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

[jpwisc]

I agree with John C., it depends what the details are on for me.

Engines
I also like my engines as accurate as possible. Our eyes are drawn to them, we watch them more closely than anything else on the layout.

Freight Cars
If you are building a single car for a photo shoot, you want the details there. If you have a small shelf layout with only 20 freight cars, you want the details there. I run strings of hoppers on my layout. I have done 'visual tests', running lesser detailed Atlas 2-Bays in with my IM and Athearn cars. As long as they have similar degrees of weathering, no one notices. I do pull the Atlas cars out of the scene before I shoot any photos. The camera is not as forgiving as the human eye. On that note, the lower detailed cars will be replaced its better ones as I find them.

I have friends with massive ore car inventories (1500+), people don't see the ore car, they see the train. After the eye finishes looking the engines over, the rest is a visual blur.

I like details, I don't need over the top on freight cars, just good. Etched metal walkways, brake piping, top side grab irons.

What would improve my world is a viable, mass produced, closer to scale N Scale coupler on more factory equipment.

[SandyEggoJake]

As a rivet counter I echo Bryans opinion, if it is visible and can be faithfully reproduced, add it.

+1.

But I'd add one caveat. 

I'm willing to accept relatively less detail on any RTR rolling stock that has accurate dating decals for my region and era.  But when a car isn't accurately dated to my era, it more than likely doesn't get bought... of if it does, it gets tossed to my (far too long) project list.  And once there, I tend to go overboard with extra detailing prior to investing in repainting & relabeling. 

I'm fully aware this is not entirely consistent;  I'm not able to read build or reweigh dates on cars once placed on my N scale layout... but still I try to maintain my roster to be historically accurate. 

So if I have any suggestions to make, it would be to continue to offer a very wide range of highly accurate paint schemes on AS BUILT prototype RTR cars, but also offer later dated reweigh versions of the same car.  And for rebuilt versions of such cars prepainted to such a later dates, place those added parts in baggies...and you might offer a premium level where those added parts are applied.  For example, consider wood reefers built with wood roofs which later were modified to get ladders and metal roof with icing platforms.  It's FAR easier for a prototype modeler to shave off cast grab irons and apply PE grab irons or extra part ladders you provide vs having to shave off cast ladders.  Same for removing icing platforms.  But by volume, I suspect most would want the ladders and icing platform versions... and so would either step up to the most expensive RTR level or would select to add such them self.   

As for broken parts, I say make the detail scaled accurately using suitable materials AND maintain a healthy supply of replacement parts for sale.  I know stocking such replacement parts is a PITA but it is great customer service.  Furthermore, if parts can be  ordered directly from a well designed website with pictures, rough dimensions and real time inventory, it will drive traffic likely resulting in incremental model sales.           

[sirenwerks]

I'm a detail-oriented person at work and with modeling.  I tend to agree with Karl but want to point out all of us will focus on our favorite railroad's models more strenuously.  For instance, Atlas has a beautiful PS1 now but when it offers a C&NW car numbered for the PS1s with rivets, I will cry foul.  Others might say who cares whether its rivets or a weld seam, you got your C&NW PS1, but if you count rivets and there are no rivets to count that arguement falls mute.

[davefoxx]

I agree with John C., it depends what the details are on for me.

Engines
I also like my engines as accurate as possible. Our eyes are drawn to them, we watch them more closely than anything else on the layout.

Freight Cars
If you are building a single car for a photo shoot, you want the details there. If you have a small shelf layout with only 20 freight cars, you want the details there. I run strings of hoppers on my layout. I have done 'visual tests', running lesser detailed Atlas 2-Bays in with my IM and Athearn cars. As long as they have similar degrees of weathering, no one notices. I do pull the Atlas cars out of the scene before I shoot any photos. The camera is not as forgiving as the human eye. On that note, the lower detailed cars will be replaced its better ones as I find them.

I have friends with massive ore car inventories (1500+), people don't see the ore car, they see the train. After the eye finishes looking the engines over, the rest is a visual blur.

I like details, I don't need over the top on freight cars, just good. Etched metal walkways, brake piping, top side grab irons.

What would improve my world is a viable, mass produced, closer to scale N Scale coupler on more factory equipment.

This.

