Model Forum / General / Railroads / August 2008

First, I don't claim to have an exhaustive or definitive analysis of why
this or that happened in different parts of the model train world. I
merely notice _some_ of the factors that were and are at work. Just how
significant they compared to the ones I ignore or don't know of is
another issue.

I think Jerry's decisions and regrets illustrate why some standards are
necessary. It also illustrates how random factors shift the market in
different directions at different times. If Trix had gone 4mm on 16.5mm
gauge, then it would have pushed Hornby into upgrading its scale
fidelity sooner. I'm not knocking Hornby - I think they made a superb
toy, with good overall scale proportions, and very good detail for a
toy. The mechs were reliable, the product as whole was very sturdy, and
all in all Hornby provided excellent play value. That's wasn't my point.

My point was that Hornby dominated the UK toy train market, because of
the quality of its product. The UK scale modellers followed that
de-facto commercial standard of 4mm scale on 16.5mm track, because it
was easier and usually less costly to adapt Hornby product to scale than
to build for 18.83mm gauge. Besides, the imagination is a powerful
modelling tool: railway modelling is a matter of compromises, and once
one has adopted a compromise, one no longer notices it.

In N. America the scale modellers early one insisted on true scale (as
close as was practicable), and ignored (and many were noisily hostile
to) the toy train product (except for those bits and pieces that could
be adapted to scale by rewheeling, etc.) The NMRA was initially a
predominantly O scale group, BTW, it wasn't until around 1950 that HO
caught up to O scale in popularity. So the NMRA was formed more or less
explicitly to counteract the dominance of Lionel's "O gauge".

From the 1960s onward, there has been a decline in the toy train market
for children. We now have a large pool of adults who enjoy train models,
in many ways, and on many levels. But overall, the demand for scale
fidelity has increased, and mfrs must keep up with that demand to
survive. One side effect has been that the quality of toy trains has
changed, too: more scale fidelity, but not so much robustness. But the
main effect has been an improvement in quality overall.

FWIW, I think Maerklin is in trouble because it thought it could hold
onto its 3-rail AC market. But the days of a captive market are over.
there will continue to be a "Maerklin system" market, but it will
decline. I foresee a thriving but brief trade in insulated replacement
wheels for Maerklin stock...

That's enough ruminations for today. ;-)

True, Lima barged headlong into the UK market with some (pretty horrible)
HO-scale offerings but quickly realised they were banging their head in a
brick wall and switched to OO.

Raivarossi tried too ................... and flopped.

Fleischmann had a pretty half-hearted attempt at UK HO and had virtually no
impact, although I believe their 'Warship' and Southern coaches (strange
combination if I may say) were still available until very recently; but that
may have simply been Fleischmann trying to sell off initial over-production.

John.

Probably because the points are new (current) and the rolling stock ids
old  - or vice versa.

Hornby don't/didn't have standards. One of the British MR mags I used to
buy occasionally gave the wheel dimensions of all the rolling stock and
locomotives it reviewed. I noticed that these dimensions varied not only
between manufacturers, as might be expected, but also within a
manufacturer's range. Weird.