New kits with flaws.

[Tom Geiger]

Dave. Thank you for the insight on getting a subject made. I'm looking forward to the F-100.

This goes out to any and all the model manufactures. China ? Weeks of waiting ? Rising costs. I can't help but to think of the time and effort in comunication that could be saved by having it done here in the USA. There are plenty of capable people here in the US that can do the same job. Possibly even better. There are still alot of proud Americans out there that are willing to work and do not expect to make 15 bucks an hour flipping burgers. Americans usually know the subjects and can get measurements, pics and details faster then China.

Sorry, but as the consumer whom all those costs are passed onto, I expect correct body lines and details for my 25 bucks plus. I don't give a rats patuty about all the costs and hold ups. That is the manufactures problems. Not the consumers. The manufacturers should make better choices where they send their work to. In this day and age it is nothing more then excuses. This is a hobby and there are many more things out there that I can spend the money on, then inaccurte kits. I am a builder and I expect to fix, repair or change things but not when it comes to the most important things people see, like body lins, grills etc.

Guess you didn't read Dave's posts. There is no one company in the USA that could produce turn key model kits today. And your $25 kit would probably be a $50 kit if produced here.

[Craig Irwin]

And your $25 kit would probably be a $50 kit if produced here.

It just might be worth it.

[keyser]

Mikemodeller, brush up on reading skills. I asked a question to Mr. M about how bigger errors happen. Not minutiae, or rivets (dismissive comment used as defense routinely by misinformed).

I mentioned kits from many as examples, including Tamiya (awful Mustang they did), et al.

Question wasn't about the specifics of errors, just mechanisms of how they get thru system Mr. M described.

Now you tell Mr. M what he can say or can't? Really? I'm in awe.... Hope you have a neat little tiara to wear. You'll be remembered through lunchtime.

Moebius is great company, great product, and knows how to get it done. Mr. M gets it done. My old friend Art A. got it done.

I'm reasonably confident I know why these issues happen at this point. The distance isn't the problem. Language at that end is an issue, but communication at this end, as Art, Bill, myself, and others have pointed out, seems to be biggest problem. And ownership of same.

Waiting for the pickups. Hudson convert from "Two Jakes" and 300 letter cars great. No need for pointing out issues (which are still there even if you deny them since kits are manna, without original sin ) if people like Mr. M and crew get it done.

+1000 on the price point. $75 Tamiya stuff and $35-40 minimal issue kits very worth it.

Edited December 24, 2014 by keyser

[Art Anderson]

Art hit on a good point. 3D rapid printing should be able to help a model company fine tune the CAD drawing before going to the mold stage. That can be done state side and should be affordable.

I would also like to add that is not easy to replicate a vehicle in scale. I have been replicating a hot rod Peterbuilt. I was able to get in on the ground floor when the frame was constructed. I took lots of measurements and pictures. I had to go back to the 1:1 project many, many times to re-measure or figure out some detail here or there. Then there is the issue with plastic body thickness vs real body thickness.

This is not to excuse a company that puts out a less than accurate product. It's just an acknowledgement that it is not easy.

I think that ultimately the buyers will decide with their money if a kit is up to par. Would you rather buy a monogram 69 Camaro or one from Revell or even AMT?

Scott

Scott, what perhaps I did not emphasize strongly enough--having looked at many 3D printed tooling mockups is: The process works very well for reasonably flat items, such as a floor pan, engine blocks and such, but where it begins to fail from the standpoint of critcial reviews is with body shells, particularly in horizontal surfaces which aren't flat, but have slight arches, curves and the like. By the time we get to see those, they have been smoothed out by hand, sometimes rather heavily painted in a grey primer--all of which can make some very visible shapes and contours quite difficult to judge for accuracy. It does take a lot of care to evaluate 3D printed items like axles, drive shafts, exhaust systems, suspension parts--but with an understanding as to how the real ones should look they can be reviewed quite successfully.

In a very real way, 3D printed model parts can often look like an architect's 3D model of a proposed building to be set on gently rolling ground. If you've ever seen one of those (we have a 3D campus diorama here at Purdue (originally created in 1958 and updated regulary since) that uses 3/32" birch plywood layers to create land elevations, their edges curving to the contour of the actual land surface--it takes some study to understand the contours of the land surface.

Art

[Art Anderson]

It just might be worth it.

To you, perhaps, but likely not the larger, overall market.

Art

[Harry P.]

To you, perhaps, but likely not the larger, overall market.

