Large Scale Central

Let's start up a company!

General Discussion
#21

OK, here is my take on this foolishness… :lol:

[b]This pure fantasy. If all of a sudden I had a gazzilion bucks to start up a large scale manufacturing company.

First of all, if I had a gazillion bucks, I doubt that I would start up a large scale manufacturing company… I’d pay JB to do it for me so I had more time to play with trains… [/b]

  1. What scale would you choose for narrow gauge and standard US gauge? Using the existing track available.

Well, for Narrow gauge, I think I would use 32mm track (zero/0 scale) and 1:24 to represent Xn3. I’d stay with 1:29 for Standard gauge.

  1. Would you produce plastic, brass, or cast metal?

I’d use diecast frames and plastic for the locos and plastic for the other rolling stock. I think that pure diecast would be just too bloody heavy to be practical, and brass is too spendy when I can get pretty much the same thing in today’s plastic technology.

  1. What would be the first US narrow gauge locomotive you would produce? Steam or Diesel.

Steam: a nice little mogul or perhaps a prairie, or maybe both. Diseasal in narrow gauge??? Perish the thought!

  1. What would be the first US standard gauge locomotive you would produce? Steam or Diesel.

For steam: a 2-8-0, then a Northern… For diesel, a C424/425…brute ugly and powerful! And I’d find some way to produce black smoke and introduce it with the C424/425.

  1. What would be the first US Narrow gauge piece of rolling stock?

Prolly a flat car.

  1. What would be the first US standard gauge piece of rolling stock?

    Flat car.

  2. Would you repaint and repaint rolling stock, or manufacture limited editions.?

    Of course I’d repaint. Doesn’t everybody?

  3. Would you paint locomotives in road names that the prototype didn’t even have on their roster?

    Uh huh. Just like the Warbonnet SD45. :smiley:

  4. Would you make starter sets without track or power supplies.

    Well, I think that if you are going to make a starter set, you are obligated to provide a power pack and some track. Bachmann had the right idea 20 or so years ago with the original Bug Mauler, too bad they didn’t follow through on it. I think it would be possible to produce a basic R/C unit for the starter set without all the bells and whistles, and still meet the price point. Since you are not putting in a power back, it could be done. Then send them to Radio Shack to buy an off the shelf battery set made for their R/C cars. Since I have a gazillion bancka bucks, I’d put in enough track to make it interesting, perhaps even a siding, and eat whatever loss, expecting to make it up when they come back for more.

  5. Would you make track?[b]

I’d try very hard not to.[/b]

  1. Would you make power supplies?

    No, since I’d probably be encouraging everybody to go battery power.

  2. Would you produce locomotives for simple and easy battery conversion?[b]

Without a doubt![/b]

  1. Would you produce locomotives with all the electronics needed for track power or DCC?[b]

Yes. With screw terminals.[/b]

  1. Or offer locomotives with options, such as simple ready for Batt/RC and sound, or the full package?[b]

I think that ready to run in analog and ready for Batt/RC or DCC is the way to go.[/b]

  1. Would you offer kits of your products, undecorated, with instructions? [b]

There doesn’t seem to be much of a market for it among the Geezer Gaugers.[/b]

  1. Would you distribute your products yourself out of a warehouse, using Internet and magazines?[b]

Yes[/b]

  1. Would you wholesale to a distributor to sell your products to stores?

    Yes

  2. Would you offer rolling stock equipped with quality metal wheels and pads for mounting KD’s?[b]

It would be foolish not to do it that way.[/b]

#22

A gizzilion bucks, gee I don’t know. The first thing I would do, is get my geep set up with AirWire and then I’d gut a U-boat and use it for a battery car;)

#23

That’s Tony, always practical… :lol:

#24
  1. What scale would you choose for narrow gauge and standard US gauge? Using the existing track available.

1:20.3 for both

  1. Would you produce plastic, brass, or cast metal?

Plastic

  1. What would be the first US narrow gauge locomotive you would produce? Steam or Diesel.

Mikado for Steam

White Pass style for the Diesel

  1. What would be the first US standard gauge locomotive you would produce? Steam or Diesel.

Mikado for Steam

RS-1 for Diesel

  1. What would be the first US Narrow gauge piece of rolling stock?

Flat Car

  1. What would be the first US standard gauge piece of rolling stock?

Flat Car

  1. Would you repaint and repaint rolling stock, or manufacture limited editions.?

Yes

  1. Would you paint locomotives in road names that the prototype didn’t even have on their roster?

NO

  1. Would you make starter sets without track or power supplies.

NO

  1. Would you make track?

NO

  1. Would you make power supplies?

NO

  1. Would you produce locomotives for simple and easy battery conversion?

Yes, that is how they would be built

  1. Would you produce locomotives with all the electronics needed for track power or DCC?

Not until the 1:1 guys do it.

