"They’ve just got to learn to time things better.
Later,
K"
Among other things.
Kevin,
sign of the times, maybe, but initially (circa late '90’s - ealy 2000’s) Bachmann supplied their product in maroon coloured packaging. Around 2004 the packaging colour changed to red. Now bear in mind the catastrophe of another toy train manufacturer ‘famous’ for its red coloured boxes. The management of the then defunct toy company had a consumer attitude commensurate with the current Bachmann philosophy. I see the current Bachmann marketting philosophy is that we, as consumers, should be thankful for whatever product Bachmann releases and do not complain or ‘anticipate’ prematurely. Sounds very much like the Germanic philosophy of that other company.
Another American based company was headed along a similar path over the last few years, but thankfully has responded to consumer criticism and is now making attempts to introduce a degree of acceptable standards in production. Sarcasm or not, I found the Bach-man comment as a chastisement and basically 'watch your step'.Tim Brien said:Tim, it does appear that after the mess with the building and release of the Kay, they might have gained some insight into the mindset of the consumer...let us hope!
Another American based company was headed along a similar path over the last few years, but thankfully has responded to consumer criticism and is now making attempts to introduce a degree of acceptable standards in production. Sarcasm or not, I found the Bach-man comment as a chastisement and basically 'watch your step'.
in regards to the latter half of your statement:
For a manufacture to “chastise” it’s buying base for interest in pre-release product is asinine! as I mentioned on MLS…if any company decides to “punish” or “bully” a potential buyer for a corporate misstep (leaked info, unauthorized pre-production photos, etc…) by not producing a good…it will in the end be the producers loss…the consumer will spend elsewhere if they choose…The Consumer Is King!
cale
Black Helicopter time: I wonder if the Christmas adage was a hidden clue to “product X” being released in December?
Matthew (OV) said:
Consider the following parts of the Bachmann model (in On30 or Large Scale: ) *Headlight *Hood doors/door handles *Steps *Side door cab with narrow (front to back) windows on sides. *Grill (radiator, front) *siderods and counterweights (and outside frame) *grabirons I cannot find a photo anyplace of any locomotive that has more than a couple of these things that look like the ones on the model … and most of the ones on the northeast railfan site are shown as diesel. The Bachmann site says of the On30 version: “Based on a 1940s stock model from the Davenport catalog, this Spectrum® 0-4-0 features the counterweight and side-rod configuration that distinguishes many transition-era locomotives.” To me that means NO prototype. Even the much maligned 45 tonner had an actual prototype… can anyone find one that has a grill like this one, AND a raised headlight (if not so massive as this one’s) AND grabirons, steps, and the shorty side door cab like this one … that also has an outside frame, and counterweights? If so … and there’s any data available… what kind of power plant was in them? Did they have air brake capabilities (some on the northeast site have air tanks visible) and what was the actual weight of this particular variety? All interesting questions. Oh, and I understand that a “critter” was often cobbled together from spare parts, etc … but again, that would make this along the lines of the “Indy” … at which point I’d start to ask some hard questions about scale too. Matthew (OV)
(http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/alcoa3585.jpg)
This one is pretty close. There are some differences. To assume there is no prototype is a bit of a stretch. Ralph
Actually that’s the one I was looking at when I made the statement.
*The railings DO match the model… Except that this one has added ones on top of the hood.
*The doors on the hood MAY match the model; you can’t see the handles etc in this photo because of whatever that is on the left hand running board.
- The radiator grille does appear to be about the same.
*The cab does NOT match. it’s shorter, longer front to back, and has no door on the sides. The windows are oval in the front instead of rectangular.
*The unit appears to be 3’ gauge, but is inside frame, and has spoked wheels.
*The headlight is mounted in the front hood, and small instead of on top and enormous.
*There is no steam-esque exhaust stack as the model has.
*The cab in the photo is proportionally lower with respect to the hood than the one on the model.
*There are no stirrup steps of any kind in the photo.
*The model appears to have a single footboard on each end, while the photo has one on each side with a space in the middle as the coupler is lower (or the footboards are higher…)
I suspect the model is of a larger/heavier unit.
