From the manufacturer's perspective... How much detail?

[sirenwerks]

We need to disconnect the 'they' mentality when it comes  to manufacturers.  Manufacturers are an 'it'.  It is a collective of people, controlled by an individual or smaller cadre of individuals, that is funded by personal investment and whose goal is to make profit from its efforts.  Decision making, like in most businesses, comes from the top by the person(s) who controls the money.  Quality and consumer wants may factor into decisions, but it is still the esoterical thought processes of one or two people filtered through the white noise of the day that makes the decisions[/size].  Yes, often the owners are MRRers.  And as manufacturers grow, often people who work under decision-makers are MRRers too and they may try the rational arguement of the consumer to sway decision-making, but as a company grows decision-making gets separated - modeling versus business.  It's not the old boys network like some people believe it is; it's not an 'us' or 'we' situation, or even 'they', 'it' is a business.  That doesn't mean the consumer has no control, it means the consumer has no say, except spending where they find what they want.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Here's my personal perspective (ie, what I care about):
I care about "signature" items being right, or able to be made right, generally throughout the model.

I'm going to use the Conrail SD40-2s as an example.

I really, really, really care about about general accuracy:
 - Are the general proportions right (hood width correct, right length, right height, etc...)?
 - Is the assembly generally "clean" (no glue blobs)?
 - Do the parts fit right (no huge gaps between parts), parts are well molded (no odd dimples, and no extra holes where there shouldn't be, I'm)

I really, really care about the carbody being the right phase: having the proper exhaust hatch, and the right radiator grills. These are things that are possible to change, but would require a complete teardown that would necessitate an almost complete repaint.

I care about the frame/pilot being right (because it's tough to change the handrails and pilot to have the right anticlimber, though it's doable). This is easier to fix, but still not "fun".

I honestly don't care so much if the horns are right, or the cab signal box is there, or the radio antenna is there. Those are easy (and fun) detail parts to add. As long as I can match the paint easily enough, I actually look forward to adding this stuff. Same thing with grab irons too. I'd rather they be absent, than have to be removed, because, really, the big thing for me is having to repaint/redecal something. If I have to do that, it goes far further down the project queue, and therefore is much less likely to be a purchase.

As others have stated, there's a decreasing amount of "G.a.S." as things are less "core" to my interest, and go in the progression: locomotives, cabooses, passenger cars, freight cars.

Now, as far as my industry perspective (it's been 10 years since I was in it, but still, I like to observe)...

I believe that, overall, it's more important that things look "good" than "accurate". Not every customer can tell if a car has the right door guides, or the number of rivets, but they can tell if the door guide is hanging off the car, or the rivets look like softballs.  The place where accuracy really comes into play is by being able to use it as a unique selling proposition to people who are marginally discriminating. For example, when MTL did their fake PRR "X58", I was able to say "it looks nice, and it's a PRR boxcar". When ESM did the REAL X58, I would've been able to say "it's an accurate PRR boxcar, and check out the amount of effort they went into to get not only the model right, but the variations, here, look...". That can justify the price point difference.

[C855B]

^^^^^

Ed nailed it. I call this "ambiance". The model has to convey the feeling without a lot of distractions, or a major single grimace point that spoils everything. F'rinstance, the new Bachmann SD45 release. Not awful generally, but the radiator grilles - the spotting feature of the prototype - are wrong... and hard to correct after the fact. Or Kato's squinty number boards and fat hoods - not as bad, but still distractions from the overall look and feel.

There are some personalization details tougher than others, however. SP "light packs", for instance, require cutting bodywork. So I'd like my 2nd-gen SP locos to have them already, and a tip o' the hat to MTL for including them on the SW1500. Beacons, horns, air conditioners, external electronics cabinets and other add-ons, Shapeways and other details suppliers are your friends.

The right trucks are an important element to prototype ambiance. The various generations of Flexicoils need to be on the right locomotives, or at least available to retrofit when there are variations within the prototype product. I'm amazed this is still an issue in 2015. And brickbats to Centralia Car Shops (...sorry, guys...) for backtracking on their UP cabooses - you had (or have) the tooling for the proper trucks, but just because a few customers couldn't work the kinks out with the loosey-goosey assembly, you abandon a reasonable reproduction in favor of the wrong (and identifiably SP!) truck OEM'ed from MTL. We notice stuff like that.

