If you were in charge of a model company

[Craig Irwin]

Return old tools to their orignal state before reissueing them.

[Erik Smith]

How about more metal transfers for emblems? Tamiya does it, how come nobody else does?

What Art said is true about small fortune resulting from years of hard work and a dwindling large fortune. We need to get that Buffett in Omaha interested in models.

[Chuck Most]

If I were in charge of a model company, they'd probably go belly-up within a few months, because I'd only produce kits of somewhat 'esoteric' subjects that only I (and maybe five or six other people, tops) would actually buy in any great quantity.

[Erik Smith]

If I were in charge of a model company, they'd probably go belly-up within a few months, because I'd only produce kits of somewhat 'esoteric' subjects that only I (and maybe five or six other people, tops) would actually buy in any great quantity.

That's what Model Factory Hiro does - you just have to charge $200 or $300 for each kit.

[PARTSMARTY]

Every one of us builders who has been building a long time could probably come up with a list a mile long,but here's a few<no particular order>:

1>make sure that every tire pictured with white lettering or whitewalls has them already on them.

2>only one piece oil pans-not molded into block

3>no molded in exhausts on anything

4>more decals for nameplates or dash guages-etc..

thanks guys

[rmvw guy]

I would like more engine choices. For instance, have a choice of the stock engine or a hot rod engine like the old 3 in 1 kits. All the '32 fords should have a stock engine included, a Falcon should include a Ford engine not just a BB Chevy, a'49 Mercury should have a flathead included along with the Caddy, a Sb and BB engine in all the Impalas and Novas, etc. etc. Also more tire choices instead of the same standard tires in almost all the kits. Oh, and more wheel choices along with stock hubcaps. And all this for a lower price. lol

[Luc Janssens]

For those of you who want to try it, make a business case, ask a quote from Revell, Round-2 and Moebius.

When the details are worked out with the vendor of your choice, go to a bank and apply for a loan....

To help you make your business case, you may use the following as a guide....

;)

The $250,000 Question

So the bank agreed to loan you $250,000 to spend on an all new 1/25 Car tool. If the investment is paid back in the agreed time, let's say 3 years, an extra $500,000 is coming your way for further releases. If you fail, say goodbye to the extra $500 000, and say hello to your new best friend, the repo man! (Insert crazy laugh here)

If you accept the challenge, then read the introduction, guidelines and pilot project below, and you will be all set.

(Revised Nov. 15th, 2007)

Introduction:

What is the $250,000 or 250K question and where does this number come from?

The 250K question is a one of kind survey, which, with the help of friends, yours truly fired up in 2001. Its purpose is to find out what you, the forum participant would do, when given a budget to create an all new model kit and make a profit from that venture. The number was taken from a statement made by a former ERTL president in the late 1990s as to how much it costs to tool up an all-new car model kit. The number went South shortly after product development went East, joining the already relocated production facilities, but word on the street is, that it's on the rise again, and almost on par with North American counterparts.

After a two year absence I felt that the time was ripe to start it up again, mainly due to the doom and gloom that is surrounding today’s hobby industry and the frustration it creates amongst many modelers, as seen on many fora.

Now this little essay is more than listing dozens upon dozens of possible new subjects, but don't let this scare you a way, because this is so much more rewarding, and lets the manufacturers and distributors who often lurk these pages see in a positive way, what you the modelers want and how.

So hop on board and turn these bad vibes into positive energy, by creating your 250K proposal.

To help you on your way I created some guidelines and with the help of our very own Tom Sheehy wrote a pilot entry, so I’m very certain that when you're finished reading all this, the ink will steadily flow out of your pen or drive you spouse nuts when you're constantly hammering the keyboard of your home computer.

Guidelines:

1) Select the type of customer you wish to reach. This will help you define the skill level, parts count, breakdown and price range.

- Youth (parents- grandparents of)

- Weekend (Novice) modeler

- Enthusiast modeler

2) Choice of subject matter:

You've selected your customer, now we need to find out what they want.

- What's the current or expected long term automotive trend in the group you selected (Racing, Muscle, exotic, drag...)?