Please… there’s been a lot of discussion about tone on here. I am being neither critical nor arrogant here, and respect your position; yes, a lot of these were very similar … my main point isn’t really about the prototype of the model, but the intended size and scale of the model – Bachmann* (and others) are famous for the “Suitable for use with Large Scale” philosophy… and whether this locomotive COULD function in 1:22.5 or 1:24 or any other scale for that matter concerns me less than what scale it’s actually intended to be, if any.
If it’s not, however nice a model, and however much fun it may be to plunk on the track, or cute under a christmas tree it might be, it doesn’t get a seat in the 1:20.3 hall of fame… period. I’ve worked long and hard to get my railroad to where all of its regular equipment is the same scale and size, on purpose… and I don’t want the waters muddied by “what scale do you want it to be?” For those who don’t feel strongly about that, I have no ilk whatsoever.
Matthew (OV)
- Before anyone screams, I don’t mean spectrum locos. I’m thining particularly of the 2-6-0 “Indy” the original Porter sidetank, the Porter Saddletank, the 20’ cars (which are still labelled “1:20.3” on many sales sites) and the 8 wheel caboose. Picture this loco with a string of V dumps (1:20.3) a string of 20’ gons or flats (1:22.5) and populated by a 1:22.5 figure (25 tonner?) or a 1:20.3 figure (12 tonner?) and you’ll see where this concern really does hold some water.
Quote:"thankful for whatever product..." Quite honestly, we should be appreciative of whatever product any manufacturer offers. New product--regardless of prototype--is a good sign. All the manufacturers get deluged with "suggestions" for what they should produce next. What goes on their long-term plan is entirely up to them. New product announcements mean the hobby is still doing well enough to support new product development.
... I see the current Bachmann marketting philosophy is that we, as consumers, should be thankful for whatever product Bachmann releases and do not complain or 'anticipate' prematurely.
“…do not complain…”
Show me a company that likes to have their products criticized. Some have thicker skins than others. Some have their heads in the sand, denying a problem exists. Bachmann actually has a very good history when it comes to listening to their customer base. Their problems stem from the fact that they seem to not do adequate testing prior to release, which unfortunately generates a high number of the complaints. (That, and it occasionally seems to take some convincing that a problem does exist.) We’ve seen the Ks fitted with new counterweights, spare parts now included in the 1:20 cars, even spare K-27 bits and and other parts being offered as separate items. That’s due to consumer pressure. If we simply smiled and nodded, nothing would have changed. I’m sure they’d prefer that, as change means added expense, but they are willing to make adjustments along the way.
Was the large scale community clamoring for a small industrial switcher? Not that I heard. I’m fairly certain most would have been quite pleased with a D&RGW #50 or SP “Little Giant.” But, who’s to blame Bachmann for their choice? The On30 version has been quite popular. Besides, I haven’t heard anyone complaining about the choice, just that they were shocked to hear nothing from Bachmann about it.
“…do not … anticipate prematurely.”
Bachmann’s always tried to remain quite secretive about what they’re doing. It’s their marketing philosophy. This time, they got caught by the calendar, and a lack of planning. (Hint: If you want to announce a product on a given date, EMBARGO your dealers from advertising until that date. It’s a common practice in any number of industries.) Credit Bachmann this time for confirming the locomotive’s existence and agreeing to jump the gun a bit. They could very easily have said “wait until July 18th.”
Contrast Bachmann with Accucraft, whose policy seems to be to lay all the cards on the table, but give absolutely no timeline for when they’re going to be dealt. In fairness, they’re selling $4K locomotives, so a little advance notice theoretically helps people budget. At the same time, how long have we been waiting for the code 250 switches?
(I’m completely lost on what the color of the box has to do with anything…)
Later,
K
Quote:Considering their "stock" engineer in all their locomotives is short even for 1:22.5, I wouldn't use him--specifically--as a reference. ;)
... ...Picture this loco with a string of V dumps (1:20.3) a string of 20' gons or flats (1:22.5) and populated by a 1:22.5 figure (25 tonner?) or a 1:20.3 figure (12 tonner?) and you'll see where this concern really does hold some water.