Anyway, excuse the ramblings. What Ed said rules.

[Rich_S]

Like or not, I noticed one thing (as I am also getting older): the longer we live, the more changes we see around you. Usually for the better. Computers get more powerful and advanced, appliances acquire "smarts".   Cars are now computers on wheels and have all sorts of features which used to be science fiction just couple of decades ago. Most people have smart phones which can recognize speech and which can act like your digital assistant.  Plus they give you access to pretty much unlimited information available on the Internet.  Even TVs have changed drastically: Vacuum tube CRTs are gone and flat screens are in. Even the TV transmission standards have totally changed.  All the old TVs are obsolete.

Since things around us change constantly, why shouldn't it be the same for our hobbies?  Electric-powered flying models have pretty much replaced glow-fuel powered ones. Flying drones (multi-prop flying models) can be had for less than $30. 20 years ago nobody even heard of drones.  Those things are quite complex. Each one has a small computer which keeps them stable in-flight.

Why should model RR hobby be any different. This is 2015 - why should be content with a GP38-2 with scale-width hood?  The technology has advanced - we can expect much more from our models.

Peteski, I think you've misunderstood my point. My point was, 40 years ago it seemed more people were into kit bashing / custom painting / super detailing. It seems today, every one expects models to come from the manufacture super detailed. The reason I say this is, the manufactures seem to sell enough of the super detailed models to enable them to produce the next model. Now I'm not saying this is a bad thing, I'm just stating from my own person perspective this is how I've seen the hobby change. But I can also understand the flip side of the coin, a person who really enjoys super detailing locomotives. If they are already coming super detailed from the manufacture, what is left for the modeler to do? Second point, someone who is on a budget and can't afford a $250 locomotive, but can afford to purchase $40 worth of super detail parts and a decoder this month, then next month when the locomotive is released, purchase a $75 locomotive. Another point, some folks may only have an annual hobby budget of $150, a super detailed wiz bang locomotive may be the closest thing to real, but if it's outside your budget, what good is it? I remember my early years out on my own and debating on weather to purchase a magazine subscription or purchase a few new locomotives for my little layout.

Some people have wondered if this is why the younger generation has turned to video games and not model railroading? The initial cost of video games can be high, but then the add on's are very inexpensive. You can get add on locomotives for Rail Works that look and sound like the real thing, complete with interiors for only $15. In a nut shell, you can purchase a lot of stuff in the Train Sim world for $250, verses one super detailed locomotive in model railroading. 

[peteski]

Peteski, I think you've misunderstood my point. My point was, 40 years ago it seemed more people were into kit bashing / custom painting / super detailing. It seems today, every one expects models to come from the manufacture super detailed. The reason I say this is, the manufactures seem to sell enough of the super detailed models to enable them to produce the next model. Now I'm not saying this is a bad thing, I'm just stating from my own person perspective this is how I've seen the hobby change. But I can also understand the flip side of the coin, a person who really enjoys super detailing locomotives. If they are already coming super detailed from the manufacture, what is left for the modeler to do? Second point, someone who is on a budget and can't afford a $250 locomotive, but can afford to purchase $40 worth of super detail parts and a decoder this month, then next month when the locomotive is released, purchase a $75 locomotive. Another point, some folks may only have an annual hobby budget of $150, a super detailed wiz bang locomotive may be the closest thing to real, but if it's outside your budget, what good is it? I remember my early years out on my own and debating on weather to purchase a magazine subscription or purchase a few new locomotives for my little layout.

Some people have wondered if this is why the younger generation has turned to video games and not model railroading? The initial cost of video games can be high, but then the add on's are very inexpensive. You can get add on locomotives for Rail Works that look and sound like the real thing, complete with interiors for only $15. In a nut shell, you can purchase a lot of stuff in the Train Sim world for $250, verses one super detailed locomotive in model railroading.

I do see your point but I still think that (and I hate to use this buzz-phrase) the paradigm has shifted.  Back 40 years ago some (but not many, even back then) N scale modelers were scratchbulding and kitbashing much more because the range of available models was much smaller than what we have now.  Nowadays even fewer modelers have to scratchbuild because many of the models which had to be scratchbuilt in the past have already been commercially produced (albeit in limited runs).