- Which yesteryears kits are (or were always) strong sellers and could benefit from a complete redo? (Amt vs Revell '64 Impala for example)

- Are there still "missing links" in a successful series? (where's the '66 Impala for example)

- And last but not least do you think they're willing to pay extra copyright & trademark fees (not only from OEM but also from 3rd parties like tire, wheel and speed equipment companies, also racing sponsors, and media groups) because it can add up quickly when you go all the way.

3) Design of the kit & tool:

Now that you have chosen the subject matter for the target group selected, one can start designing the kit. It must not only meet the skill level (easy, moderate, challenging) of the target customer, helping (not fighting) him or her to create something they can be proud of.

It also sets the price bracket in which you will have to operate deciding on parts count, the choice as to parts breakdown depends not only on the skill level but the subject matter too. Here are two examples:

- Skill level: molded-in headlamps are out of place in a kit marketed towards enthusiasts

- Subject matter: Engines is very important in a drag racing car, but not in a Van where dress-up features are more desired.

To tackle this, it's best to talk with fellow modelers (on or off Tom's board), go through your stack of kits or display case(s) lined with built models and write down what features you liked or disliked when assembling them. If you have any, take a look at your (old) promos and die-casts too, because they were/are designed for easy and fast assembly by non-modelers on a production line.

I took the liberty of writing down some key elements which (for me at least) define the characteristics of an excellent kit, no matter what skill level:

- Ease of build, no matter how many parts.

- Parts break-down not only chosen in function of molding restrictions and possible future siblings, but also to avoid possible sink mark areas and optical distortions (on clear parts), the degree of detail you wish to incorporate, helping the painting process (like the separate grille inserts of the Amt (ex-MPC) '74 Roadrunner/GTX) or the mating of various subassemblies and also by trying to make the assembly dummy proof, by carefully (again to avoid ghost sink marks) chosen (perimeter) ridges, holes and pins.

- Crispness of the molded parts, so clean-up is minimal and applying finishing materials like BMF becomes child's play.

- Sprue attachments, designed not to damage the appearance of the parts when cut off the tree. This is especially important for plated parts.

- Ejection pins, is it possible to position them on hidden surfaces, or on the sprues, maybe by beefing up the affected part(s) sprue attachment(s).

- Parting lines, be creative and don't let them run too close to areas where they can affect the overall presence of the model, like too close to molded-in scripts, or try to hide by using the shape of the piece to its advantage, especially when dealing with plated parts.

Keep in mind that outright criticism of an existing kits flaws or shortcomings may not be appreciated by its manufacturer when reading your proposal. Try to use constructive criticism to avoid your proposal being sent straight to the shredder. Likewise, pointing out strong points of a model's design or engineering aspects may facilitate the acceptance of your proposal. For us, this may be just a hobby, but for many it is a business and a way to make a living.

4) Packaging and support

How do you want to present your product? The design of the box is the first thing the buyer sees, and may make or break a decision to purchase the kit. Packaging of contents, as well as the layout of the instruction sheet are also issues that may reinforce the buyers decision of having bought the kit.

5) The bean counters have reviewed your proposal and it seems the kit you're proposing slightly exceeds the budget. Luckily you are still at the planning stage, so what aspect or parts of the kit do you lose, and why?

It may seem like a cruel question, but sometimes during the planning stages for whatever reason there's something that goes over budget. What do you do?

6) Post a photo of the subject

Post a photo either from your collection or taken from the web (when doing the latter, remember to indicate who the picture is courtesy of). Please don't post excessively large pictures. Not all people have a high-speed internet connection.

Pilot Entry: 1969 Dodge Polara CHP Cruiser by Tom Sheehy & Luc Janssens

1) Select the type of customer you wish to reach:

The enthusiast modeler,

As with big rig builders, police car modelers are rarely blessed with new subjects, and the few released were either simplified designs and retools or marketed towards youth, sometimes including questionable and costly extras.

Only one kit sticks out and then it's an old tool whose current existential status is unknown, namely the old Jo-Han Plymouth Fury, which was on the market for decades.

I firmly believe that police car modelers will lay the green on the counter for a detailed cruiser because they almost always had to rely on aftermarket companies to make a convincing model.

2) Choice of subject matter:

The 1969 Dodge Polara is widely known as one of the all-time favorite cruisers amongst officers who were active during the 60s-70s. It is also listed as the fastest cruiser of the time, even surpassing the 94-96 Caprice LT1s. The 1969 Polara equipped with a 440 4bbl was officially clocked at 147mph in tests.