Art

That's exactly the problem. People are griping about $25-30 kits as it is. So who among the "model buying public" is going to part with $70 for an "accurate" kit? Some. But not many. Certainly not most. Which brings us back to the point where today's model kit manufacturers have to manufacture an accurate kit at a cheap price. Not that easy to do, given today's economic realities. So cost cutting rears its ugly head. No way around it.

[martinfan5]

Mikemodeller, brush up on reading skills. I asked a question to Mr. M about how bigger errors happen. Not minutiae, or rivets (dismissive comment used as defense routinely by misinformed).

I mentioned kits from many as examples, including Tamiya (awful Mustang they did), et al.

Question wasn't about the specifics of errors, just mechanisms of how they get thru system Mr. M described.

Now you tell Mr. M what he can say or can't? Really? I'm in awe.... Hope you have a neat little tiara to wear. You'll be remembered through lunchtime.

Moebius is great company, great product, and knows how to get it done. Mr. M gets it done. My old friend Art A. got it done.

I'm reasonably confident I know why these issues happen at this point. The distance isn't the problem. Language at that end is an issue, but communication at this end, as Art, Bill, myself, and others have pointed out, seems to be biggest problem. And ownership of same.

Waiting for the pickups. Hudson convert from "Two Jakes" and 300 letter cars great. No need for pointing out issues (which are still there even if you deny them since kits are manna, without original sin ) if people like Mr. M and crew get it done.

+1000 on the price point. $75 Tamiya stuff and $35-40 minimal issue kits very worth it.

I disagree with you on one thing, but I cant say it publicly for all to read, but spot on for everything else.

[Ace-Garageguy]

...So cost cutting rears its ugly head. No way around it.

And somehow, American manufacturing has been almost totally convinced that the ONLY way to control costs is by offshore outsourcing of the highly-skilled parts of the production cycle. It's a monkey-see, monkey-do situation to some degree...one company's bean counters seem to make it work, so everyone piles on the bandwagon and throws all the skilled Americans who COULD do the work to the wolves.

What's interesting to me is that, as my old engineering company still wheezes and rattles along in its final death throes, I'm constantly deluged by American injection molding companies wanting to do prototyping to full-scale production for us, and just begging me to send them drawings or projects for quotes.

After the first of the year, I hope to be able to talk at length with some of these folks and see if they're actually doing the work here, or if it's all outsourced. I have a sneaking suspicion there IS the capability to do this stuff in the US, because I just happened to run across a supplier of styrene pellets for injection molding almost literally in my own back yard, while I was searching for "plastics" suppliers for an entirely different material. If they're selling the pellets HERE, chances are good there's injection-molding capability not too far away.

Could they be cost effective? Who knows, but time is money, and lag times created by language barriers doing it the way everyone seems to think is the ONLY way are a factor to consider.

[Chuck Most]

Mr. Metzger ... so I'm showing respect using proper name...

[Harry P.]

And somehow, American manufacturing has been almost totally convinced that the ONLY way to control costs is by offshore outsourcing...

When you look at American labor costs vs. Chinese labor costs, is it really any mystery why so many American companies are actually making their product overseas? Hmmmm... pay American factory workers union wages and benefits, or pay Chinese workers a buck an hour (if that) to manufacture the same thing? It's the simplest way to dramatically slash production costs. I'm not saying it's a good thing or a bad thing. I'm just saying any bean counter worth his beans will come to the same conclusion.

Like I said, it's not a question of capability. It's a question of cost.

[Ace-Garageguy]

When you look at American labor costs vs. Chinese labor costs, is it really any mystery why so many American companies are actually making their product overseas?

Like I said, it's not a question of capability. It's a question of cost.

And that's the standard response. But I'm just not convinced YET that there's no cost-effective way to do all the work here. If US companies with the capability are starving for work, prices for said work become more plastic (pardon the pun), and the cost of highly skilled labor in China continues to rise, as do shipping costs and costs associated with lag-times and correcting mistakes due to multi-language and multi-culture communication problems.

[Harry P.]

And that's the standard response. But I'm just not convinced YET that there's no cost-effective way to do all the work here. If US companies with the capability are starving for work, prices for said work become more plastic (pardon the pun), and the cost of highly skilled labor in China continues to rise, as do shipping costs and costs associated with lag-times and correcting mistakes due to multi-language and multi-culture communication problems.

Things may be changing, but as of now you're not going to find it more cost effective to produce a product here than in China.

