Classic Metal Works vehicles - here is your chance to make a difference

[peteski]

CMW is conducting a survey for future product releases.  Here is the link (you will be asked for a name and email address at the end):
http://survey.constantcontact.com/survey/a07e6j015qih8g9v91g/start

I completed the survey. It was a bit awkward to navigate. On the initial page it redirects you to a "fixed" survey. Then (on the bottom of the H0 section (which you aren't supposed to fill in) where you are to skip that entire HO section to section 3 (N scale version of section 3) it seems to imply that you are going to section 4 where in fact it will get you to N scale section 3.

Go vote and make a difference! 

[DKS]

I wish I could get excited about this, but to be honest, I find the quality of their products has been dropping precipitously. Unless the quality improves to the point it was at the outset (at the very least), I'm not inclined to participate.

[GimpLizard]

I preety much agree with David. As far as CMW's quality goes. I'd actually prefer if Busch or wiking did US prototpye vehicles. (Especially if they were of the sedan & station wagon variety... and from the early/mid 1960's.) But I'm so hard up, at this point, I'm willing to take what I can get. 

[Scottl]

I've never seen one of their products and have little interest in these old car models (man, who thought wood paneling on cars looked good  ).  However, the online images they provide make the products look well finished and the overall effect is very nice to my eyes.  What aspect of quality has deteriorated?

BTW, cars and vehicles in general are often a disappointing feature to me on finished layouts.  They must be quite difficult to paint and finish and they often look very rough to me.  Perhaps it is the casting quality but I don't have any first hand knowledge.  It is part of the reason I have shied away from vehicles, because I doubt I can do any better.

[asarge]

Unbelievable.

[DKS]

I've never seen one of their products and have little interest in these old car models (man, who thought wood paneling on cars looked good  ).  However, the online images they provide make the products look well finished and the overall effect is very nice to my eyes.  What aspect of quality has deteriorated?

Product images are either HO models and/or heavily shopped. Their earlier models were nicely made; lately, however, the fit and finish is really deteriorating. On some of the automobiles, the wheels are misshapen and recessed into the car so far it sits on its chassis (perfect for lowriders). By contrast, some of the trucks appear to be riding on stilts--all they need are fat tires and they become monster trucks. Here is a comparison between the official product image and reality:





I would not even use this as a background model.

[Scottl]

Ah, now I see.  Thanks for clarifying.  I agree with you.

[DKS]

I have to wonder what the tooling cost difference would be between diecast metal and plastic. I know their whole product line image is based on the diecast angle, but I think they do themselves a disservice by adhering to it so strongly. As it is, some of their trucks are mostly plastic, with the cab being the only metal part.

[SkipGear]

I don't know David, some of their earlier models were only slightly better than Matchbox cars, if that. Thick, chunky window frames, blobs for details. Wheels that don't fit the wheel arches or look horribly under and oversized depending on the model.  I think the details and proportions have gotten better but I will agree the painting is slipping.

[DKS]

I don't know David, some of their earlier models were only slightly better than Matchbox cars, if that. Thick, chunky window frames, blobs for details. Wheels that don't fit the wheel arches or look horribly under and oversized depending on the model.  I think the details and proportions have gotten better but I will agree the painting is slipping.

I never claimed the models were foreground quality; they were, however, done well enough to serve as background models. And I think the wheel proportion and fit is getting much worse, not better.

One of my favorites was this van--it even had interior details (not that they mattered under normal viewing conditions).



As for the "chunky" nature of the details, I believe that's mostly due to being diecast metal. I truly wish they'd apply all of their R&D to plastic--I think the outcome could be stellar.

[wm3798]

Agreed on the use of plastic.  That could also give rise to the types of models I'd love to see, well proportioned, but low res "fleet" cars for use on MT open auto racks.
The cast metal doesn't look bad, but they cause the racks to be way too heavy, and way too top heavy.

I'd have to imagine that they could be produced in numbers and varieties that would make them more affordable, too.

Lee

[MichaelWinicki]

I wish they had more modern vehicles.

Doing a pike set in 1970, I can justify a few vehicles of the vintage they specialize in but not many.

[MVW]

So ... what are the alternatives?

I don't have a LHS, but I just bought some CMW vehicles off the auction site for roughly $3 a car/truck (new, unopened packages). Haven't received them yet, so I can't comment on the quality. But David's photos of the production shot and the real deal are pretty jarring.

But if CMW's products are unusable, what other readily available options are there? (I'm doing the transition era, BTW.)

Jim

[Mr. G]

Good grief, that Country Squire is wretched. 

I didn't buy the early cars because they were pretty blobby looking, but they did seem to be improving for a while.  When the 1950 Chryslers arrived, though, I realized that momentum was over.

[Rasputen]

That Ford station wagon shown is in fact a plastic body.