It was basically a 4 door muscle car, which sat on top of the food chain eating GTOs, Chargers, Challengers, 'Cudas, Chevelles, Camaros and Mustangs for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Just the kit we need for keeping the tablecloths of America's contest tables free from tire burns! In fact, anyone who collects and/or builds muscle car kits must have at least one, just to keep his collection intact.

3) Design of the kit & tool:

Finding a pristine example will not be a problem in this case, because Hemmings "Muscle Car Machines" Magazine recently did a restoration feature on one. Likewise for someone to measure and photograph it, because it's in Tom Montgomery's (Former Amt/Ertl kit designer) back yard!

Body: Four-door body of course with fine and sharp engraving (Don't you love the window surrounds on a late 60s Jo-Han annual?) and without heavy molded-in features. For example, a dome light which can lead to a sink mark in the roof, which the modeler has to fill and sand. Small ridges and holes where to drill in the roof for roof mounted emergency lights will do.

Because this car has seen service in many agencies, it would be handy to either offer the side moldings as separate metal transfer pieces (like Galaxie LTD's 1948 Chevrolets). This may not be feasible and could be a possible giveback when running into budget issues, but since it's a thin molding to begin with, it probably can be sanded off with relative ease when molded-in.

The body closings will only consist of the hood dressed up with a separate lip* and hinges, in case the builder wants to show off the engine.

The following items round up the body assembly: firewall, inner fenders (as with Amt '68 RR), radiator brace, side mirror(s)*, door handles*, front bumper* with separate grille* (to ease the detail painting) with clear headlamp lenses, rear bumper*, tail lamp-surrounds* with a perimeter flange to reinforce them and provide a gluing surface to mount them into the body and provide a stop for the rear bumper, and clear tail lamp-lenses of course (* indicates chrome part).

Interior: The plain-Jane base level trim all around interior, would be a sort of snap-fit platform style, minimizing the risk of getting glue in unwanted places.

Consisting of a floorboard with a two piece dash, steering wheel and column with molded-in selectors, separate pedals, two piece bench seat, separate rear seat with package tray (flashed over holes for mounting the two CHP flashers), separate door panels to allow for easy detailing. Police radio set-up for the transmission hump. It can be similar to the Jo-Han Plymouth set up, as that was very accurate. However, having separate pieces for the radio, siren control and switches would be great so that different set-ups can be configured by the builder. Two detailed microphones are needed; there was only one in the Jo-Han kit which was incorrect for the set-up.

Chassis and drivetrain: Breakdown similar to AMT’s 1957 Chrysler 300 or their 1960 Galaxie kit, 440 4bbl (what else!) with Torqueflite 727 Auto Trans. This police engine was rated at 375 HP. Kit should include two air cleaners, one stock and one low restriction. The low restriction is the police unit, and is similar in design to the one in the Lindberg 1964 Dodge 330 kit. It's actually referred to in the Dodge literature as an "unsilenced" air cleaner. Separate chassis, heavy duty rear end, dual exhaust, and front and rear sway bars round out the chassis. Wheels: two sets...one needs to be correct steel wheels with dog dish hub caps of correct vintage. I'd include a base series full hubcap as an option for those doing a standard sedan. Tires need to be a beefy vintage blackwall, Goodyear Polyglas or similar. The ones AMT has been using for years are actually pretty good.

Accessories: Here's where it gets tricky. The Jo-Han Plymouth was actually a great kit for the roof lights alone. They were extremely accurate and looked the part. This kit should be done with that in mind, optional roof light set-up* for multiple agencies. Spotlights* for both sides are a must. Two styles of beacon lights, one like the Jo-Han, which is a Federal model 176H and one a flat top 4 beam (Federal 184, Dietz 211 or similar). The roof bar with twin beacons would be nice too. That's a Federal model 11, with optional chromed siren speaker in the center. I'd use the rounded speaker (like the speaker on the Adam-12 car) instead of the flat wide style in the Jo-Han kit. Since electronic sirens were just becoming popular, it would still need an old mechanical siren for under the hood as another option. To round it out, about six flashers of different sizes, 2 small, 2 medium, 2 larger, all single faced. These could be used for rear deck flashers, front grille flashers, optional light bar flashers, etc.

