I am amazed that you are dwelling on the True Line fiasco for so long and also that you are so bitter.
I for one have one of these, bought at the bargain bin price and am quite happy with it. Quality wise I see very little difference between the True Line steam locomotive and any of my BLI or Spectrum steamers.
I bought the engine because there are so few Canadian models in the HO world.
The majority of my HO steam locomotive roster are PFM/Van Hobbies models ranging from the 1960's to the late 1980's.
Those of the HO model railroadesr wanting models based on real Canadain locomotives did not have much choice, and I would not value the mechanisms of those locomotives much more that that of a BLI or Spectrum.
I think it is time to let go and get on with life.
I would hate to think of the rants you would have if you ever bought a car that turned out to be a lemon.
Wow......four years later and still a comment! I had mentioned that a really fine repair person was going to make this model run well....Jan Willard! Well it stumped him. His comment was the mechanism was most likely from a very cheap run of the mill Bachmann 4-8-4 worth about $35 if that..... and that it was impossible to make gold from dross (crap). The box however is a fine piece of furniture not at all in keeping with this really lousy and incredibly over-priced choo choo.
Sorry to be negative, but I'm annoyed that I shelled out over $500 for what I thought was going to be a fine model and at half price to boot!
HZ
As of being someone in the business of machining at one time, I don't believe any of you have any idea as to what plastic injectin molds cost to machine. Firstly all the drawings are rendered from pictures and done with cad software. Alot more cost effective now than it was 30-35 yrs ago. Secondly machining of the injection molding dies is all done on a cnc machine. And thirdly ,it is all being done in China, where labour is cheap.
$75,00-$100,00 production costs??
Even that seems way too high.
As for TLT Northern, there were so many flaws in it, people were returning them.
After TLT recalled and refurbished them, alot of people still said NO to the price. And they steadily dropped the price to sell them.
TLT U2 484 northern, I have seen it being sold on thier own website for around the $400.00 mark.
Now, do you honestly think that they were selling them below thier cost??
The cost of making these engines is cheap, the quality is cheap, but the retail price is waaaayyy out of line.
yours truly,
Rapido A diesel locomotive does not cost $500K to tool. Tooling is very expensive, but not that expensive. I can see a steam engine costing over $300K to tool, but it would have to be extremely complex to reach half a million. One of our passenger cars can easily cost $100K to tool, so tooling is not cheap. This is why we manufacturers often have to paint models in non-prototypical paint schemes. Very few paint schemes today will warrant enough sales to cover those tooling costs. Or we produce lesser-detailed models that don't cost as much to make. When working in China we can't use aluminum tools, which would be a lot cheaper to make. Aluminum tools are not great for fine detail - the really fine stuff wears off more quickly than it does on steel and the tools are too easily damaged. It can be done, but to me the risks are too high. Who wants to spend $5K and two weeks on one finely-detail truck mould just to have an injection worker pry a stuck part out with a steel screwdriver? You can imagine what that would do to an aluminum mould. The costs of tooling have not dropped at all. For most manufacturers, they have actually increased by over 100% in the last decade. -Jason
A diesel locomotive does not cost $500K to tool. Tooling is very expensive, but not that expensive. I can see a steam engine costing over $300K to tool, but it would have to be extremely complex to reach half a million.
One of our passenger cars can easily cost $100K to tool, so tooling is not cheap. This is why we manufacturers often have to paint models in non-prototypical paint schemes. Very few paint schemes today will warrant enough sales to cover those tooling costs. Or we produce lesser-detailed models that don't cost as much to make.
When working in China we can't use aluminum tools, which would be a lot cheaper to make. Aluminum tools are not great for fine detail - the really fine stuff wears off more quickly than it does on steel and the tools are too easily damaged.
It can be done, but to me the risks are too high. Who wants to spend $5K and two weeks on one finely-detail truck mould just to have an injection worker pry a stuck part out with a steel screwdriver? You can imagine what that would do to an aluminum mould.
The costs of tooling have not dropped at all. For most manufacturers, they have actually increased by over 100% in the last decade.
-Jason
Thanks for your explanation. At least you clarified that the costs to cut tools varies, depending on whether you are making plastic cutlery for the dollar store, or a precision piece like a videocassette shell that has tolerances to meet, or even a detailed, precise casting of a CPR passenger car for The Canadian.
(Maybe you can go on tour with your tools?)
I'd also like to thank Jason for his input.
Information from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
Cheers
Roger T.
Home of the late Great Eastern Railway see: - http://www.greateasternrailway.com
For more photos of the late GER see: - http://s94.photobucket.com/albums/l99/rogertra/Great_Eastern/
selector Jason, I can't tell you how much of a pleasure it is to see someone in the business pipe up and share his personal knowledge of the industry. If nothing else, it helps all of us to start discussions from a more informed and standardized platform. Thank-you for feeling comfortable enough about your own part in the hobby and what you think your customers should know of it. I feel it brings us all together...quite a bit more, actually. And it helps to demystify the production of items whose prices keep rising. Crandell
Jason, I can't tell you how much of a pleasure it is to see someone in the business pipe up and share his personal knowledge of the industry. If nothing else, it helps all of us to start discussions from a more informed and standardized platform. Thank-you for feeling comfortable enough about your own part in the hobby and what you think your customers should know of it. I feel it brings us all together...quite a bit more, actually. And it helps to demystify the production of items whose prices keep rising.
Crandell
Crandell,
The pleasure is all mine. I believe that if the model railroad community knows the facts, they will see that a lot of the choices made by the manufacturers - which may seem counter-intuitive on the surface - have solid reasoning behind them. As modellers we often forget that there is an economic side to the industry and decisions need to be made due to financial circumstances which may not always be ideal.
Best regards,
Jason
Jason Shron - President - Rapido Trains Inc. - RapidoTrains.comMy HO scale Kingston Sub layout: Facebook.com/KingstonSub
betamax rogertra: I keep reading figures like $500,000 on all model railroad news groups for new tooling and dies. What's this figure based upon, if anything, or is it just the figure that everybody quotes "because I read somewhere that it costs $500,000....."? Show me, other than a quote on another model railroad group, how people arrive at this figure, or is it just a model railroader myth? Not that i don't believe it, I just want proof from a non model railroad group or vested interest group, like a manufacturer's site, on how this figure is arrived at. That would be a reasonable figure, for precision, high accuracy tools made in North America. The production supervisor at one plant I was in mentioned the tools in the injection moulding machines was $100,000, thirty years ago, and it cast the shells for floppy disks. You pay by the hour to make these things, plus the cost of the material. It all takes time, and the more complex it is, the more time required.
rogertra: I keep reading figures like $500,000 on all model railroad news groups for new tooling and dies. What's this figure based upon, if anything, or is it just the figure that everybody quotes "because I read somewhere that it costs $500,000....."? Show me, other than a quote on another model railroad group, how people arrive at this figure, or is it just a model railroader myth? Not that i don't believe it, I just want proof from a non model railroad group or vested interest group, like a manufacturer's site, on how this figure is arrived at.
I keep reading figures like $500,000 on all model railroad news groups for new tooling and dies.
What's this figure based upon, if anything, or is it just the figure that everybody quotes "because I read somewhere that it costs $500,000....."?
Show me, other than a quote on another model railroad group, how people arrive at this figure, or is it just a model railroader myth? Not that i don't believe it, I just want proof from a non model railroad group or vested interest group, like a manufacturer's site, on how this figure is arrived at.
That would be a reasonable figure, for precision, high accuracy tools made in North America. The production supervisor at one plant I was in mentioned the tools in the injection moulding machines was $100,000, thirty years ago, and it cast the shells for floppy disks.
You pay by the hour to make these things, plus the cost of the material. It all takes time, and the more complex it is, the more time required.
In this case there are two very different influences that have occurred over thirty years. We all know what inflation has done, especially when it comes to labor rates of highly skilled craftsmen. But technology has even greater strides and you may well find that a lot of that expensive labour has been replaced by a digital CAD file controlling an expensive machine that cuts the tools.
I don't think we are any closer to an answer. The machinery itself needs to be amortized but quite possibly the material cost for cutting any specific tool has become fairly nominal. There will be labour costs for creating and tweaking the CAD file but it is easier and faster to make a few adjustments with a computer keyboard than correcting a physical tool.
How much do new tooling and dies cost; frankly I have no idea. But on the whole my guess is that the cost has dropped, possibly very significantly.
John
{Chose to delete my reply to this, but apparently that is no longer possible}
-Fritz Milhaupt, Publications Editor, Pere Marquette Historical Society, Inc.http://www.pmhistsoc.org
rogertra I keep reading figures like $500,000 on all model railroad news groups for new tooling and dies. What's this figure based upon, if anything, or is it just the figure that everybody quotes "because I read somewhere that it costs $500,000....."? Show me, other than a quote on another model railroad group, how people arrive at this figure, or is it just a model railroader myth? Not that i don't believe it, I just want proof from a non model railroad group or vested interest group, like a manufacturer's site, on how this figure is arrived at.
TA462 A aluminum tool to make an automotive seat cushion costs around 10 grand. That tool will produce over 800 THOUSAND pieces in it's roughly 4 year life span. Aluminum is the material of choice when making tools. Tool and die makers are obsolete now, everything is cut useing a 3 axis machine that is programmed. The actual making of the tool is the easy part. Ask me how I know. NEWS FLASH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! True Line Trains has drastically reduced the prices of these locomotives. I just recently (Wednesday) picked up two more and I'm thinking about maybe another one. Look around, they are going for $425 or less at a few select hobby shops. That is right in line with what a plastic loco should be.
A aluminum tool to make an automotive seat cushion costs around 10 grand. That tool will produce over 800 THOUSAND pieces in it's roughly 4 year life span. Aluminum is the material of choice when making tools. Tool and die makers are obsolete now, everything is cut useing a 3 axis machine that is programmed. The actual making of the tool is the easy part. Ask me how I know.
NEWS FLASH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! True Line Trains has drastically reduced the prices of these locomotives. I just recently (Wednesday) picked up two more and I'm thinking about maybe another one. Look around, they are going for $425 or less at a few select hobby shops. That is right in line with what a plastic loco should be.
The cost and lifespan of a tool depends on the materials and the degree of precision you want. A simple tool will last a long time and be cheap to make.
A complex tool used to cast a precision item, such as a well detailed steam locomotive boiler, will cost a lot more. How long it has to last, well, that depends on how much wear you will tolerate, and how much you are willing to pay for the material it is made of.
These items, and those such as Rapido's products, are not the same as plastic caps for Coke bottles.
Paul,
I NEVER said ALL anywhere in this conversation. I know full well that they have made some upgrades, fixed some old problems and tooled some new models.
But there are still many items that are the same as the first day I walked behind the counter of a hobby shop to start work in 1969.
And, changing one part to solve a known problem or improve detail is not the same cost as retooling the intire model.
Here is one that is still exactly the same - 50' flat car with two vans - only the paint jobs have improved - all the parts are exactly the same.
Bay window cabooses now have better ladders and end rails, plastic rather than metal, but everything else about them is the same.
And some of that MDC tooling was obviously deemed a better choice for some upgrades than the Athearn versions.
A few upgrades are way different than wholesale replacement. And since many of the parts still interchange it is clear that upgrade is what they have done - not retool completely.
Sheldon
Sheldon,Not all Athearn RTR's are the exact same tooling as the previous Blue Box & Roundhouse kits were.
For example, the old line of cars almost always needed a Kadee red washer on the truck bolster to bring the coupler up to the correct height. New tooled underframes under Athearn RTR's have a slightly taller bolster plate, eliminating the need for the Kadee red washer.
Not impressed? Okay, how about the 85' TOFC's that Athearn RTR has made. They have a totally different coupler installation and have additional weights added (both were major flaws with the old BB kits...so much so that A-Line had replacement weights with new coupler pockets cast in place). Also, the 5th wheels are completely different as well.
The 85' TOFC too unusual? Then what about the universal 40' PS-1 boxcar? The new Athearn RTR version is not the old BB tooling at all. Now, the original Athearn RTR 40' PS-1 boxcars were, indeed, merely assembled versions of their old BB kits. However, right around the time that Horizon aquired Roundhouse, the 40' PS-1's from Athearn appear to be from completely new or updated tooling.
I havean Athearn RTR 40' PS-1 boxcar for the PRR "Merchandise Service" #30998. It's on the Athearn website as being announced in December, 2002. It is the Athearn BB tooling, complete with metal coupler covers, under-the-floor weight (painted black), big "door claws" for the operating doors, and all the other normal Athearn BB features and flaws (but it does have the thicker floor bolster).