How do you propose we convince American workers to work for Chinese wages? What company that makes toasters in China at a unit cost of two bucks is going to bring that manufacturing here and make the same toaster at a unit cost of ten bucks? Or more?

[Ace-Garageguy]

It's always much easier to accept that it's impossible to do things differently, or to do things that haven't been done, than it is to find a way to make them work. Kinda handy for everyone that folks like the Wrights kept on trying to accomplish what everyone else KNEW was impossible.

I'm not suggesting that Americans work for Chinese wages. There are many ways to control costs, and one way I've found that works is to hire exceptionally competent people who get a lot of money, but who get things done FAST, and done RIGHT the first time. That can very often be cheaper than hiring lower-wage folks who aren't really as good at their jobs as they could be. I've proven this multiple times to my own satisfaction.

[Harry P.]

It's always much easier to accept that it's impossible to do things differently, or to do things that haven't been done, than it is to find a way to make them work. Kinda handy for everyone that folks like the Wrights kept on trying to accomplish what everyone else KNEW was impossible.

I'm not suggesting that Americans work for Chinese wages. There are many ways to control costs, and one way I've found that works is to hire exceptionally competent people who get a lot of money, but who get things done FAST, and done RIGHT the first time. That can very often be cheaper than hiring lower-wage folks who aren't really as good at their jobs as they could be. I've proven this multiple times to my own satisfaction.

The bottom line is simple. Pay for a factory full of workers making $25/hr plus benefits and insurance and paid vacations and retirement plans, or pay for a factory full of workers making a buck an hour.

All of the competence and getting things done fast and done right aren't going to overcome those numbers. And that's exactly why everything we buy today (well, the vast majority) is made in China. Numbers are numbers. And when the Chinese labor costs begin to creep up too high, we'll find the next "China."

[lordairgtar]

When you look at American labor costs vs. Chinese labor costs, is it really any mystery why so many American companies are actually making their product overseas? Hmmmm... pay American factory workers union wages and benefits, or pay Chinese workers a buck an hour (if that) to manufacture the same thing? It's the simplest way to dramatically slash production costs. I'm not saying it's a good thing or a bad thing. I'm just saying any bean counter worth his beans will come to the same conclusion.

Like I said, it's not a question of capability. It's a question of cost.

I work for a small job shop that makes mostly wiring harnesses for many things. One of our big customers who we call "Goofy Engineering" have much made overseas. We get the fun of correcting what the overseas maker screwed up. I do not understand the economy of that. Outside of management. ownership and office, we are seven people who can create, prototype, and have the ability to manufacture 3,000 pieces of product in a day. That goes from creating a print, to cutting wire and cable, crimping, stripping, bundling, soldering, loading connectors and building the conduits and platforms. I wear several hats in my job. I took it upon myself to learn a lot of the processes and procedures of our manufacturing when we were still a 50 person shop. When the economy went bust and overseas outsourcing became reality, I did not get laid off because I proved my worth by learning all the machinery and departments. My specialty is micro coaxial cables and coax cabling in the larger sizes as well plus soldering circuit boards by hand for custom applications. But I learned to do more. I also inspect. Harry P. is right, but all the capability in the world ain't gonna beat that bottom line. On a good note, we are getting a lot of cool work back from China because we have proven to provide a quality product that doesn't have to be reworked or shipped back. Some companies just scrap the bad work and continue with a new order.

[Ace-Garageguy]

If the design work and tooling are done stateside and done RIGHT, the tools can be shipped to China for production.

Honest, once the CAD work is done, cutting tools is not the major expense. Basically, you feed the data into the CNC machines, and they do the work. Sometimes while everyone is sleeping. There's a bulkhead in the F-22 that's carved from a 700 pound billet. The finished part weighs something less than 70 pounds. Maybe 35...it's been a while. The scrap metal that's left on the floor is almost worth more than it costs to cut the part out.

OR. a pre-production set of tools can be cut here, test-shots made, and the verified CNC tooling files transmitted to China to be cut on compatible CNC machines there. That's the way we did it on a vibration-absorbing handle I collaborated on.

And as far as 3D printing to verify design work goes...pre tool-cutting...the resolution of the big industrial machines is staggering now, and getting better and better and better. What were limitations just a couple of years ago are dead as dodos now.

Edited December 24, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[keyser]

Sorry I misspelled Mr. Metzners name in one post, a typo, but I don't know him personally, and really think he deserves a Mr.