  1. Or offer locomotives with options, such as simple ready for Batt/RC and sound, or the full package?

Full Package

  1. Would you offer kits of your products, undecorated, with instructions?

Yes

  1. Would you distribute your products yourself out of a warehouse, using Internet and magazines?

Yes

  1. Would you wholesale to a distributor to sell your products to stores?

NO

  1. Would you offer rolling stock equipped with quality metal wheels and pads for mounting KD’s?

Yes

#25

You would have to start with a big pile of money, so you could afford a cup of coffee when you were done :lol:
Ralph

#26
Ralph Berg said:
You would have to start with a big pile of money, so you could afford a cup of coffee when you were done :lol: Ralph
You got that right, especially if you stay true to prototype and do all the other "correct" stuff and don't sell any toys or caricatures. That's where the real money is. "Modelers" are too cheap :D
#27

Start by building narrow gauge European products. :slight_smile:
LAO

#28

It’s interesting that most of the responders, with only a few exceptions, suggest continuing with one scale for standard gauge models and a separate scale for narrow gauge models. I really don’t understand this thinking.

Doesn’t anyone care that neither SG nor NG railroads operated in a vacuum, separated from the rest of the world, where the people were a different size? With only a few exceptions, SG and NG railroads interchanged freight and passengers at some point. The prototype passengers and freight riding on the SG didn’t suddenly get larger when boarding the NG!

Limiting the choices to only run on existing track solidifies the fact that there will really not be anything new. Go back and read the replies and I think you will find that the existing manufacturers are doing virtually everything that has been suggested. No one company is doing it all, but overall, most of what has been suggested is already being done. So much for new!!

Ric’s 1:20.3 SG and NG plan is what I am currently working on. Don Niday at Iron Creek Shops has 1:20.3 SG and dual gauge plastic tie strips available for code 250 rail. I currently have a tiny bit of hand spiked SG using code 332 rail on redwood ties, but future SG will use code 250 on Don’s ties. Now to get the boxcar put together and at least one of the 45 tonners converted to run on SG track. The folks who inhabit my miniature towns and ride on the RRs are all nominally the same scale, so they require the same scale equipment. That’s the way the real world is.

Happy (No matter what scale) RRing,

Jerry

#29

Jerry,

That is my thoughts, also. Nothing operated in a vacuum. If you have 3 ft in 1:20.3, then we need 4 ft 8.5 in. in 1:20.3, also. It can be simple equipment, but it did or does exists. Both the D&RGW, plus the EBT interchanging with the PRR are examples. Since people come in many sizes, they will work well together with equipment both standard and narrow gauge if the eqipment is true to size. It wouldn’t take a lot of equipment to force the perspective.

#30

Jerry, jb limited us to working with existing track, which limited our thinking. To do standard and narrow gauge in the same scale would require developing a new track gauge, which is outside the parameters set by the original poster.

That said…

I did the math, and in 1:29 scale, 36 inches comes out to be 1.241379 inches. Because 45 mm gauge track in 1:29 scale is a bit narrow for standard gauge, it would follow that the narrow gauge track selected for 1:29 scale should be just a bit wide, to make up for it. Therefore, 0 gauge track at 32 mm, or 1.25 inches should work out just fine for An3, A being the designation selected by someone for 1:29 scale.

Who’s going to build the first 1:29 narrow minded locomotive?

#31

A couple of our first “investor’s” suggested 1/24 scale for both.
Meaning existing users would have to rip up track and re-invest in everything.

If we decided on 1:20.3, only track for the standard gauge would have to be made, or dual gauge.
We prolly wouldn’t sell as much standard gauge, because just like changing to 1/24 scale, no one would change.

So therefore, I would stick to the existing scales–1:20.3, 1/32 or 1/29 for now. Perhaps standard gauge 1:20.3 could be added later.

#32

Steve,

You said - “Jerry, jb limited us to working with existing track, which limited our thinking. To do standard and narrow gauge in the same scale would require developing a new track gauge, which is outside the parameters set by the original poster.”

As Jerry stated Don Nicolay makes the tie extrusions in plastic for duel gauge trackage in 1:20.3. Since Bachmann’s 45 tonner was sold in both standard and narrow gauge in the “Prototypes”. I felt it met the qualifications. Barry Boggs has created narrow gauge and standard guage in 1:22.5, but they have all been custom creations. I was just dreaming large. :wink:

A standard gauge, large scale 1:20.3 box car would sure put everything in perspective.

#33

Steve Featherkile said:
SNIP Who’s going to build the first 1:29 narrow minded locomotive?

Been there done that. I converted a USAT NW2 to 3’ narrow gauge on 32 mm gauge track for a good customer of mine. He used it to pull out of steam live steamers back to the depot.