[jagged ben]

The Railwire crew are not representative of "most customers" (maybe a better way to put it) The majority of the hobby are "buy the RTR, put it on the track" modellers. TRW is chock full of guys that represent the upper 1% of scratch builders, kitbashers and artistic masters..... while they are are breed unto themselves, I want their opinion because although many here are clearly not part of the majority, they are experienced, savvy modellers who know the hobby and have a feel for the market.

I guess part of my point is that maybe a good part of the reason you get so many complaints is that a certain sizable percentage of the model railroad product consuming public are just incorrigible curmudgeons who will complain about every product no matter how good it is.   

I think here at TRW we are not so representative of that.  (Some here may laugh at my saying that, especially the moderators  , but that was my point about bringing up the Atlas forum as a reference for comparison.)  So maybe take our advice more seriously.   

My final advice is to damn the torpedoes and just keep making models that you guys as a team consider to be of high quality.   

[basementcalling]

... but if you count rivets and there are no rivets to count that arguement falls mute.

And thus why you can't please every modeler.

The short, direct answer to your question, PD, is make em with enough detail to sell well, not so much that people return  busted cars.

[mdeberg]

I'm a big fan of manufacturers with tooling that allows different levels of detail where it makes sense, such as in unit trains.   Scaletrains.com is one of these manufacturers...  Personally, I prefer the rivet counter level of detail in most cases, but wouldn't mind seeing a lower cost version for unit trains where it makes sense such as coal hoppers, tank cars, etc...

Having multiple levels of detail may also attract more train enthusiasts into the hobby?  Typically, we see younger modelers, they go away from the hobby for a while in their late teens/early twenties and then often come back.

[djconway]

I'm a big fan of manufacturers with tooling that allows different levels of detail where it makes sense, such as in unit trains.   Scaletrains.com is one of these manufacturers... 

How can you say?  "ScaleTrains.com is one of these manufacturers...."  They have not made any N Scale items / they have not announced any N scale items.  Until it hits the shelf its all rumors.

They (ScaleTrains) are most likely doing this debate internally right now, what to put on - what to leave off.  It's not an easy debate to go through, every scratch builder has to go through that debate granted its only one person but you have to do the debate to make or modify something.

Take the IM kits -- the grab irons scale out over 3" in diameter out of the box,  do you roll your own out of 0.005 brass wire - knowing that that is almost 10% too large or do you go with what's in the kit because it's easier, they sure don't look better.  I have seen IM & Micro Trains "kits" sit on the shelf for years because ?? people are too afraid of taking on a kit?  Micro Trains molded on and painted grabs look far better than the IM oversized grabs.

[Chris333]

They (ScaleTrains) are most likely doing this debate internally right now, what to put on - what to leave off.  It's not an easy debate to go through, every scratch builder has to go through that debate granted its only one person but you have to do the debate to make or modify something.

Naa that was long ago for them. Just because they are not ready yet doesn't mean they aren't already designed.

[sirenwerks]

u say?  "ScaleTrains.com is one of these manufacturers...."  They have not made any N Scale items / they have not announced any N scale items.  Until it hits the shelf its all rumors.

Maybe because it's what they did in HO scale with their first two freight car releases; Kit Classics, Operator and Rivet Counter versions.  Interesting idea, IMO, and would be curious to see what that would mean in N scale versus HO.  I miss the IMRC and Round House 'kits', if they could be called that.  Yea, maybe it only saved a few pennies NOT having them assembled, but at least you got to do two minutes more 'modeling'.  Which is the point of the hobby.


As for the comment made that there are "incorrigible curmudgeons who will complain about every product no matter how good it is", while there may be some of those out there, I think a major percentage of those that appear as such simply have standards of expectation that aren't being met.  That says something about the manufacturers as much as it does about the consumers.

[mark.hinds]

FWIW, I would like a "partially assembled" option, where the detail parts are included in the box for the purchaser to attach themselves.  If this costs less, so much the better, but at least I wouldn't have to replace details attached by ham-handed factory workers.  One case in point is my otherwise good Intermountain F7s, which often have problems with grills, grabirons, etc. 

MH

[Rich_S]

Let me play devil's advocate for a minute, what would everyone say if all suppliers were only allowed to sell for manufactures retail price, i.e. no deep discounts for mail order?  In other words, you can have all the detail you want, but you will have to pay full MSRP?