Now the most important necessity for all of these lights: MOLD ALL OF THEM IN CLEAR PLASTIC. Not red, not blue, not a mix... CLEAR. This allows the builder to tint them accordingly to the agency that's being represented.

The push bar would be a preformed pre-painted metal assembly, to keep it in scale and robust

Agency decals: I'm sure licensing and permissions are in order here. But it shouldn't be too bad, considering Hawk/Lindberg is issuing about 6 different state agencies in their reissue of the 1996 Crown Victoria. A CHP version is a must, this would negate the need for roof lights, too, as they ran most of these with no roof lights and dual spotlights, the driver's side being red. The CHP would also have two flashers, one red and one amber, on the back package shelf, both on the left side, facing rear. However, the 1969 Polaras were used all over the country, and offering different versions or including different agencies in the one kit (like the Jo-Han Plymouth) would be great.

The tooling could be used for modified reissues of any C-body MoPar from 1969-77 as the chassis were virtually unchanged except for the yearly addition of annual emissions upgrades (or downgrades, if you will). The ultimate choice would be the 74 Monaco for its wide use in movies (Blues Brothers) and its very wide use in police and taxi work.

4) Packaging and support

Box

- Artwork: I really like the way Sean Svendsen handled the Model King box designs of the ’70 Wildcat and Camaro Funny Cars. He really knows how to present a built model, so I would put him in charge of that (hopefully his fees are reasonable). for the box top however, I also like the art work of Jairus Watson and know he would do a good job of a CHP unit burning sideways (showing off the "Wolfs Head" graphics on the door) through a corner on Mulholland drive, in hot pursuit of some bad boys.

The size of the box would be like the "Accurate Miniatures" Corvette kits, to show off the artwork and the neatly displayed contents when removing the box top.

- Packaging of the parts: chrome, clear parts, tires, packed separately in poly bags, same for the white plastic parts, decals by Cartograph covered with a protective paper and bagged too.

- Instruction sheet: I like the approach AMT/ERTL took in the mid 1990s, which was very detailed and every part was clearly identified.

- Consumer support: On our company website I would post a whole range of photos taken when the engineers of product development were measuring up the cruiser, together with anecdotes, facts and fiction of the subject and the agency it served with.

Also a photo composing as per instruction sheet sequence would be available on line together with tips on how to build a perfect model.

5) Budgetary constraints

I would lose the metal transfers, and engrave the side molding into the cavity of the body sides, is a too simple solution for the cash problem, therefore I would get in touch with a die cast manufacturer (like Highway 61) to see if the project is of interest to them too, because the majority of model car collectors are not modelers, if they're interested the R&D costs would drop considerably, and could start a long term partnership

6) Post a photo of the subject

For photo's and the original article of the restoration of this unique vehicle click on the link below.

Note: The book "Dodge, Plymouth & Chrysler POLICE CARS, 1956-1978" by Edwin Sanow and John Bellah, Motorbooks International was used for reference.

http://www.hemmings...._feature15.html

Photo courtesy of Hemmings Muscle Machines.

The 250 000 dollar / 250K question ©.

Format created by:

Luc Janssens,

Edited April 6, 2012 by Luc Janssens

[modelmike]

better packageing most of all for the clear plastic parts "I hate when the windshields are marked up"

[Boreham]

I'd review our current model stock and insist that a sample of 5 be built OOB. by board members.

Allowing a week to build 1 one the 5 selected during company hours.

They would be asked to identify the Feedback on their findings.

Commission an experenced model builder to discuss same.

This would make these people directly aware of the flaws that are present in current products.

Set a task schedule to remidy these defects with 3 months with the tooling supplier naturally discussing design aspects.

Insist that all future products recieve this pre production Proofing method.

Set a design program in place to eleminate the use of tab gates on some items and look at the use of submarine gates on wheels and chrome parts especially.

Open a customer feedback program via "Model brand insert here" Forum on our products with a 15% shelf price discount to be offered .

Edited April 6, 2012 by Boreham

[Art Anderson]

The last 2 new Revell Funny Car kits have chrome sprue with invisible attatchment points, so it is on their radar.

If you don't build drag cars then you missed out.

Great ideas around this place.