(http://www.rcs-rc.com/pics/LiveSteam-OZ/PS-DeadSteam-01.jpg)

Plus it had a train for running on the 32 mm gauge track.

(http://www.rcs-rc.com/pics/LiveSteam-OZ/PeterStuart-16.jpg)

(http://www.rcs-rc.com/pics/LiveSteam-OZ/PeterStuart-17.jpg)

(http://www.rcs-rc.com/pics/LiveSteam-OZ/PeterStuart-18.jpg)

(http://www.rcs-rc.com/pics/LiveSteam-OZ/PeterStuart-19.jpg)

Yes, even though I find this hard to swallow, 1:29 scale is really the only scale for mainline and narrow gauge on the currently available 45 mm and 32 mm gauge track.

#34

Steve,

What wheel/track profile would you use for An3?

If unlimited money, I’m with Jerry B on 1:20.3 all prototype gauges.

Sincerely,

Joe Satnik

#35

Since I’m dreaming anyway, I am lining up with the 1/24 boys. New track, model both standard and narrow in 1/24.
1/2 inch equals 1 foot is nice and simple, the way I like it.
Ralph

#36

Jeff Saxton cut and sold some 1:20.3 standard gauge boxcar kits when he did the ‘budget boxcar’ kits several years ago. I didn’t get one, but I do have access to the plans and hope to build a couple. I thought I might use Bob McCowan’s ‘plastic box’ substructure techniques.

Don Niday (Iron Creek Shops) and David Queener (Cumberland Locomotive Works) have been very strong proponents of 1:20.3 standard gauge and have developed several products, including the tie strips, trucks and complete cars to support that scale / gauge combination.

The NMRA has published Standards for F scale (link) in both standard gauge and narrow gauge.

I guess it could be reasonably argued that SG & NG in F (1:20.3) scale already exist and therefor meet John’s original requirements.

As I wrote earlier, the reasons several of us suggested 1:24 is the simplicity of scaling, and to have access to all the other goodies that exist in the much larger aircraft and vehicle modeling world. In that regard, 1:20 is comparatively limited. As JB wrote, 1:24 would require a reset of most everything to do with the trains.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

#37
Joe Satnik said:
What wheel/track profile would you use for An3?
Well, since most of the track for 0 gauge is over size for 0 gauge, it would probably work very well for the light weight stuff used in narrow gauge in 1:29 scale. As to wheel profile, I dunno. Whatever looks good, I guess. :D Since I have a gazillion bancka bucks to throw away on this venture, I'd hire some bright boy to figure that out for me...

What Tony did looks very plausible.

My personal opinion is that F scale (1:20.3) will certainly have the “WOW” factor, and I would dearly love to see someone do it, I think it would be too big to be practicable. If you are going to spend that kind of money, and have that kind of room, you might as well go all the way to 3.5 inch or 7.5 inch scale and do live steam ride on.

#38

Going 1/2" would definitely open lots of possibilities, but----

Track outside would have to be at least .250 or so, making it way over sized.
Why?
Finescale wheels would tend to de-rail due to un-even track, etc.
Your standard gauge track would prolly be, what, .125 or less?
And narrow gauge even smaller.
Not robust enough for outside use.
That’s one of the reason I decided to go with track gauge already produced by other manufactures.

I would start up with 1:20.3 for narrow gauge and 1:29 for standard gauge.
Simply because future customer’s are already set up and adding a loco or rolling stock to their collection would be easy.

jb

#39

“I would start up with 1:20.3 for narrow gauge and 1:29 for standard gauge.
Simply because future customer’s are already set up and adding a loco or rolling stock to their collection would be easy.”

See that’s the rub. So you actually wanted this business to make money? I think you are seeing the reason the businesses today make some of the decisions they make. The broader the market the better chance you are to land a sale with a customer. But then you have to go with the compromises to your pure desire for the business you wanted to create.

Therefore it is probably best to not mix your hobby and your employment. Remember before I got involved with the marina, I spent all my spare time on the boat at the marina. :wink:

#40
TonyWalsham said:
Yes, even though I find this hard to swallow, 1:29 scale is really the only scale for mainline and narrow gauge on the currently available 45 mm and 32 mm gauge track.
I haven't done the math... is 32MM track equally as incorrect in 1:29 for 3FT gauge as 45MM track is for Std. Gauge ?

I know where your coming from with all the 1:29 Std,. gauge being available and the 32MM track availability being good, but starting down another incorrect scale/gauge path just doesn’t make any sense to me. We’ve already had attempts to do American Narrow Gauge (3Ft.) in 1:22.5 and 1:24. Why add another odd ball.

I’d rather see a very small selection of track an rolling stock for Std. Gauge in 1:20.3.