Also there seems to be fewer people interested in working with their hands - nowadays people spend a big chunk of their lifes on the their computing devices doing social interaction on forums, Facebook, Twitter, playing games which are very realistic computer simulations or even designing their own 3D realities. There is still scratchbuilding going on but quite a bit of it is as 3D-printed computer designs. Shapeways is chock full of all sorts of nifty N scale items. But I still think that this N scale group of modelers is a very small minority. The larger portion of the N scale community is quite happy plopping down the cash on a very detailed roadname-specifc models they want.

[Rich_S]

We need to disconnect the 'they' mentality when it comes  to manufacturers.  Manufacturers are an 'it'.  It is a collective of people, controlled by an individual or smaller cadre of individuals, that is funded by personal investment and whose goal is to make profit from its efforts.  Decision making, like in most businesses, comes from the top by the person(s) who controls the money.  Quality and consumer wants may factor into decisions, but it is still the esoterical thought processes of one or two people filtered through the white noise of the day that makes the decisions.  Yes, often the owners are MRRers.  And as manufacturers grow, often people who work under decision-makers are MRRers too and they may try the rational arguement of the consumer to sway decision-making, but as a company grows decision-making gets separated - modeling versus business.  It's not the old boys network like some people believe it is; it's not an 'us' or 'we' situation, or even 'they', 'it' is a business.  That doesn't mean the consumer has no control, it means the consumer has no say, except spending where they find what they want.

I really do not understand the meaning of your post? Do you view model railroad manufactures as greedy, who's only purpose is profit? Profits are not a bad thing, they help companies grow. Second point, all companies are top down, there has to be some direction or the company would fall apart. Most model railroad companies are very small companies, companies like Kato, Atlas, Athearn and Bachmann are the exceptions. I do agree, the public has more power than they often realize, in the form of purchasing power. If you feel manufacture product x is a poor product, but because you want one you still purchase it, shame on you. 

[Rich_S]

I do see your point but I still think that (and I hate to use this buzz-phrase) the paradigm has shifted.  Back 40 years ago some (but not many, even back then) N scale modelers were scratchbulding and kitbashing much more because the range of available models was much smaller than what we have now.  Nowadays even fewer modelers have to scratchbuild because many of the models which had to be scratchbuilt in the past have already been commercially produced (albeit in limited runs).

Also there seems to be fewer people interested in working with their hands - nowadays people spend a big chunk of their lifes on the their computing devices doing social interaction on forums, Facebook, Twitter, playing games which are very realistic computer simulations or even designing their own 3D realities. There is still scratchbuilding going on but quite a bit of it is as 3D-printed computer designs. Shapeways is chock full of all sorts of nifty N scale items. But I still think that this N scale group of modelers is a very small minority. The larger portion of the N scale community is quite happy plopping down the cash on a very detailed roadname-specifc models they want.

Peteski, I agree with you 100%, the paradigm has shifted. I just wonder are we leaving the small minority of super detailers and kitbashers behind? Yes, the things I see 3D printed at Shapeways is like Science fiction, but at the same time, it is a great time to be part of this hobby. On the other hand I have to be honest, I never thought twice about weathering a $1.95 Athearn blue box freight car, but I just can't bring myself to weather a $30 Micro-Trains boxcar or worse yet, even strip one of their cars to repaint and decal. I'm probably part of that small minority getting left behind, maybe that is the effects of age and time, but I get sticker shocked every time a new locomotive is released from one of the premium manufactures     

 

[sirenwerks]

I really do not understand the meaning of your post? Do you view model railroad manufactures as greedy, who's only purpose is profit? Profits are not a bad thing, they help companies grow. Second point, all companies are top down, there has to be some direction or the company would fall apart. Most model railroad companies are very small companies, companies like Kato, Atlas, Athearn and Bachmann are the exceptions. I do agree, the public has more power than they often realize, in the form of purchasing power. If you feel manufacture product x is a poor product, but because you want one you still purchase it, shame on you.

Your response spoke to what I said.  No, profits aren't a bad thing, and while some companies start in order to feed a need in the hobby, they progress through developmental life cycles to where they are profit oriented, not a bad thing at all.  But it feeds their decision making sometimes in bad ways.  One could use the Rapido meat reefer as an example.  Or some of IMRC's bungles.  They miss that their decisions, inability to listen, or lack of action when things go wrong impacts the consumer and the consumer.