Seriously, though, Matt’s concerns about this loco are–in my opinion–what makes it such an ideal model. It’s perfectly suited for multiple scales–the only way you’d know is by the size of the engineer in the cab. Look at the photos of all the Davenports on the NERails site, and tell me just by looking at them how big they are relative to one another. Every dimension on those locos is variable, customizable to the purchaser. (For example, US Gypsum had a clearance issue at one of their plants which mandated a maximum height of 10’. The diesels they ordered had very low cabs as a result.)
Later,
K
Matthew,
I still say it is a stretch to say there is no prototype. The site I linked to is a limited resource.
And loco’s were optioned many different ways when ordered.
I would think one should have the model in hand and done a good bit of research before proclaiming there is no prototype.
Who knows, might even be a Spectrum.
Ralph
Prior to the ‘K’ being released, Bachmann were very open about upcoming releases. Contractual restraints resulted in a ban on discussion of the ‘K’ until the item was close to being released. We all remember the Vulcan fiasco. Many wanted the loco, but many more lampooned the idea and told Bachmann to look elsewhere for a planned prototype release. What did we get then - a newly tooled 38-tonne Shay, a 3-truck 55-tonne Shay, a retooled Porter and a repainted American. All these releases were basically retooling of existing releases. Apart from the ‘K’ and newly released 1/20.3 scale rolling stock, then nothing but rehashes for the masses. Exactly how popular was the 3-truck with obligatory onboard, embedded electronics? How popular is the ‘K’? How well are the American repaints selling?
I feel something important is destined to be released for Christmas this year (hopefully, not simply a caboose for the ‘K’?). Bachmann has had its thunder stolen from under them - what is more important, the news of the release or the actual product being available? The Bach-man has certainly ‘hinted’ at something coming in time for a Christmas release (if we all keep our mouths shut tight!). A management marketting psychology shift in Philly has not gone down well and to date, has alienated those who were the mainstay consumers.
Who do they think they are? More importantly, who do they think WE are!!! Howard is getting on a seriously deranged power trip if he thinks he can dictate to us (i.e. the people that BUY his products!!!) what we can do and what we can say and what we can think!!! We don’t work for them! (Ooooh…we’d better be good little boys and girls and do what we’re told and keep our mouths shut or we won’t get any more presents! Sheesh!..)
Bachmann has had a serious marketing problem for some time. It’s their attitude. Oh, sorry Kevin but I’m going to have to disagree with you in that Bachmann really doesn’t have a good track record where problems are concerned! In fact, the main person that has pulled their chestnuts out of the fire time and time again is persona non grata now!! Their SOP is to deny that a problem exists and to bully anyone that talks about it! Case in point: What happened to all those “Quasinami” equipped Shays?
The Bach-man is warning us to quit speculating or we won’t get any new products. FINE!! Accucraft and a slew of other manufacturers are picking up the slack. If Bachmann wants to cut their own corporate throat then I will be glad to pass the knife!! There are some corporate grand-hi-muckey-mucks that need to retire (or be retired!) The K fiasco should have clued in some people. No such luck!
I don’t like bullies and I sure as hell don’t like to BE bullied! I buy Bachmann products so I feel I have the right to voice my opinions and I DON"T appreciate being told what and what not to do by a manufacturer that wants my business!!! Spin it all you like but I will continue to speculate and I will continue to check in with Durango Dan as he has become the source for information that used to belong to the Bach-man. I will continue to critique products but I WON’T EVER pre-order another Bachmann engine EVER again!! (It’s not personal. I just don’t feel like being a Beta testor for Bachmann when I have coughed up over $700!)
Well, I’d better quit there or somebody will accuse me of bitching and I just couldn’t take that! Here endeth the rant.
Good grief! Those statements were so very obviously said in jest. Get a grip guys! Sorry … I just can’t believe it. Bachmann is trying to have some fun in announcing that their product release was let out of the bag, and they get jumped on. Save the rants for something worth ranting about, like product quality or service … not the way someone chooses language in a simple forum post. Is a vendor not allowed to have a sense of humor? I guess it is wasted on those customers who lack it.