Bob

It's great when a model kit development person can get sprue attachment points positioned so that they do not show, but when Revell did that with the quick change rear end on their otherwise pretty excellent Kurtis Midget--they blew it, IMO. To do this almost always means putting the attachment BEHIND the back surface of the part, which is what Revell apparently approved on the 2-halves of the QC, plus the rear gearbox cover. Only one problem though: Doing that meant having a pronounced (for the size of those three parts at least) "nub" directly on the mating surfaces, which has to be removed completely for those three parts to glue together wilh only the most minimal seam possible. Now, it would not be a problem IF the rear gearbox cover plate didn't rely on a raised "rib" on either side for the purpose of making alignment easy, but as tooled, it was a bear!

Art

[charlie8575]

Having written a business plan for this, and now making a few small revisions to it prior to going to some banks, I'm reading a lot of this with interest.

I think the biggest thing we need to deal with is accuracy. I'm looking at using rapid production and rapid prototyping methods (shocking for someone as Ludditish as i can be!,) which promise reduced tooling costs and better shape/size/contour fidelity. This can also cut down the cost of tooling the model itself substantially.

I also like the idea of returning to more 2/3-in-1 kits, and with the reduced costs of setting up the tools, it can be done with better parts and possibly reducing (I doubt we'll ever be able to completely eliminate) the compromises seen in a lot of the earlier kits.

I also agree with better quality control, re-patriated production (I think I found how to do it and still stay cost-competitive,) branded tires, and better engraved detail, although for some things, I've become quite sold on the concept of fret-less photo-etch for things like scripts. The idea of hidden attaching points on plated parts is also a good one, and I would do it whenever possible.

Harry- I LOVE the idea of snap-in windows. With your permission, I would like to crib that for my product design.

The reduced costs I'm working on finding can also lead to more and more unusual subjects, because it won't be as big a risk financially.

My product line would be Moebius/Galaxie-level, but I would probably add a line of snappers/snap-and-glue kits in the future for younger or new builders.

As I finish putting the details together, there is an excellent chance a very important announcement will be coming before year's end. Stay tuned for further details.

Charlie Larkin

[Harry P.]

Harry- I LOVE the idea of snap-in windows. With your permission, I would like to crib that for my product design.

Crib away!

[charlie8575]

One other thing I forgot- yes, box art is critical!

And I have some really cool ideas for that. When my line gets released, you'll see what I'm thinking. Suffice it to say, I might start a whole new trend.

Charlie Larkin

[Boreham]

Having written a business plan for this, and now making a few small revisions to it prior to going to some banks, I'm reading a lot of this with interest.

I think the biggest thing we need to deal with is accuracy. I'm looking at using rapid production and rapid prototyping methods (shocking for someone as Ludditish as i can be!,) which promise reduced tooling costs and better shape/size/contour fidelity. This can also cut down the cost of tooling the model itself substantially.

I also like the idea of returning to more 2/3-in-1 kits, and with the reduced costs of setting up the tools, it can be done with better parts and possibly reducing (I doubt we'll ever be able to completely eliminate) the compromises seen in a lot of the earlier kits.

I also agree with better quality control, re-patriated production (I think I found how to do it and still stay cost-competitive,) branded tires, and better engraved detail, although for some things, I've become quite sold on the concept of fret-less photo-etch for things like scripts. The idea of hidden attaching points on plated parts is also a good one, and I would do it whenever possible.

Harry- I LOVE the idea of snap-in windows. With your permission, I would like to crib that for my product design.

The reduced costs I'm working on finding can also lead to more and more unusual subjects, because it won't be as big a risk financially.

My product line would be Moebius/Galaxie-level, but I would probably add a line of snappers/snap-and-glue kits in the future for younger or new builders.

As I finish putting the details together, there is an excellent chance a very important announcement will be coming before year's end. Stay tuned for further details.

Charlie Larkin

wow...

just wow

Sometimes I regret sharing my knowledge.

Edited April 6, 2012 by Boreham

[Jeff Johnston]

1. Engineer kits so that chrome parts are not connected to the tree in places that are visible on the finished model.

2. Soft, real rubber tires.

3. Make all kit glass a snap fit to avoid the problem of trying to glue the glass in place without having the glue show (many modelers have a lot of trouble gluing in the glass neatly). A little engineering could eliminate the whole problem.

4. Always include a comprehensive list of correct factory interior/exterior color combinations for builders who like factory stock.

