Generic N Scale Vehicles

[jimmo]

I have been asking in every vehicle thread I run across for generic vehicles. I have 5 boxes of toyota crowns scattered over a couple modules with some repaints to cut down on uniformity. 3 or 4 more options like the crown say a generic mid 70s pickup, a K car clone, a round 90s caprice looking thing, a two door 70s sedan with a big trunk, a first gen minivan, and an early taurus clone would cover a lot of ground. OK so that is six but you get the point. Two pieces with the wheels and bottom done in clear to have windows, buyer paints the tires and bottom.

Sounds a lot like my vehicle line http://stores.ebay.com/willmodels

I wasn't sure what you meant by "Two pieces with wheels and bottom..."

On the issue of clear-cast models, due to the refractive nature of clear resin you are never going to get the desired "see-thru" effect that you want. This is especially true when you apply paint to the carbody surface. I have experimented with several ways to decorate clear model castings and have reached the conclusion that the only way to achieve the see-thru effect is to cast the bodies as hollow and actually make it physically see-thru. The only way to have truly transparent glazing is either with the liquid type, which (most of the time) looks like more of a lens effect than it does glass. The most effective way (I've found) is to use a vacuum-formed clear insert.

[DKS]

On the issue of clear-cast models, due to the refractive nature of clear resin you are never going to get the desired "see-thru" effect that you want. This is especially true when you apply paint to the carbody surface. I have experimented with several ways to decorate clear model castings and have reached the conclusion that the only way to achieve the see-thru effect is to cast the bodies as hollow and actually make it physically see-thru. The only way to have truly transparent glazing is either with the liquid type, which (most of the time) looks like more of a lens effect than it does glass. The most effective way (I've found) is to use a vacuum-formed clear insert.

I can attest to this firsthand. I produced the NZT school bus in clear based mostly due to popular demand. But the product was fraught with issues. In addition to not creating the desired "see-through" effect, clear resins are not perfectly clear. Also, clear resin is more expensive and harder to cast, pushing the price up. Not to mention that clear vehicles are a serious PITA to paint properly, and the school bus, with its many windows, was a nightmare. Ultimately I discontinued that product, and assuming I move forward with any new vehicles, they'll have open windows and (hopefully) vacuum-formed clear inserts. That said, I'm not planning on being a model vehicle manufacturer, so I won't be competing with existing businesses.

[up1950s]

I want the generic vehicles to be prototypically correct .

[cfritschle]

I want the generic vehicles to be prototypically correct .

Richie,

I think most of us do!   

I want to make it clear that I do not want to encourage any manufacturer to invest in tooling to make generic vehicles if it is at the expense of prototypically correct vehicles.  However, if someone needs a lot of vehicles, and cannot build the kits, then some of the models made in 1:150 and 1:148 scales will work as stand-ins, as long as the prototype was not very well known, or commonly seen with the prototypes for the 1:160 scale vehicles it is mixed with.  A case in point is the Oxford SS Jaguar.  It represents a pre World War II prototype.  Jaguar built a larger car after World War II that took many of the same styling cues as the pre war car.  In this comparison photo, the wheels of the 1:148 model are about the only part that appears oversize.  http://nscalevehicles.org/resources/oxford_diecast.php

And with the TomyTec cars, the ones in which the prototype is/was imported into North America will not work well with 1:160 scale cars.  Almost anyone can see the TomyTec Honda Fit and Toyota Prius are oversize.  However, the TomyTec Prince Gloria Super 6 and Nissan Cedric 30 are the right size for "large" North American cars from the late 1950s to early 1960s, and look all right next to the Wiking Chevelle.  Even the TomyTec TomyTec Datsun 310 and Toyopet Corona are smaller than the Wiking VW Beetle.  Another one is the 1:150 scale Honda Today, which is about the right size for a 1:160 scale Honda Civic.  So some can be used if one is careful as to which "oversize" cars they use with the 1:160 scale models.

I am going to continue to advocate for prototypically correct vehicles, but I wanted to find out what people had in mind when they said a generic model of a vehicle would suffice.  I have even seen requests for a generic model of a prototype when a 1:160 scale model of the prototype is already available!

Carter 

[nkalanaga]

If a prototype model is available, or can be made without licensing issues, I agree that there is no need for a similar generic.  A prototype model is always preferable.  However, if a prototype model can't be made, for whatever reason, I would be happy with a well-designed generic.  As long as it looks plausible it's much better than nothing.

