Author Topic: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's  (Read 1316 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Joetrain59

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1362
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +43
Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« on: March 06, 2014, 01:00:50 AM »
0
 Would you all please use reclosable "zip" bags, instead stapling bags to hang cards please.
 And cant tell you all how many times the hole punch goes right through instructions/photos.
 Especially with BLMA.
 Think about it please.
 Joe D

up1950s

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8876
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +706
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #1 on: March 06, 2014, 01:16:05 AM »
0
Would you all please use reclosable "zip" bags, instead stapling bags to hang cards please.
 And cant tell you all how many times the hole punch goes right through instructions/photos.
 Especially with BLMA.
 Think about it please.
 Joe D

Joe you could buy Ziploc bags of your choice on eBay . Bulk lots of lots of them at reasonable cost . This way all your bags from various manufacturers will be the same size , or the same few sizes . 2"x3" etc . I don't hang mine as parts can escape , I put them in shoe boxes and plastic trays , and train boxes .

Joetrain59

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1362
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +43
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #2 on: March 06, 2014, 01:36:47 AM »
0
Hello Mr. Dost,
 What I do now is fold top of bag over, tape or staple(again) to hang card. It's all very destructive in long run. Yes, I always put parts bags in containers or such, but eventually, parts get out. We pay good $ for these items. Let the MFR's buy the bulk lot's.
 It's the same as not getting all the product from a spray bottle of glass cleaner,etc.
 Joe D

mmagliaro

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4506
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +881
    • Maxcow Online
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #3 on: March 06, 2014, 04:47:22 AM »
0
As a matter of fact, I just discovered that, of all places, Michael's Crafts carries and excellent selection of
bulk zip-lock bags in many sizes from little 1.5" x 1.5" up to 6" x 4" with lots of sizes in between.
For, I think, under $5, you can buy 50 or 100 of these and you're all set.

peteski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 20577
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +1827
    • Coming (not so) soon...
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #4 on: March 06, 2014, 04:53:17 AM »
0
Want some really cheap zipper bags? Try http://www.sciplus.com/p/ZIPSEAL-CLEAR-POLY-BAG-3-X-4_9179 "Each" is a package of 100 bags.  I have been dealing with that company for years, and  also use those bags.
--- Peteski de Snarkski
--- Honorary Resident Curmudgeon

Big Train

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 109
  • Respect: +10
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #5 on: March 06, 2014, 07:14:01 AM »
0
Kinda like what Micro_trains does with their conversion kits?.....It's a great idea because you can seal the bag again to prevent losing parts. Plus the re-cycle thing, too.

TiVoPrince

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5156
  • Respect: +2
    • http://www.technologywrangler.com
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #6 on: March 06, 2014, 08:28:28 AM »
0
Preference
is to transfer parts to divided plastic boxes.  Fairly certain I have saved a year or more in search time since transferring parts from little hang bags hiding in every drawer and stray box near my workbench...
Support fine modeling

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11162
  • Your choice for ANAL...
  • Respect: +1736
    • DKS Home
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #7 on: March 06, 2014, 09:36:46 AM »
0
NZT has used resealable plastic bags since the beginning; I buy them by the thousand. Also, the hang tag is carefully designed so that the requisite hole punch does not impinge on any text or artwork. It doesn't take much effort to arrive at a sensible design; part of this stems from being a modeler as well as a manufacturer, and developing packaging in which I'd want to receive a product.

"Life's a piece of sh!t when you look at it."
                                       —Monty Python

M.C. Fujiwara

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1344
  • I'm my own personal train-er.
  • Respect: +84
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #8 on: March 06, 2014, 09:54:30 AM »
0
Very much appreciate the resealable bags!

[and to start the requisite thread drift]

How did "they" come up with 14 as the "intended age"?
Is it based on a specific lawsuit, a key stage of physiological or psychological development, a "scaling back" from driving a car, or arbitrary?