I also have Athearn RTR 40' PS-1 boxcar for the NH (in McGinnis all-orange) #32198. It's on the Athearn website as being announced in June, 2005. The differences between it and the old Athearn BB are clear. The underframe is completely different. The metal weight is inside the car, and the underframe is all one piece. The coupler covers are plastic and screw into the floor. Even the trucks are different, with the newly tooled ones being much crisper with more detail on the springs and journal covers. The carbody is also of a different tool. The doors do not operate, and therefore do not have the "door claws" or the oversize door runners. The two grabs on the left side of the car are of the "H" pattern and not of the old drop step style as on the BB's. The body rivets are much finer and there's more of them all over the carbody. The brakewheel is different and smaller, and the stirrup steps are much finer looking and have a different shape.
Now it appears that the new Athearn RTR 40' PS-1 boxcar is merely the old Roundhouse tooling. However, it has been upgraded significantly. I also have an MDC/Roundhouse 40' PS-1 boxcar kit from the end of the company before Horizon bought them out. It's a NH boxcar red "script logo" 40' PS-1 #30593, production date unknown. The floor is plastic and not metal as was normal for most MDC items wayback in the day, and MDC was movoing away from cast metal underframes there at the end.
The comparison of the MDC to the later Athearn RTR 40' PS-1 boxcar shows that the underframe, while simular, is different. The floor joists are of different shape and size, and the air tank, triple valve, and air cylinder are all in different places (heck, on the MDC tooling, they are cast into the floor; on the Athearn RTR, they are different pieces). The MDC boxcars have operating doors (and door claws) as on the old Athearn BB's, but these have been replaced with non-operating doors without "claws". The strirrup steps are cast into the floor and are mere retangles while the Athearn RTR's are finer and shaped correctly. The grabs on the MDC are of the drop step type, while on the Athearn they are of the "H" type.
The poling pockets and the roofs are indentical, as well as the location and detail of the tackboards on the ends (they even have the same exact flaw), which indicates that it is, indeed, the MDC tooling. As shown, however, it's been highly upgraded and modified.
I can't run through every Athearn RTR, but at least with the 85' TOFC and the 40' PS-1 boxcar, the fact is that they are not the merely the old Athearn/MDC kits put together. They actually put some real money into fixing up these old cars, which therefore justifies their higher prices. And that's not getting into the knuckle couplers (yeah, they stink, but they're better than X2F's) and the metal wheels (the cheapest I found on Walthers website were Kadee wheels at $0.71 each...or $2.84 per car).
Paul A. Cutler III
Kit vs RTR witht he same tooling: for an extra couple of extra bucjs labor cost to assemble the model , you can sell it as RTR for $30 instead of as a kit for $8. Even where labor isn't as cheap as in CHina, it still has a much larger profit margin than the hardware. Which is wmy my company doesn;t care too much if you buy your equipment from us, as long as we do the installation.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
betamax Once upon a time, cutting tools was very expensive. Hundreds of thousands of dollars. You needed a very skilled tool and die maker, particularly for more complex stuff. Harder materials mean more time is needed. Things have gotten more expensive as the tool and die maker is becoming harder to find here in North America. But they are still around. Five hundred thousand is a reasonable cost for a tool. Depending on the metal it is made of and the complexity. For something like the True Line limited run locomotive, they could cut a tool in aluminum that would have a life of about 1000 cycles, or less, depending on your tolerances. They could get those cut in China for a lot less than those made here. They might be able to get all the tools cut for $25,000 in China, which is a significant saving. Once they are done, they can sell the tools for their scrap value. Where Athearn can save money is by cutting simple tools that only make something like coupler boxes, instead of complex tools that made the big black sprue with all the parts you would see in the box. It is a lot cheaper that way, and they can make common parts in large quantity that way, and use them as they need them. They also save in setup fees, as they don't have to carefully remove one tool to install another for a limited run of parts.
Once upon a time, cutting tools was very expensive. Hundreds of thousands of dollars. You needed a very skilled tool and die maker, particularly for more complex stuff. Harder materials mean more time is needed.