For the manufactures it's a tight rope walk, as most manufactures are paying a Chinese company to make the products and most Chinese companies have a minimum order amount with cash up front. Add too much detail that drives the price way up and you're sitting on inventory that is not moving. The same is true for not enough detail or poor performance and you are again sitting on inventory that is not selling. Do that to many times in a row and you're no longer in business.

In my 45 +/- years in the hobby, I've seen a lot of change. At one time, it seemed people were just happy to finally get a GP38-2 with a scale width hood. It seemed no one thought twice about purchasing, paint, decals and super detail parts to create a model of one of their favorite prototype engines. It seems now everyone wants all the bells and whistles, but they want the same price as the old shake the box models.

In my opinion, 40 years ago, model railroaders were only model railroaders, now it seems you read in some of the layout tours, "besides model railroading, Herbie enjoys golfing, kayaking, mountain climbing and playing tuba in the local Oom-pah band" has our lives become so rushed, that we no longer have the free time and that is why we want all of the bells and whistles? Or is it because too many of us are involved in too many hobbies? 

Now back to the original question, if I want super detail, I'll add it myself. What I'm most looking for is smooth performance from freight, passenger and locomotives that match the builders blue prints without breaking the bank.    
     

[peteski]

In my 45 +/- years in the hobby, I've seen a lot of change. At one time, it seemed people were just happy to finally get a GP38-2 with a scale width hood. It seemed no one thought twice about purchasing, paint, decals and super detail parts to create a model of one of their favorite prototype engines. It seems now everyone wants all the bells and whistles, but they want the same price as the old shake the box models.

In my opinion, 40 years ago, model railroaders were only model railroaders, now it seems you read in some of the layout tours, "besides model railroading, Herbie enjoys golfing, kayaking, mountain climbing and playing tuba in the local Oom-pah band" has our lives become so rushed, that we no longer have the free time and that is why we want all of the bells and whistles? Or is it because too many of us are involved in too many hobbies? 

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.

[mdeberg]

This thread wasn't tagged with an N Scale only icon... But you're right for N Scale seeing as they haven't released anything yet in N scale.  However, they have proved it in HO scale with their initial releases, it's part of their DNA for doing things differently as they shared at Trainfest during their all access sessions.  You can watch their videos as well on TM TV.  Where appropriate in N Scale they will do the same, doesn't make sense for all product releases, but you already know they have multiple levels of product offerings and they are looking to maximize their tooling investment.     

How can you say?  "ScaleTrains.com is one of these manufacturers...."  They have not made any N Scale items / they have not announced any N scale items.  Until it hits the shelf its all rumors.

They (ScaleTrains) are most likely doing this debate internally right now, what to put on - what to leave off.  It's not an easy debate to go through, every scratch builder has to go through that debate granted its only one person but you have to do the debate to make or modify something.

Take the IM kits -- the grab irons scale out over 3" in diameter out of the box,  do you roll your own out of 0.005 brass wire - knowing that that is almost 10% too large or do you go with what's in the kit because it's easier, they sure don't look better.  I have seen IM & Micro Trains "kits" sit on the shelf for years because ?? people are too afraid of taking on a kit?  Micro Trains molded on and painted grabs look far better than the IM oversized grabs.

[daniel_leavitt2000]

I stayed away from this thread after the insanity that was the meat reefer thread. Sometimes I think you like the punishment here.

Here is a story:
MTL made an ACF 89's flat in 1991. By most accounts it was a good car and has been produced with much more regularity than their other cars. But people here had a few complains: it's an older prototype, it sits too high, the hitch detail could be better etc.

Then Atlas made a model of the same prototype more than 20 years later. And what did the 20 years of incredible refinement and advances in CAD and tooling? A car that sits at the same height, has problems tracking, problems with couplers and parts that looked larger but broke off easier.

Now I like both models, and have more than a dozen of each. But the thing is... I find the MTL cars MUCH easier to modify and refine than the Atlas version. There is a certain wisdom of simplicity in the MTL cars. No glue, parts snap together, etc. I really respect that.

But MTL has issues with selective compression of its models which I can not forgive. This isn't O27. These cars are small. Why do they need to actively divert from the prototype?

Lets take another example. How old is the MDC 57' reefer? I still like the tooling better than the IM version because the machined parts are finer and more natural than the add-ons IM uses. The Ahearn FGE
reefer is a perfect example of tooling done right: stand out parts in the underframe and crossovers are separate, but grillwork and door detail are molded in.