[up1950s]

So say a manufacturer wanted to make a foobie 1959 Studebaker Lark , how much different would it have to be to preclude the manufacturer from having their collective asshats being sued off ?

[DKS]

So say a manufacturer wanted to make a foobie 1959 Studebaker Lark , how much different would it have to be to preclude the manufacturer from having their collective asshats being sued off ?

Sometimes it's as simple as not using the actual name of the vehicle. In other cases, it may require reshaping some portion of the model so it's not a complete, exact copy--subtle changes that the majority of modelers could not identify.

[SkipGear]

The RC car body manufactures have gone through the same thing. You no longer buy a Ford or Chevy oval body. They are now an F-type, D-type or C-type body. It is still recognizable as its namesake but brought the cost of the bodies down $40 to $30 each. (and by the way, that is for a one piece lexan vaccuformed body, much less effort to create than an N scale model)

The only bodies that the RC manufactures bother to license are anything pickup truck related (monster truck, short course etc.) because the market is large enough to capitalize on name brands. Also a Japanese company has a bunch of the imports licensed but I think they signed some long term deals long ago becuase they have been doing them since the 90's.

I wouldn't mind a C-type sedan or pickup representing a Chevy of what ever era you choose. I have pile of Walmart diecasts that are probably 1/144 or so in size that fit the bill for generic 70's era cars. Just wish they were the right size. The price was certainly right.

[jimmo]

That or just realize that we're small-fry enough that the companies most likely aren't going to go after a little niche hobby vendor.

This is exactly why I am continuing to produce as accurate of prototypes as possible and call them what they are.

Maybe I'm kidding myself but I can't for the life of me reconcile (in my mind) the purpose of a major billion-dollar company wasting expensive resources chasing after every individual making models (or whatever) of something they make or made years ago. When it offers absolutely no financial gain for them (through licensing), nor does it effect their bottom line (except for the cost of pursuing so-called violators). The size of our models makes licensing nearly impossible and highly undesirable to them on the aspect of the "chocking hazard" issue.

All they would be doing essentially, is stomping on some little guy for no other reason than "because we can."

[DKS]

All they would be doing essentially, is stomping on some little guy for no other reason than "because we can."

That, unfortunately, happens.

Look at the music industry, suing a handful of random ordinary people many tens of thousands of dollars because they downloaded a few dozen songs. They do it to strike fear in the hearts of others who might do the same. Not saying it will happen to you or anyone else reading this, but I confess it does give me pause.

[jimmo]

That, unfortunately, happens.

Look at the music industry, suing a handful of random ordinary people many tens of thousands of dollars because they downloaded a few dozen songs. They do it to strike fear in the hearts of others who might do the same. Not saying it will happen to you or anyone else reading this, but I confess it does give me pause.

I'm not sure how the down-loaders of music could be sued successfully because they are not the violators of the copyright laws--the provider of the music is.

Legal departments (like any other company department) or legal firms have to follow certain guidelines in what they do in order not to be counter-sued or waste resources on legal actions against an individual or company who has no money. After all, it they are businesses who's sole purpose is to turn a profit. Any lawyer will tell you that getting a judgement against someone is one thing--collecting is another. It costs a lot of money to take someone to court and if it looks like non-profit situation, they might want to even bother with it.

The most you would probably see from them is a C&D letter.

[wcfn100]

I'm not sure how the down-loaders of music could be sued successfully because they are not the violators of the copyright laws--the provider of the music is.

You need to read on how P2P file sharing works.

Jason

[Chris333]

I believe it is not illegal to download songs, it is illegal to make them available to download. FWIW back when I bought my first $1500 computer my only goal was to download music I could no longer find. 

[jimmo]

You need to read on how P2P file sharing works.

Jason

I think file sharing of music is apple and oranges compared to what we're doing. I'm certainly not stealing their products and distributing to others, thus depriving them of revenue.

[DKS]

I believe it is not illegal to download songs, it is illegal to make them available to download. FWIW back when I bought my first $1500 computer my only goal was to download music I could no longer find. 

Nope. It's just like I said. and the only mistake was that I underestimated the fines involved by an order of magnitude...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122800693.html

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/18/woman-loses-court-fight-over-illegal-music-downloads-and-you-wont-believe-how-much-they-say-she-owes/

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/09/09/12-year-old-sued-for-music-downloading/

And the relevance to making models of cars isn't music versus models, but how the IP owners react: suing the little guy is not out of the question.