over in public, pick yourself up and say “sorry it’s been a while since I inhabited a body.” And just walk away.
dinwitty There may be certain levels for kit building, basic screwdriver throw together kits, then you have the Bowsers that require some workmanship to finish, you might be drilling new holes, tapping, whatever, to add super details, or not but if your skilled to build a Bowser engine you have entered the realm of craftsman building. Imagine now if you scratchbuild your own steamer now, but that is possible.
There may be certain levels for kit building, basic screwdriver throw together kits, then you have the Bowsers that require some workmanship to finish, you might be drilling new holes, tapping, whatever, to add super details, or not but if your skilled to build a Bowser engine you have entered the realm of craftsman building. Imagine now if you scratchbuild your own steamer now, but that is possible.
I was going to say---AND YET THIS THREAD LIVES!!!!---ohno--ohno-
But in all seriousness--I think the idea of attempting something that involves learning curves does kind of challenge some mind sets. I'm not going to cave my cranium in if the horn--or whistle--is 6" off its prototype position. My goodness, how many people do I know model Texas and Gulf or such--not many.(in my case---none) So what if the dang thing is out by 6"? I'm more likely to worry about its cylinder type and positioning. And Bowser arguably made GOOD bases from which TO BUILD ON.
As for scratchbuilding---if I find it within my skillsets--I'd do it in a flash
And there is the rub---if I just accepted my skillset as a wall and did not challenge the thing how am I going to improve as a modeller without pushing myself? There is where we start to fall off the bucket, because we think, if my skillset only allows me to buy RTR then I'm not going to try further, if there is no ENCOURAGEMENT to stretch oneself---and by encouragement I mean the type that sees potential for improvement---telling the guy what can be improved and HOW and sees what is good in what they done. And if you know that the prototype for xyz RR had the whistle in 'X' position tell the poor little guffer before he puts the dang thing into the wrong space-----please??
hah, like the old Athearn RDC was made a window or 2 short so it can negotiate the 18" radius curves.
ITS NOT PROTOTYPE!!!! Theres article(s) on lengthening the RDC to correct length but your bashing 2 cars to do that.
Consider I want a Virginian Triplex, but the only thing out there is expensive brass. Someone made an Erie one using Mantua 2-8-2 mechanisms, and made the MR model of the month award. I followed that hype and found 3 mikes at a recent show and I may sometime make my own Trip. MTH didnt make the Virginian so there I go.
I wouldn't gloat around if a Pennsy K4 firebox was 6 inches too wide or short or the cab roof slightly narrow etc etc, if it gets the looks of the engine close enough, I'm pretty happy.
The hobby is about skilled building, but for many of those its drop on the tracks and look pretty. Thats what snap track is for.
Enjoy the hobby for how you choose it for, but there are deeper realms to enjoy in this hobby.