I know it has something to do with the Federal Consumer Product Safety Act http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/certification.htm, but as the Consumer Protection Safety Commission defines "Children's Products" as for those 12 and under http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Education/childrens-products/ , just curious why model railroad stuff cites age 14.

[Sorry for the drift, but it is model railroading product related drift!  :D]
M.C. Fujiwara
Silicon Valley Free-moN
http://sv-free-mon.org/

Denver Road Doug

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2120
  • Respect: +27
    • Mockingbird Industrial
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #9 on: March 06, 2014, 11:00:50 AM »
0
RE: Age 14...I don't know the specifics of why 14 over 12 although I can probably find out if you really want to know, as we have staff at our company that is right in the middle of all this legislation.   My guess is it's an easy way to "exceed mandate" for PR purposes, (since it's probably largely ignored by everyone anyway) and also probably anticipating that at some point the age will end up there so marketing materials wouldn't have to be updated then.
NOTE: I'm no longer active on this forum.   If you need to contact me, use the e-mail address (or visit the website link) attached to this username.  Thanks.

Scottl

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4028
  • Respect: +445
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #10 on: March 06, 2014, 11:12:36 AM »
0
Evidence for a legal nanny state.  Some litigious individual obviously leveraged the absence of said warning in the past to squeeze a company and now it is legislated.  Kind of like the "danger, this coffee is hot!!!!" nonsense.

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11162
  • Your choice for ANAL...
  • Respect: +1736
    • DKS Home
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #11 on: March 06, 2014, 11:48:52 AM »
0
Some litigious individual obviously leveraged the absence of said warning in the past to squeeze a company and now it is legislated.

Not all product safety is legislated. If the product is not regulated, then manufacturer product warnings are voluntary. As long as there are no serious consequences of such self-regulation, it will likely (hopefully) remain that way. The alternative is the rather onerous prospect of regulating absolutely everything.

While I've not found the specific source of the "age 14" declaration, I suspect that it was an ad hoc decision by someone because it was--

...an easy way to "exceed mandate"...

In other words, CYA with a healthy margin.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2014, 12:01:50 PM by David K. Smith »
"Life's a piece of sh!t when you look at it."
                                       —Monty Python

M.C. Fujiwara

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1344
  • I'm my own personal train-er.
  • Respect: +84
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #12 on: March 06, 2014, 12:01:02 PM »
0
I was really hoping just to find out about the age 14 thing, not start rants on the role of government in business and society.
If anyone knows off the top of their head (given there are several manufacturers here on the forum), I'd like to know.
Otherwise sorry I brought it up.

I really like NZT packaging: very thoughtful and considerate.
(By a modeler for modelers!)

My details box is full of little resealable baggies: one day I really need to go through and sort them.
Maybe do the cubby / bin thing as there seems to be lots of different parts in different bags (usually based on projects rather than type of parts).
M.C. Fujiwara
Silicon Valley Free-moN
http://sv-free-mon.org/

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11162
  • Your choice for ANAL...
  • Respect: +1736
    • DKS Home
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #13 on: March 06, 2014, 12:11:37 PM »
0
This may be the source. Per ASTM F963-08,

Quote
If the toy is intended or designed for children 14 years of age or older, then ASTM F963-08 does not apply to the toy and it need not be tested by a third party laboratory.

This then relieves the manufacturer of the responsibility of product testing.
"Life's a piece of sh!t when you look at it."
                                       —Monty Python

M.C. Fujiwara

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1344
  • I'm my own personal train-er.
  • Respect: +84
Re: Parts packaging suggestion to MFR's
« Reply #14 on: March 06, 2014, 12:15:43 PM »
0
This may be the source. Per ASTM F963-08,

This then relieves the manufacturer of the responsibility of product testing.

Woot, there it is.
Thanks DKS.
M.C. Fujiwara
Silicon Valley Free-moN
http://sv-free-mon.org/