First, a disclaimer - I am not selling anything!
Here is my question... Say we have three premium rolling stock kits - one each from Red Caboose, Intermountain, and Tichy.
And then we have three of the same aforementioned kits that are built up (nice job) and ready to run.
Of the two situations, which would be worth more to you and others?
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
I often consider the "play value" of a kit vs. an RTR model. I really take a lot of pride in a kit I've assembled myself. My carfloat idler flats and my Hide Service Only boxcars thet run from the packing plant to the tannery are all Tichy models, with my own decals, which makes them all unique.
I feel the same about structure kits. I am happier spending a few weeks assembling, illuminating, painting and detailing a 4-walls-and-a-roof kit than just pulling something out of a box.
I paint and decal a few engines for my home road. That's just shell work, though.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Which would be more popular? RTR.
Which would I prefer? Kit.
While I appreciate RTR and its availability, like MB - I find more pleasure and satisfaction in assembling kits. A kit also allows me to make changes should I decide to add or change something - e.g. adding interior or exterior detailing not offered with the RTR product.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
I'd venture the modeller's demographic is a significant factor in what is chosen here. Even if we dismiss the issue of available funds, I'm guessing older modellers are the more inclined to prefer the kit. Not just for the satisfaction, but for the exercise of skills gained through the years. A job well done is a reward of it's own making.
(Attuvian) John
If I understand your question, you are refering to an "aftermarket" situation where someone builds the kit and then sells it - correct?
I would much rather build the kit myself. In my whole 57 years at this hobby, I have only purchased a handfull of items built by another modeler, or things "used" as in spent time actually operating on someone elses layout.
I have bought lots of of "new old stock" unbuilt kits, and/or RTR locos and rolling stock.
My view on this is reflected in lots of things in my larger life style. Once I could afford new cars, I have not really bought any used ones. If it runs on electricity or gasoline, I am not very inclined to buy it used.
Sheldon
.
RTR would be my choice. Not that I don't enjoy building a kit now and then, but nowadays with the sun racing across the sky at break-neck speed each and every day I prefer spending the majority of my modeling time doing what I like best; weathering RTR rolling stock. 'So much to model, so little time.'
Regards, Peter
mobilman44which would be worth more to you
Hi mobilman44,
I much prefer kits as long as they don't try my patience. A few years ago I bought two LaBelle wood passenger car kits because they were the closest thing I could find to run on my small version of the Algoma Eastern Railway that ran from Sudbury to Little Current on the Manitoulin Island. The kits required a level of skill that I didn't feel I possessed at the time so they were parked on a back shelf. I have a Tichy 200 ton crane kit that sits beside them. They are all still way down on my priority list.
What I do like doing is fixing up older kits that someone has already assembled but that have suffered through the ages. I just bought a number of tin bodied Athearn and Varney assembled kits and two white metal freight cars of unknown origin. I don't have to worry about adding weight to those two babies!
Cheers!!
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
tstageWhich would be more popular? RTR. Which would I prefer? Kit. While I appreciate RTR and its availability, like MB - I find more pleasure and satisfaction in assembling kits. A kit also allows me to make changes should I decide to add or change something - e.g. adding interior or exterior detailing not offered with the RTR product. Tom
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
I find that I am in both camps depending on the situation. I have gotten a few RTR cars that I have had to do some relettering on due to issues with the car numbers. (Duplicates sometimes or sometimes inaccurate numbers.) There even have been a couple that I've had to completely reletter as the letteering styles were wrong. I've also had a few kits that were that way as well.
Many of my cars and engines were kits (Athearn BB, MDC pre-Horizon Hobby, Accurail, etc). However, I do have RTR cars as well as some RTR on Advance Reservation as that's the only way to get them.
It all depends on what I think I need.
I really enjoy the occasional kit build every now-and-then. I kind of use them to 'cleanse the palate' in between larger modeling projects. I had built quite a few Red Caboose, Intermountain and the ever ubiquitous Life-Like Proto kits going back to the late '90s.
I consider Tichy along with Carmelingo & Funaro and Westerfield types of kits more of a 'craftsman-level' kit as much of the brake rigging and piping has to be fabricated by the modeler but I have done a few of both, mainly because there were no other available options for securing that particular model.
However when it comes to things like the Rapido GLa hopper or F22 flat car when I might have 2 or 3 dozen in the roster or perhaps the Intermountain 40' box car where I really DO need 40 or so NYC 'Pacemaker' cars I really don't want to devote a couple hours each toward having a finished model. RTR is my friend.
I still have a stack of Life-Like Proto car kits on the shelf and really enjoy grabbing one when I don't have any other 'pressing' projects in the queue. They're sort of like revisiting old friends. Honestly, I really can't distinguish which cars, say out of the fleet of tank cars or drop-end mill gons passing by which ones I built from a kit or which ones I bought RTR. In the end there's great satisfaction in seeing both.
For the freelancers, I'm glad that there are still a few sources for unpainted rolling stock out there but I think their popularity is waning. Plus the manufacturers are claiming production interruptions to provide kits or parts. Many present-day modelers have no facility for painting nor the patience for decal work, if indeed there are decals available.
Cheers, Ed
mobilman44 First, a disclaimer - I am not selling anything! Here is my question... Say we have three premium rolling stock kits - one each from Red Caboose, Intermountain, and Tichy. And then we have three of the same aforementioned kits that are built up (nice job) and ready to run. Of the two situations, which would be worth more to you and others?
RTR. I find assembling cars and locos to be boring, and painting and decalling them is down-right mind-numbing.
I don't over detail my layout, because I fully understand that a model railroad is purely representational.
Every building on my layout is either scratchbuilt, where I want a representation of a specific structure, or heavily kitbashed where I just want a representation of a structure type.
I view my modelling effort as scratchbuilding a model railroad. Rolling stock is just a component of that.
I've been in the hobby since I was 14, more intensely since about 2000.
I've never really enjoyed building models of rolling stock. Athearn/MDC/Accurail were simple enough and kinda fun, but I don't have the patience to detail individual cars. I hate applying all of the tedious details.
OTOH, I love kitbashing structures. Tearing apart poorly built kits found at train shows to make a silk purse out of a sows ear is a lot of fun for me. Conversely, I hate the look of RTR buildings.
RTR for the rolling stock and locos. Kits for the structures.
BTW, selling built structures doesn't work very well. Bulky and hard/expensive to ship.
Edit: I agree with AEP528 just above.
Edit 2: And the only assembled kit I would ever buy is one assembled at the factory (AKA RTR). Never a kit assembled by an individual.
- Douglas
Interesting responses, but I wonder if anyone else understood the question the way I took it?
I could be wrong, but this sounds like a curiosity question crafted to get informative responses without divulging why the question is being asked. Admittedly a process I am not generally fond of.
So in my response, I asked for clarification of the question, still hoping for a reply from the OP.
I will say this about the various responses, they clearly show how the hobby has changed in the last 50 years.
Funny but all companys mentioned are connected in some way. Intermountain owns Red Caboose and both companys (even though one company now) use Tichy as parts or compleat kits which they turn into RTR.
The question has bugged me for some time. I've bought and sold a lot of rolling stock and locos (Ebay) and find the trend going from kit to RTR over the 24 years I've been "in the market". I'm sure that is no surprise to anyone here.
But the pricing (I'm a retired business analyst) of the two forms intrigues me. RTR is always higher as its always "new", and of course prices have gone up over time.
Kit prices have gone up some, with (IMO) the lack of demand keeping the supply and prices suppressed. Again, no big surprise here.
But what I do find "notable" is that well built railcar kits sell for the same car in kit form or less. ASSUMING the quality of the build is there, I would feel that the built up kit would sell for more - perhaps not what an original RTR would go for, but certainly more than the unbuilt kits.
Oh, to hopefully calm suspicions of ulterior motives..... I had a 600 plus railcar inventory of kits and build ups. Today I have ONE built up, and THREE kits, and they are NOT for sale.
mobilman44 But what I do find "notable" is that well built railcar kits sell for the same car in kit form or less. ASSUMING the quality of the build is there, I would feel that the built up kit would sell for more - perhaps not what an original RTR would go for, but certainly more than the unbuilt kits.
If I were to pay someone to build a kit for me, I would expect to pay the cost of the kit plus the builder's fee.
On the other hand, an already built kit, regardless of quality, is a second-hand product. It cannot be distinguished from a well-done, assembled kit on a flea market table.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I will say this about the various responses, they clearly show how the hobby has changed in the last 50 years. Sheldon
The biggest change is that modellers can spend more time on the things they want to do, as opposed to things they have to do. Don't make the mistake of assuming that all modellers 50+ years ago put the effort into kit- and scratch-building because they wanted to.
I will cite Allen McClelland as proof of that. He credits the existence of the V&O to the availability of RTR (or near RTR) locomotive and rolling stock models. And that was 60+ years ago. To paraphrase, because I don't have the V&O Story nearby, he was able to spend time "building a model railroad, instead of railroad models."
AEP528Don't make the mistake of assuming that all modellers 50+ years ago put the effort into kit- and scratch-building because they wanted to.
I agree with this 100%. Just because "everybody" scratchbuilt or kit built decades ago, doesn't mean they actually wanted to.
A lot of it was driven by the desire to have more specific models or better details than what they could buy generically. A necessary (evil) tradeoff. Far fewer did it simply because they wanted to be a craftsman. I have no interest in being a craftsman. I assume there is a lot of us in the hobby, and always was.
RTR and greater availability of models has increased my interest in the hobby, not diminished it.
mobilman44 The question has bugged me for some time. I've bought and sold a lot of rolling stock and locos (Ebay) and find the trend going from kit to RTR over the 24 years I've been "in the market". I'm sure that is no surprise to anyone here. But the pricing (I'm a retired business analyst) of the two forms intrigues me. RTR is always higher as its always "new", and of course prices have gone up over time. Kit prices have gone up some, with (IMO) the lack of demand keeping the supply and prices suppressed. Again, no big surprise here. But what I do find "notable" is that well built railcar kits sell for the same car in kit form or less. ASSUMING the quality of the build is there, I would feel that the built up kit would sell for more - perhaps not what an original RTR would go for, but certainly more than the unbuilt kits. Oh, to hopefully calm suspicions of ulterior motives..... I had a 600 plus railcar inventory of kits and build ups. Today I have ONE built up, and THREE kits, and they are NOT for sale.
IMO, an RTR model is the same thing as an assembled kit, so the price should be the same. The guy who built his kit on his workbench is competing with the labor costs (and shipping I guess) of the talented young lady building the same kit in China. He's not going to be able to sell his talent and labor for more than hers, IMO.
When Proto went RTR from kits, their RTR was exactly the same as the kit. It was even described as an "assembled kit". And today, the undecorated versions you can buy from manufacturers tend to simply be the same parts as the RTR, just in disassembled form.
Now, if that guy is adding different parts, different paint, maybe weathering...better couplers, etc. then he's adding value to the assembled kit from what the market can get from RTR China.
When it comes to rolling stock, I don't build kits, never have, never will. But, then, I only got into scale model railroading 20 years ago. Although kits were still readily available back then, I had no interest in them because RTR stuff was also readily available. I had my fill of building kits, tanks, planes, ships and cars when I was a kid.
Rich
Alton Junction
Way back when I was in the hobby shop business, I dealt directly with Intermountain. Intermountain was experimenting with RTR car offerings. Their salesman explained it this way, "we can ship our kits to China for assembly, get them built, reboxed, and shipped back to the USA for $4.00 a car." Of course, the mark up I paid was significantly more as a dealer. I sold very few RTR Intermountain cars, and I think retail was $22 a car (back in 1999).
AEP528 ATLANTIC CENTRAL I will say this about the various responses, they clearly show how the hobby has changed in the last 50 years. Sheldon The biggest change is that modellers can spend more time on the things they want to do, as opposed to things they have to do. Don't make the mistake of assuming that all modellers 50+ years ago put the effort into kit- and scratch-building because they wanted to. I will cite Allen McClelland as proof of that. He credits the existence of the V&O to the availability of RTR (or near RTR) locomotive and rolling stock models. And that was 60+ years ago. To paraphrase, because I don't have the V&O Story nearby, he was able to spend time "building a model railroad, instead of railroad models."
I never suggested any such assumption and I agree that modern products of ALL types have given modelers a new freedom to pursue the hobby in the ways that best suit their skills and interests.
I have my own personal example - track - I learned to hand lay track, built TruScale turnout kits and scratch build turnouts by age 16. That is a skill I now reserve for special situations. My new layout requires 140 turnouts and 2,000 ft of track - I will spend my time elsewhere given the quality and appearance of commercial track these days.
I buy my share of RTR, I also still build craftsman kits, and everything in between.
I save my skills for the projects where they are most important.
But I will say this, there is no task in the hobby that I simply hate - for me it is just about time allocation.
Allen McClelland was also a proponent of "good enough" modeling, me too. That's why I will never replace all my Blue Box freight cars, etc.
I agree with you, "representitive" is often more than good enough.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I never suggested any such assumption and I agree that modern products of ALL types have given modelers a new freedom to pursue the hobby in the ways that best suit their skills and interests.
That's fair. Unfortunately there are so many people across the model railroad forums who loudly proclaim that the hobby has changed for the worse over the last XX years that's become my assumption, esepcailly on a thread around value of kits versus built-up kits.
And I'm not even sure that the hobby itself has really changed all that much. My goal has always been to have a realistic and plausible model railroad. There have been changes in the means to do that; Some things I build, some things I buy, all that's changed is the ratio between the two. The end product itself is the same.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I have my own personal example - track - I learned to hand lay track, built TruScale turnout kits and scratch build turnouts by age 16. That is a skill I now reserve for special situations. My new layout requires 140 turnouts and 2,000 ft of track - I will spend my time elsewhere given the quality and appearance of commercial track these days. I buy my share of RTR, I also still build craftsman kits, and everything in between. I save my skills for the projects where they are most important. But I will say this, there is no task in the hobby that I simply hate - for me it is just about time allocation.
I would say I spend my time on the aspects of the hobby I enjoy the most. It follows that my skills are most developed in those areas, but skill development has never been a goal of mine in model railroading.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Allen McClelland was also a proponent of "good enough" modeling, me too. That's why I will never replace all my Blue Box freight cars, etc. I agree with you, "representitive" is often more than good enough. Sheldon
After building some walthers tank cars, I got turned off to the idea of making my own cars. The trucks and couplers were not able to operate properly on even straight track. Are there more reputable builders to use?
I'm 100 percent kit builder.
Even some of the RTR stuff I have has been kitbashed to improve looks and reliability.
And yes, I'm aware that my resale value depends greatly on the person purchasing it.
When I'm long gone, I'm sure my fleet will go to the first person that shows up with $5.
I don't care about any of that, I had fun putting it all together.
( And, I must be the only modeler here that LOVES decaling. )
Rust...... It's a good thing !
kasskaboose After building some walthers tank cars, I got turned off to the idea of making my own cars. The trucks and couplers were not able to operate properly on even straight track. Are there more reputable builders to use?
More reputable builders? I don't know how to say this, and I don't know exactly which Walthers product you had, or how old it was but there are no quality issues with any Walthers kits I am aware of, and I have been building HO rolling stock kits since about 1967.
Rolling stock kit building just might not be your thing?
Were these Proto2000 tank cars? First that is/was really a LifeLike product in the early days of Proto2000. Second, they are somewhat advanced kits, even though they are plastic.
AEP528 ATLANTIC CENTRAL I never suggested any such assumption and I agree that modern products of ALL types have given modelers a new freedom to pursue the hobby in the ways that best suit their skills and interests. That's fair. Unfortunately there are so many people across the model railroad forums who loudly proclaim that the hobby has changed for the worse over the last XX years that's become my assumption, esepcailly on a thread around value of kits versus built-up kits. And I'm not even sure that the hobby itself has really changed all that much. My goal has always been to have a realistic and plausible model railroad. There have been changes in the means to do that; Some things I build, some things I buy, all that's changed is the ratio between the two. The end product itself is the same. ATLANTIC CENTRAL I have my own personal example - track - I learned to hand lay track, built TruScale turnout kits and scratch build turnouts by age 16. That is a skill I now reserve for special situations. My new layout requires 140 turnouts and 2,000 ft of track - I will spend my time elsewhere given the quality and appearance of commercial track these days. I buy my share of RTR, I also still build craftsman kits, and everything in between. I save my skills for the projects where they are most important. But I will say this, there is no task in the hobby that I simply hate - for me it is just about time allocation. I would say I spend my time on the aspects of the hobby I enjoy the most. It follows that my skills are most developed in those areas, but skill development has never been a goal of mine in model railroading. ATLANTIC CENTRAL Allen McClelland was also a proponent of "good enough" modeling, me too. That's why I will never replace all my Blue Box freight cars, etc. I agree with you, "representitive" is often more than good enough. Sheldon
No disagreement with any of that.
A few more thoughts, again from someone who started in the hobby when all the good stuff was kit built, and who learned from a lot of people 15-20 years older than me.
The hobby has always included all types of people with various approaches, skill levels, goals and interests. However there is no question in my mind that years ago the product limitations discouraged those who had less skills or were not interested in learning those skills.
For decades that changed SLOWLY, I watched it. I worked in this buisness in the 70's, pretty much the whole of the 70's.
Then, thru the 80's and early 90's product and manufacturing inovations started to change the hobby in dramatic ways. Ways that were not even fully recognized right away.
I personally knew some of the people responsible for these advances, Bachmann Spectrum, Proto2000, etc.
I love all the advancements, even ones I choose not to use, like DCC or sound.
AND I respect the craftsmanship of the past, the cutting edge detail in the Revell structure kits, the constant improvement of the Athearn drive, the developement of the Kadee coupler, etc. All things that played and important part in getting us here today.
I'm building a large layout, I like long trains. I'm not building 1000 craftsman kits, and I'm not buying 1000 $50 RTR freight cars. So there is a balance, some $50 RTR freight cars, "Blue Box" style freight cars (kit and RTR), early easy to build "semi craftsman" kits, serious craftsman kits.
I'm a kit basher, or RTR basher in some cases. I practice "minimum effort modeling" in many cases.
And I love one of the things you hate - painting and lettering cars. I love my freelance/protolance layout theme.
To get back to the OP's question, assuming I understand it correctly, I have NO interest in buying a model assembled for resale AFTER it leaves the manufacturers factory?
What is the end game here? Why would this be a business model? The only thing I can possiblely think of is weathering and/or road numbers?
I'm way to fussy about weathering and think 85% of it is over done.
And I'm surely not paying any more than what factory RTR models already cost.
Hi,
It looks like this thread has run its course. I Have to say I'm surprised at the many different views and comments and generated "rabbit trails".
But, I guess that is a good thing!
Mobileman44,
My appoligies for not seeing your earlier mid stream response. An example of why I am not qualified to use a phone, or sometimes even my tablet, for this kind of thing.
A few thoughs.
Just the opposite of you, in my 57 years in this hobby I have never been in the "selling" side regarding my personal collection. In all that time I have only sold off about 12 items that I later decided did not fit my needs.
I worked in two hobby shops, managing the train department in one of them, from 1970 to 1980. That was enough "dealing in trains" for me.
I still don't understand people who buy stuff, keep/use it a while, then sell it and buy more stuff, similar or different, and then later sell that stuff, etc.
I only buy what fits the carefully constructed theme of the layout, which has not changed in nearly 40 years.
As mentioned before, I buy NOS type "used" stuff all the time, RTR or kit, but very seldom do I buy obviously "already been played with" stuff.
So I am not surprised by your observations one bit.
The price of new items is at least partly driven by "cost to produce". The cost of "used" items is strickly supply and demand.