5. Ban the floating alternator!

Thank you Harry I could not agree more.

Also I agree with Dave Van in that I am not sure how much "fun" it would be to run a model company. If I ran Revell or Round2 would I run out and tool up a brand spanky new 67 Galaxie ? Dunno...being that a company has to make money that would be the deciding factor. I'd also be branching out into other areas because model cars, or model anything is an adult hobby. What does a 16 year old kid want to buy ? Plastic phone covers and RC bodies that fit onto the more popular RC cars and ###### like that...then maybe if I am making the buck on that side I can throw the modelers a break even bone once in a while...like that 67 Galaxie

But what Harry says I agree. Especially the chrome tabs.

[vintagestang]

Mold the distributor with holes in it so it will be easyer to wire.

[charlie8575]

I do not mean any harm or anything bad by this.

Charlie do you work for a model companie?

If so Wow had no idea!

No, Tim.

I'm considering starting one. This has not been an easy road to travel, but if I can get it all to work, it'll be worth it.

While maybe not "fun," as Dave suggested, it will be starting a firm to help with a hobby I enjoy and the challenge of starting a new firm, clean-sheet, as I think it should be.

Charlie Larkin

[Eshaver]

Charlie , will this be a publicly traded company , an LLC , a partnership ? What can you share with the curious here ? Ed Shaver

[charlie8575]

Corporation, possible LLC sub-titling; I'll need the ability to raise capital a corporation has that you can't get through proprietorships or partnerships. I may stay private while I get things going to take pressure off, as too many times, publicly-traded companies end up being forced to put too much emphasis on short-term gain, not long-term success. Beyond that and that I plan on making all products within these borders, I'm not going to spill all my beans yet.

Charlie Larkin

[Chuck Most]

I'd review our current model stock and insist that a sample of 5 be built OOB. by board members.

Allowing a week to build 1 one the 5 selected during company hours.

They would be asked to identify the Feedback on their findings.

Commission an experenced model builder to discuss same.

This would make these people directly aware of the flaws that are present in current products.

Set a task schedule to remidy these defects with 3 months with the tooling supplier naturally discussing design aspects.

Insist that all future products recieve this pre production Proofing method.

Set a design program in place to eleminate the use of tab gates on some items and look at the use of submarine gates on wheels and chrome parts especially.

Open a customer feedback program via "Model brand insert here" Forum on our products with a 15% shelf price discount to be offered .

I like this idea. I think that's one area that many of the kit manufacturers are ignoring altogether. New tooling is nice, but there is always room for improvement in the existing product line. It seems like all too often a reissued kit is just rushed back into production after a few test shots look 'okay', but when it starts trickling out to modelers, a number of quality issues come to light. Some of those issues may have to do with wear and tear on the tooling, while some might have been engineered into the kit from day one, or added during a later reissue. Either way, such a program could serve to eliminate the problems.

[Chuck Most]

One other thing with regards to 'improving the existing product'- I'd also see to it that decalized gauge and instrument panel graphics were provided, as well as a more comprehensive decal sheet in general, with markings for the engine bay and other areas often overlooked (embroidered patterns on seats, woodgrain patterns for door panel trim, and the like).

[peekay]

One other thing with regards to 'improving the existing product'- I'd also see to it that decalized gauge and instrument panel graphics were provided, as well as a more comprehensive decal sheet in general, with markings for the engine bay and other areas often overlooked (embroidered patterns on seats, woodgrain patterns for door panel trim, and the like).

I agree 100%. Wouldn't this be the easiest and cheapest way to improve a re-released kit?

(Johan did it with the last release of their 59 Rambler wagon - 3 new sheets of decals!).

[imatt88]

A lot of good things said, for sure.

I especially like Chucks suggestion to expand the decal sheets. Factory stock, underhood decals would be an awesome addition.

Charlie,

Good luck with your "project". Now, how about some new tool 1960's full sized Pontiacs....

Seriously though, I hope it goes well...

Cheers, Ian

[charlie8575]

Thanks, Ian.

I have a couple of ideas in mind that you might like. If this all comes to fruition, you'll see exactly what I'm doing and talking about. We'll just say that if AMT's molds for a lot of stuff (not just the "Tin Injuns") turn out to be lost or irreparable, that I have a few things in mind to step in and fill some voids...

Charlie Larkin