Quote:If you want to let what goes on behind the scenes dictate your preferences, I'm not going to argue. For me, it makes no difference. I consider myself one of Bachmann's "mainstay consumers," and I don't feel alienated in the least. I can't speak for anyone else, but I would bet there are plenty of people who--like me--only care about what comes out of the box. Bachmann certainly has had its quirks, but they also continually push the envelope with their 1:20.3 stuff, each one seemingly moving the bar just a bit higher each time.
... ... A management marketting psychology shift in Philly has not gone down well and to date, has alienated those who were the mainstay consumers.
Quote:They're [i]far[/i] from unique in that department. And (as I mentioned earlier) while they do seem reluctant to admit problems exist at first, they do eventually come around and make corrections where they can. Yes, I do think they shot themselves in the foot in how they treated TOC. He's an unfortunate victim of politics. I'm certainly not going to stop buying trains because of that. Life's too short to let others' petty disputes keep me from my relaxation.
... Their SOP is to deny that a problem exists and to bully anyone that talks about it!
On that note, I’m off to the workshop.
Later,
K
Del,
prior to the ‘pre’-announcement of the ‘K’ release, I would have considered the comment as either sarcasm or in jest. However, recent events over the previous twelve months or so, dictate otherwise. I followed the original Bachmann forum site for some years and decided to leave when the ‘K’ was ‘announced’, against Bachmann’s wishes as regards contractual agreements with a HoN3 manufacturer and there seemed a manufacturer commitment to DCC in largescale. From that point on postings were arbitrarily deleted by the Bach-man. It seemed that if one was not into DCC then one had no idea what they were talking about. Recently, I returned to see the ‘problem’ that the critter announcement had caused and noted the Bach-man had apologised for deleting previous posts.
I re-read the posting by the Bach-man in the General Forum area. Yes, it does read as somewhat tongue-in-cheek but the threat behind it is real. There are some people at Bachmann that are VERY upset at those of us that dare to criticize their decisions! Okay, that’s understandable but the Bach-man has told us to pipe-down before with the threat of cutting off a new offering being held over our heads as a consequence should we not tow the line.
Look, I understand that they want to introduce new products at the NMRA show and they hate leaks but that’s life!! Don’t blame us when something shows up complete with pictures and parts numbers and we discuss it!! As far as not buying any more Bachmann, I never said that! I said I wouldn’t ever PRE-ORDER again! I will wait for the inevitable problems to crop up and then I will send it off to TOC for a “Jurrasic Park” conversion! That way I know that I will get something I want that works!
I have quit posting on the Bachmann board for the most part. It’s useless and it p*sses them off so why should I? That isn’t good enough for them. They don’t want us posting here or on any of the other forums either! That’s arrogant presumption!
A little “Davenport” would certainly be on my short list. Will I loose sleep if it is never introduced or developed? About as much as I did when the “Long Gone and Busted” bit the dust. Put a product out there and it might sell. Don’t pursue new products and they certainly won’t be bought.
don’t really matter much to me if it was real or not…goes back to what I said…if they choose not to make something to punish the consumer…we’ll go somewhere else to shop…MSRP $275…street prob $150?
Cale Nelson said:Here in yUK, Dragon G Scale, a very useful dealer in South Wales, is selling them - in five different colour schemes - for £123.95.
how do those figures work out in USDollars?
So figure on about $150.00 to you guys in CheapTrainLand… 
tac
seems it like a GR Mag thing…everyone overseas gets their copy then mine shows…weird…you are correct mr. TAC…
these guys are having too much fun!
(http://www.backwoodsminiatures.com/ir01.jpg)
(http://www.backwoodsminiatures.com/sw01.jpg)
I almost bought the 45 tonner but it just looked too big and I did not want to do a major modification. This new offering looks more promising. I want a diesel shifter to work in a yard and haul ore cars out of a mine shaft and this will probably fit the bill. I won’t decide until I see it. Any new large scale product from any manufacturer should be welcomed. It wasn’t too long ago that you had to build most of your on engines or go without.