Things have gotten more expensive as the tool and die maker is becoming harder to find here in North America. But they are still around.
Five hundred thousand is a reasonable cost for a tool. Depending on the metal it is made of and the complexity. For something like the True Line limited run locomotive, they could cut a tool in aluminum that would have a life of about 1000 cycles, or less, depending on your tolerances. They could get those cut in China for a lot less than those made here. They might be able to get all the tools cut for $25,000 in China, which is a significant saving. Once they are done, they can sell the tools for their scrap value.
Where Athearn can save money is by cutting simple tools that only make something like coupler boxes, instead of complex tools that made the big black sprue with all the parts you would see in the box. It is a lot cheaper that way, and they can make common parts in large quantity that way, and use them as they need them. They also save in setup fees, as they don't have to carefully remove one tool to install another for a limited run of parts.
Nobody is disputing any of that, but the design and construction of a great many Athearn products is exactly the same now as it was when they were made here. The parts are IDENTICAL. I know because I have disassembled a number of Ready to Roll cars in my kitbashing and compared them to their US made blue box counter parts. So if Athean already had high quality steel tooling, it is unlikely they have paid for new tooling.
You may not be familiar with the Athearn line, but I have been in this hobby for 40 years and worked in several hobby shops. I am very familiar with a large precentage of the Athearn product line. Only the small parts sometimes came attached to a sprue. Athearns large parts always appeared to come from a single item tool. Many of the kits had some or all of even the small parts in a paper envelope, not on a sprue.
Since a fair number of their parts interchange betwwen products, seperate tools would make sense anyway. Example - they make wood side and steel side reefers. EVERY part is the same except the sidewall/floor casting - been making them that way since the early 60's.
They sell seven different heavy weight passenger cars, that share only three different floors and all use the same trucks, lighting kit and some of the same window inserts.
So they may have been ahead of their time in injection molding planning and use. I doubt they ever had "complete set" tooling for each product. Their coupler boxes are molded into the frames, the covers are metal, freight trucks are all the same mounting, etc.
Now in recent time they have retired a few products in favor of newer tooling they got when MDC was aquired, but the same was true over at MDC, lots of common parts to all kits.
Fact still remains, the final product sold by Athearn today as RTR is in many cases the exact same product they sold in blue box kits for decades.
Where does this $500K tooling cost come from?
Has anyone any hard evidence or proof that this is really the cost or is it another of those myths created because at some point, someone, somewhere. read that the tooling costs for something was $500K and now become a model railroad "fact" only because it's constantly repeated on boards like this.
Of course, no manufacturer will say otherwise as for them, it's convenient myth, if in fact it is a myth, as they can then justify their prices.
As for the True-Line 4-8-4, it costs what it costs because it's a Canadian model, of a Canadian locomotive, made by a Canadian company and that alone can justify a sky high price because, "Canadians are accustomed to paying higher prices than Americans."
It's just the way it is. Don't believe me?
Check out American ads for "Sleep Country" Vs the same "Sleep Country Canada" products in Canada.
Check out hobby store prices Vs the same items in Canada.
etc, etc..
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Flashwave: betamax: In China you can cut tools cheaply. The cost depends on several factors, one of which is the material it is made from. If you only want a 1000 units, you can make a tool for that purpose quite cheaply. Cheap labour and materials make a big difference. How can Rapido tool an entire passenger train, with locomotives, and sell it for $1500 each in a limited run, if the tools cost $500k each? Athearn stopped selling kits because the tooling to make them cost a lot more than simple tools needed to make tens of the same part that they will assemble before shipping. I'm no expert on this, but I thought the Kit and RTRs were the same pieces, just that one is and one isn't assembled? Flashwave, you are correct, most of the Athearn products are exactly the same as they were when offered in kit form. Some have been upgraded slightly, but most parts remain the same, made with the same tooling. Athearn I suspect is still investing in high quality steel tooling that will last for hundreds of thousands of pieces. Actually, before kit production stopped, in the transition to China production of RTR, most of the injection molding was still done here and parts sent to China for painting and assembly. Some others in this business are still doing this - just think about several smaller brands that offer kits and RTR - their tooling and injection work is done here still. Sheldon
Flashwave: betamax: In China you can cut tools cheaply. The cost depends on several factors, one of which is the material it is made from. If you only want a 1000 units, you can make a tool for that purpose quite cheaply. Cheap labour and materials make a big difference. How can Rapido tool an entire passenger train, with locomotives, and sell it for $1500 each in a limited run, if the tools cost $500k each? Athearn stopped selling kits because the tooling to make them cost a lot more than simple tools needed to make tens of the same part that they will assemble before shipping. I'm no expert on this, but I thought the Kit and RTRs were the same pieces, just that one is and one isn't assembled?
betamax: In China you can cut tools cheaply. The cost depends on several factors, one of which is the material it is made from. If you only want a 1000 units, you can make a tool for that purpose quite cheaply. Cheap labour and materials make a big difference. How can Rapido tool an entire passenger train, with locomotives, and sell it for $1500 each in a limited run, if the tools cost $500k each? Athearn stopped selling kits because the tooling to make them cost a lot more than simple tools needed to make tens of the same part that they will assemble before shipping.
In China you can cut tools cheaply. The cost depends on several factors, one of which is the material it is made from. If you only want a 1000 units, you can make a tool for that purpose quite cheaply.
Cheap labour and materials make a big difference.
How can Rapido tool an entire passenger train, with locomotives, and sell it for $1500 each in a limited run, if the tools cost $500k each?
Athearn stopped selling kits because the tooling to make them cost a lot more than simple tools needed to make tens of the same part that they will assemble before shipping.
I'm no expert on this, but I thought the Kit and RTRs were the same pieces, just that one is and one isn't assembled?
Flashwave, you are correct, most of the Athearn products are exactly the same as they were when offered in kit form. Some have been upgraded slightly, but most parts remain the same, made with the same tooling.
Athearn I suspect is still investing in high quality steel tooling that will last for hundreds of thousands of pieces. Actually, before kit production stopped, in the transition to China production of RTR, most of the injection molding was still done here and parts sent to China for painting and assembly.
Some others in this business are still doing this - just think about several smaller brands that offer kits and RTR - their tooling and injection work is done here still.
Then what's the difference? if it's the same piece getting assembled or not?
-Morgan
betamax Someone mentioned elsewhere that making the sprue with all the little pieces costs more than just making a tool the molds, for example 100 coupler boxes each shot. Simpler tool, less cost. Since all the pieces are alike, planning the flow of plastic, etc, is simplified in the process too. They can get tools made the makes hundreds of identical pieces every cycle, which saves them money. Since some of those parts are common to every project, they can save a lot of money in the process. Like wheel sets, coupler boxes, brake wheels... Not to mention setup and teardown costs associated with the tooling during production. With the money saved they can invest in better tools, which means we get a better end product.
Someone mentioned elsewhere that making the sprue with all the little pieces costs more than just making a tool the molds, for example 100 coupler boxes each shot. Simpler tool, less cost. Since all the pieces are alike, planning the flow of plastic, etc, is simplified in the process too.
They can get tools made the makes hundreds of identical pieces every cycle, which saves them money. Since some of those parts are common to every project, they can save a lot of money in the process. Like wheel sets, coupler boxes, brake wheels... Not to mention setup and teardown costs associated with the tooling during production.
With the money saved they can invest in better tools, which means we get a better end product.
There is some truth to that, and yes some "economy of scale", but that gain would not justify Athearn making new tools for products they already have high quality tooling for. It would only apply to the choices when making new tooling.
As some one who has worked in this business, been around model trains since the 60's, and who as purchased a great number of Athearn products both then and now, I can assure that the changes in the product are very small, so I doubt there has been much if any retooling just because of the China production.
Sheldon.
Flashwave betamax: In China you can cut tools cheaply. The cost depends on several factors, one of which is the material it is made from. If you only want a 1000 units, you can make a tool for that purpose quite cheaply. Cheap labour and materials make a big difference. How can Rapido tool an entire passenger train, with locomotives, and sell it for $1500 each in a limited run, if the tools cost $500k each? Athearn stopped selling kits because the tooling to make them cost a lot more than simple tools needed to make tens of the same part that they will assemble before shipping. I'm no expert on this, but I thought the Kit and RTRs were the same pieces, just that one is and one isn't assembled?
betamax In China you can cut tools cheaply. The cost depends on several factors, one of which is the material it is made from. If you only want a 1000 units, you can make a tool for that purpose quite cheaply. Cheap labour and materials make a big difference. How can Rapido tool an entire passenger train, with locomotives, and sell it for $1500 each in a limited run, if the tools cost $500k each? Athearn stopped selling kits because the tooling to make them cost a lot more than simple tools needed to make tens of the same part that they will assemble before shipping.
Howard Zane Wow! This thread is almost 18 months old! Still my major point is that I will always take off my hat and say "Thanks" to any model railroad manufacturer. This was TLT'S first attempt with a steam model. I'm for giving them a chance. I don't think the molds cost upwards of $500,000. $75-$100,000 would seem more resonable. No business man would spend a half a million for $100,000 of product unless he is into politics. HZ
Wow! This thread is almost 18 months old! Still my major point is that I will always take off my hat and say "Thanks" to any model railroad manufacturer. This was TLT'S first attempt with a steam model. I'm for giving them a chance. I don't think the molds cost upwards of $500,000. $75-$100,000 would seem more resonable. No business man would spend a half a million for $100,000 of product unless he is into politics.
Howard
As you probably know, Sunset is bringing in a brass Selkirk with sound for about the same price as the CN 4-8-4 and I agree, the tooling could not have cost $500,000 for the True Line CN 4-8-4. It looks nice but seems too high in price to be purchased by most model railroader I know. I will be getting the Selkirk for about the same price as the Sunset NP Z6 was a year or so ago. Both seem like bargains compared to the CN 4-8-4, but if someone wants the CN model, they must pay the price.
It seems to me that lately that the O scale brass Sunset models are very reasonable in price compared to their HO models. Could it be that they sell a lot more O scale models?? I also realize they are not super detailed but do look nice in general.
And to add to the thought process, how can BLI continue to import Brass/ Hybrid models at half the price?
CZ
I purchased my model about 3 months ago. I don't have a model layout any more; however I must say that this model is by far the most detailed locomotive I have ever seen.
Sure...it is largely plastic with a metal core but this plastic is very strong and when handled properly, it is very durable.
When you consider the electronic special effects and a hi low beam headlight, sound obtained from a cnr northern and smoke effects to name but a few of it's features...and I think a fair price...it is a very good buy.
Lastly but not least; I have found TLT support to be tops.
There are very few of these engines available. this is not a plug for TLT...just an observation.
saabguy
cudaken Why would a plastic engine cost that much and why has MTH not sued them yet?
Why would a plastic engine cost that much and why has MTH not sued them yet?
Ken
I hope you are being a little rhetorical here. The tooling costs for this locomotive are more than 6 figures, probably closer to 1/2 million. Since the market for the model is extremely limited, the importer chose to have 1,000 made - quite a risk IMHO. So the tooling costs alone are somewhere in the area of $100 to $500 per model, more likely towards the higher end of the range.
If you don't make models that will sell large runs in plastic, the tooling costs per unit is very high. Blackstone is dealing with the HOn3 market, where you can't sell large runs of plastic, either. The story I heard is that the original run of K-27s was 1500 pieces. They did well enough to re-run, but inflation has been rampant in China, too. The next run is going to cost more, not less - as is the C-19 coming out in less than a year. The plastic RTR cars that started out at less than $40 are now up to $50+. FWIW, Blackstone also uses Kader (Bachmann's Chinese manufacturer and owner) to make their locomotives.
I think that when the current contracts for Chinese model locomotive production run out, you are going to see some serious price increases across the board. I'm afraid Chinese die-cast/plastic is doomed to the same price and production size spiral that Japanese and Korean brass went through. And the present abundance of new tooling will decrease significantly. You won't be seeing more than one or two new locomotives/year/importer, and some of those importers will drop back to just re-running existing models with a few token changes, or drop out altogether - just like the 1980s when brass prices went through the roof.
I was initially surprised at the decision of plastic over brass, but perhaps Blackstone's unpredicted success in HOn3 spurred True Line. Blackstone came in with a plastic K-27 at close to the price of used brass version, but they succeeded because they had the 1st HOn3 locomotive that would run on a layout right out of the box (most of the time), and the detail was comparable to a lot of brass. I'm thinking True Line is using the same business model.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W