As for the top down part, exactly, but some of us here sometimes forget that the TRW participants who work for manufactures are limited in their ability to pass on what we want, influence product development for us.  But that's a tricky subject - we shouldn't expect that but we want to have that voice.  It would be great if more 'CEO' types hung out here, but they don't have the stomach for both the constant nitpicking and for the real constructive feedback (hard to tell which is which sometimes, as both are so passionately voiced.)

[peteski]

Peteski, I agree with you 100%, the paradigm has shifted. I just wonder are we leaving the small minority of super detailers and kitbashers behind? Yes, the things I see 3D printed at Shapeways is like Science fiction, but at the same time, it is a great time to be part of this hobby.

I don't think it is that bad.  There will still be a very small group of scratchbuilders who will go to great lengths to build models of some obscure prototype not available commercially. But they will probably do that using CAD and 3D printing instead of basswood or styrene.  But probably 99% of average N scalers will just buy those expensive ready-to-run models and just run them on their layouts.

On the other hand I have to be honest, I never thought twice about weathering a $1.95 Athearn blue box freight car, but I just can't bring myself to weather a $30 Micro-Trains boxcar or worse yet, even strip one of their cars to repaint and decal. I'm probably part of that small minority getting left behind, maybe that is the effects of age and time, but I get sticker shocked every time a new locomotive is released from one of the premium manufactures     

I can relate to this.  I still have some of the older N scale locos and rolling stock with their original price stickers.  But then there is inflation. Something that cost $5 back in 1980's would be probably equivalent to $10 or  $15 in today's money. And of course the models which are more detailed will cost even more.  But you can still find low-end models with prices comparable to the 80's prices.

For example a Bachmann no frills, non-DCC 0-6-0 switcher can still be had for $40 (which would have been much less in 1980's dollars).  I think I paid about $20 for one of these back in the 80's. http://www.blwnscale.com/bachmann-060.htm

Those models are built using the 1980s technology.  If you want something more up to date (detail and mechanical wise), you have to spend more of your 2015 dollars. 

A different example is Atlas RS-3.  The original MSRP on those revolutionary Atlas/Kato models was $39.  While those are no longer made, the current Atlas (Master Line) RS-3 has MSRP of $120. That would of course be lower in the 80s dollars.  You also have to consider that these RS-3s have much better mechanism and better detail (like painted walkways and railings and pilot-mounted couplers).  So, while it pains me, I don't think the current prices are all that much out of line when compared to the to the prices of models 35 years ago.

[Catt]

For my quarter's worth if I can see it on a freight car while setting at a crossing with a train cruising through at 15 to 30 mph I would want it on my models.If it isn't noticeable in a moving train I don't worry about it in a train parked somewhere.I do like separately applied ladders and stirrups but would prefer etched metal to breakable (and it will) plastic.

Some other things ,if the car is supposed to be say a PS-1 boxcar then it should look like one and not a mismatch of what ever the manufacturer came up with.Correct length and ride height are a definite plus too.

[daniel_leavitt2000]

^^^^^

Ed nailed it. I call this "ambiance". The model has to convey the feeling without a lot of distractions, or a major single grimace point that spoils everything. F'rinstance, the new Bachmann SD45 release. Not awful generally, but the radiator grilles - the spotting feature of the prototype - are wrong... and hard to correct after the fact. Or Kato's squinty number boards and fat hoods - not as bad, but still distractions from the overall look and feel.

There are some personalization details tougher than others, however. SP "light packs", for instance, require cutting bodywork. So I'd like my 2nd-gen SP locos to have them already, and a tip o' the hat to MTL for including them on the SW1500. Beacons, horns, air conditioners, external electronics cabinets and other add-ons, Shapeways and other details suppliers are your friends.

The right trucks are an important element to prototype ambiance. The various generations of Flexicoils need to be on the right locomotives, or at least available to retrofit when there are variations within the prototype product. I'm amazed this is still an issue in 2015. And brickbats to Centralia Car Shops (...sorry, guys...) for backtracking on their UP cabooses - you had (or have) the tooling for the proper trucks, but just because a few customers couldn't work the kinks out with the loosey-goosey assembly, you abandon a reasonable reproduction in favor of the wrong (and identifiably SP!) truck OEM'ed from MTL. We notice stuff like that.