Harry, you're correct about costs. The salaries here are higher, but it's the associated administrative, tax, insurance, liability, and medical that kill us for competitveness,

If we could get great prototypes made, "pilot production" of resin, or 3D in combo with resin, or renshape equivalent, that may work?

Edited December 24, 2014 by keyser

[Art Anderson]

The bottom line is simple. Pay for a factory full of workers making $25/hr plus benefits and insurance and paid vacations and retirement plans, or pay for a factory full of workers making a buck an hour.

All of the competence and getting things done fast and done right aren't going to overcome those numbers. And that's exactly why everything we buy today (well, the vast majority) is made in China. Numbers are numbers. And when the Chinese labor costs begin to creep up too high, we'll find the next "China."

Truthfully, much of this talk about "pittance wages" in China is almost jingoistic. For just the last four years alone, manufacturing's MINIMUM wage in the provinces that harbor the bulk of Chinese industry (and that list includes the province where the bulk of model kits and diecast stuff is made!) has risen 22% in 2011, 20% in 2012, 17% in 2013, and 13% this year--on top of similarly rapid increases since about 2003-04. Now, by any stretch of the imagination, those are HEFTY pay raises. The bigger fly in the ointment is the currency rate of exchange for the Yuan VS the US Dollar--that the Chinese government keeps artificially high in THEIR favor.

As for the other countries in the region (except for South Korea, Taiwan and Japan), no other country yet has quite the technical ability yet to win any serious business such as we're discussing away from China or the other three. Even the Japanese model companies do their own kit designs and tooling domestically, while farming out production to places such as the Phillipines and Thailand. In addition, energy costs in China are also, by comparison, far higher than in the US--most smaller Chinese factories, such as the ones making toya and hobby products must maintain their own backup sources of electricity themselves, given the inability of the state-run utility companies to keep up with demand. In addition, shipping costs have risen on a skyrocket over the past several years, due to high crude oil prices (thos container ships burn a LOT of oil!), which has lead to a slowing down of cruising speed across the Pacific--what was 12-13 years ago a 10-day voyage from Shanghai or Hong Kong is now a full month--which cuts fuel consumption significantly, but leads to higher wage costs attributable to longer crew times at sea and longer turnaround times for the ships themselves. So, it's not as cut-and-dried as most people want to believe.

Art

[Art Anderson]

If the design work and tooling are done stateside and done RIGHT, the tools can be shipped to China for production.

Honest, once the CAD work is done, cutting tools is not the major expense. Basically, you feed the data into the CNC machines, and they do the work. Sometimes while everyone is sleeping. There's a bulkhead in the F-22 that's carved from a 700 pound billet. The finished part weighs something less than 70 pounds. Maybe 35...it's been a while. The scrap metal that's left on the floor is almost worth more than it costs to cut the part out.

OR. a pre-production set of tools can be cut here, test-shots made, and the verified CNC tooling files transmitted to China to be cut on compatible CNC machines there. That's the way we did it on a vibration-absorbing handle I collaborated on.

And as far as 3D printing to verify design work goes...pre tool-cutting...the resolution of the big industrial machines is staggering now, and getting better and better and better. What were limitations just a couple of years ago are dead as dodos now.

Actually Bill, the cutting of tooling is still the biggest check that has to be written, from what I have been told numerous times.

Art

[Art Anderson]

That's exactly the problem. People are griping about $25-30 kits as it is. So who among the "model buying public" is going to part with $70 for an "accurate" kit? Some. But not many. Certainly not most. Which brings us back to the point where today's model kit manufacturers have to manufacture an accurate kit at a cheap price. Not that easy to do, given today's economic realities. So cost cutting rears its ugly head. No way around it.

harry, one only has to look back at the debacle of the once-vaunted Accurate Miniature to see what happened with their fantastically tooled, intricate model kits in both aircraft and automotive subjects for the answer to your question!

Art

[jbwelda]

>fantastically tooled, intricate model kits

didn't the Grand Sport feature a half molded tube frame that was covered with sink marks and parting lines?

its what stopped me from even considering building it without being able to devote the time for massive cleanup

just shows you can shoot holes in anything, nothing is perfect, nothing is universal.

jb

[johnbuzzed]

Not giving them a pass Jonathan. I get annoyed about poor kit engineering as anyone. Believe me, I've done my fair share of cussing when things aren't "as advertized". I just believe, in the grand scheme of things, it's not all that important. There are much more pressing things in life. whether or not a body line is incorrect or a roof is too high is of little consequence. Like any product, I think we should have a reasonable expectation that it will be done correctly, but if I have to choose between things I would like to be done correctly, I'd rather it were the brakes in my car than the engine size in the kit I just bought. Steve

Good point. But, most of us are here to discuss scale models, not brakes in a real car. Here is where we can complain and share our gripes about our hobby and (hopefully) get results; else, who's gonna listen? And, we can also pass along accolades where they are deserved.

Edited December 24, 2014 by johnbuzzed

[johnbuzzed]

Scott, what perhaps I did not emphasize strongly enough--having looked at many 3D printed tooling mockups is: The process works very well for reasonably flat items, such as a floor pan, engine blocks and such, but where it begins to fail from the standpoint of critcial reviews is with body shells, particularly in horizontal surfaces which aren't flat, but have slight arches, curves and the like. By the time we get to see those, they have been smoothed out by hand, sometimes rather heavily painted in a grey primer--all of which can make some very visible shapes and contours quite difficult to judge for accuracy. It does take a lot of care to evaluate 3D printed items like axles, drive shafts, exhaust systems, suspension parts--but with an understanding as to how the real ones should look they can be reviewed quite successfully.

In a very real way, 3D printed model parts can often look like an architect's 3D model of a proposed building to be set on gently rolling ground. If you've ever seen one of those (we have a 3D campus diorama here at Purdue (originally created in 1958 and updated regulary since) that uses 3/32" birch plywood layers to create land elevations, their edges curving to the contour of the actual land surface--it takes some study to understand the contours of the land surface.

Art

If NASA can e-mail the software for a wrench to be 3D printed aboard the ISS, then a competent company wih a sharp IT department and the courage to spend a little money- as an investment in a tool- should be able to use 3D printing as an R&D tool. The software will continue to be developed until the digital effects won't be noticeable. Think digital sound- it sounds cool and all high-tech, but natural sounds are not digital- they are analog. It's the same with hi-def TV- look close at that digital picture and it looks ugly, but from a viewing distance, it looks great- all sharp and clear. But in reality, nowhere near the real thing, which is also analog. True, natural sound and light are waveforms, not series of pulses. But those digital signals are carefully processed and manipulated to fool the brain; so, too, will be 3D printing.

Companies and corporations, businesses of all sizes need to remember that you have to spend money to make money. Whether those expenditures are on tools, research or employee morale, there will be expenses. Those who are too stingy are doomed to producing mediocre, poor- selling products. Maybe their shareholders will see a little more in their dividends, or the owners might be able to get a bigger Christmas tree, but in the long run, they will be hurting. t have seen it live and in person, firsthand, at my employer back on LI. And in the news recently-Think "GM and ignition switches"...

Edited December 24, 2014 by johnbuzzed

[Art Anderson]

If NASA can e-mail the software for a wrench to be 3D printed aboard the ISS, then a competent company wih a sharp IT department and the courage to spend a little money- as an investment in a tool- should be able to use 3D printing as an R&D tool. The software will continue to be developed until the digital effects won't be noticeable. Think digital sound- it sounds cool and all high-tech, but natural sounds are not digital- they are analog. It's the same with hi-def TV- look close at that digital picture and it looks ugly, but from a viewing distance, it looks great- all sharp and clear. But in reality, nowhere near the real thing, which is also analog. True, natural sound and light are waveforms, not series of pulses. But those digital signals are carefully processed and manipulated to fool the brain; so, too, will be 3D printing.

Companies and corporations, businesses of all sizes need to remember that you have to spend money to make money. Whether those expenditures are on tools, research or employee morale, there will be expenses. Those who are too stingy are doomed to producing mediocre, poor- selling products. Maybe their shareholders will see a little more in their dividends, or the owners might be able to get a bigger Christmas tree, but in the long run, they will be hurting. t have seen it live and in person, firsthand, at my employer back on LI. And in the news recently-Think "GM and ignition switches"...

Well, the companies in question here are definitely not in the Fortune 500 category--in fact every US model kit company would be categorized as a small business.

Art

[johnbuzzed]

The bottom line is simple. Pay for a factory full of workers making $25/hr plus benefits and insurance and paid vacations and retirement plans, or pay for a factory full of workers making a buck an hour.

All of the competence and getting things done fast and done right aren't going to overcome those numbers. And that's exactly why everything we buy today (well, the vast majority) is made in China. Numbers are numbers. And when the Chinese labor costs begin to creep up too high, we'll find the next "China."

The thing that seems to be forgotten about investing corporate dollars here in our own nation is that the money will stay here, and not make those in other nations rich.