Anyway, excuse the ramblings. What Ed said rules.

For all I poked fun at MTL for the SW1500 hood width, I really, REALLY like the model. It just looks right to me.

[Angus Shops]

Hmmmm.... I've been watching this debate unfold and wondering exactly where I fit in. In the end I think it depends on each individual's modelling interests. I'm a bit of a passenger fanatic, so I expect a higher level of prototype fidelity from my passenger fleet, less from the freight cars. However, I still like good looking boxcar, with well refined details. Ladders and grabs can be cast on like MT, but not like old style train set cars. I do find separately applied details a little clunky...sometimes. I'm happy with cast on grabs and handrails on my passenger cars. I don't like the cast on handrails on my Kato F units, so they get replaced with .008 wire ones, but I don't consider Kato to be an inferior manufacturer for what I consider to be their minor shortcoming. On the other hand, I think the wire handrails on my Intermountain F units are too fat, and they're not straight, so they also get replaced (along with added grabs on the nose, ice breakers on the roof and drawbar connections to reduce the space between units). For all these 'problems', I still think these are excellent models.

Layering on the detail also adds to the cost per unit, which may be ok on engines, but adds up fast on the freight car fleet. I prefer to have good quality, sharply moulded, nicely decorated, and modestly detailed car that I can afford to purchase one or more of without too much guilt.

Geoff

[mmagliaro]

Details don't matter one bit unless overall proportions and macro level tooling is up to snuff. As a modeler, I'm happy to add to a great model. If the base model has a hood that is too wide, board gaps too deep, or molded on parts that are time consuming to remove, then I lose interest. So worry about underbody detail all you want, but if the basic car body is rubbish, then you lose sales to the 25% of the market that also might pay more for the extra cost of factory details.

75% of the market will buy a model just because it is new. If you're catering to them, then why sweat the details?

THIS is the key.  I will buy almost any model that doesn't have botched detail or botched proportions, if it's a model of something I want.   But if lengths, heights, door sizes, truck styles, ... the basics, are wrong, it is no longer a super detailing project.  It is a complete rebuilding project, and if I have to do that, then forget it.  Why not make it from scratch?

So I would say, make sure to get all the basic dimensions, colors, lettering, door width, number of panels and so on.  If you leave off grabs, rivets,
a little hatch here and there, and so on, that's okay.  That's much better than having the wrong one on there, or
having things in the wrong place that have to be removed if we nerdy detailers want to work over our models.
I'd much rather have a cheaper, plainer car that has everything that is does have  dead-on correct.

As an example...  and this is particularly true with freight cars, is ride height and coupler height.  Good grief.  There is just no reason those basics can't be right, but so often they are not.

I probably view this from a different perspective, as I spend more of my time worrying about locomotive details than
rolling stock details.  But I think the principles are the same.   
And by the way, this is the reason I buy so few ready-to-run models.  They are almost always so darn wrong on basics
that it's more work to tear them all apart and fix them than to just build from scratch.

[robert3985]

THIS is the key.  I will buy almost any model that doesn't have botched detail or botched proportions, if it's a model of something I want.   But if lengths, heights, door sizes, truck styles, ... the basics, are wrong, it is no longer a super detailing project.  It is a complete rebuilding project, and if I have to do that, then forget it.  Why not make it from scratch?

So I would say, make sure to get all the basic dimensions, colors, lettering, door width, number of panels and so on.  If you leave off grabs, rivets,
a little hatch here and there, and so on, that's okay.  That's much better than having the wrong one on there, or
having things in the wrong place that have to be removed if we nerdy detailers want to work over our models.
I'd much rather have a cheaper, plainer car that has everything that is does have  dead-on correct.

As an example...  and this is particularly true with freight cars, is ride height and coupler height.  Good grief.  There is just no reason those basics can't be right, but so often they are not.

I probably view this from a different perspective, as I spend more of my time worrying about locomotive details than
rolling stock details.  But I think the principles are the same.   
And by the way, this is the reason I buy so few ready-to-run models.  They are almost always so darn wrong on basics
that it's more work to tear them all apart and fix them than to just build from scratch.

+1

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore