ScaleTrax #4 Switches

Paul...from everything I have read you would be so much better off dropping some Ross Switches in where you need them.  Consider the lack of response as a response that says they ain't never coming.  BigRail

Paul,

   I had a good conversation at York with Mike Wolf on the subject.  Here are the facts:

• MTH has not abandoned ScaleTrax and has every intention of continuing the line they currently have.
• The switches are in production and expects them by year end.  (Mike told me they have to buy a minimum of two tons of metal when making any run.  So they will not do a run for just one piece.  So for whatever reason they waited until building two tons worth of track made sense.)  So it sounds to me like the more track people buy the faster it will get restocked.  They have many pieces that are still in stock and are not selling so there is no need to make more.
• The current offerings are not changing.

As for making new pieces Mike will not make any new specialty pieces like Wyes, curved switches or larger curves.  The reason is simple, they will not sell.  He said that the O-80 are the worst selling pieces.  So why build larger ones?  As for Wyes, how many people will actually buy them?  They might sell hundreds in a year and will need to sell thousands to break even.  Tooling costs in excess of 10K+ per piece.  If you make $10 per piece, you need a 1000 pieces to break even.  Doesn't seem like a lot, but when you consider how many track systems there are, and how many people want a Wye, it seems unlikely to recoup the investment.

As for larger curves, I argue you don't need them with Flextrax.  I may use some curves larger than O-80 if they had them just for convenience but would likely use Flextrax most of the time since I like larger changing (custom) curves.  So I can understand why they would not build larger curves, especially when the largest one they have now (O-80) does not sell very well.

I did point out to Mike that there was a missing piece that I think is needed, and that is O-63.  Currently, you can not create a double track using O-54 since there is nothing for the inside or out.  This makes it very difficult to design a smaller layout with ScaleTrax which I have tried to do.  This size is much more common and should sell.  I argued that this may prohibit a much larger group of customers from building smaller layouts with ScaleTrax.  To my surprise...he agreed!  He said he will look into modifying the existing tooling to produce an O-63 curve.  Maybe there are other pieces that make sense, but Wye and curved switches do not.  If you can argue that other pieces are necessary, then bring it up in this thread.  If this helps increase the popularity and success of this track system, then maybe it will lead to more pieces in the future.

For me personally, the only piece I would like to see made is a #8 switch.  But that seems unlikely.  I can build a great layout with what they have now just using #6 switches and flextrack only!  A #8 would be more realistic but if I really want one, I can just build one thanks to Ted and Dave Hikel who showed it can be done.  They actually build a curved (O-72/O-80) curved switch for me. 

Rich

www.toytrainsontracks.com

Rich,

Thanks for the great reply!  It appears that there is some hope that I will be able to complete my layout as designed after all.  I designed my layout (nothing large... 12' x 16') using RR-Track and I selected ScaleTrax based upon its appearance  and testimonials of those who had used it.  Actually, I've had no problem with ScaleTrax other than the double crossover I designed into the track using the 2 LH #4 switches, 2 RH #4 switches and the crossover.  I ordered the entire package early this year and received everything except the 4 #4 switches and the crossover.  A couple of months ago, I received the 2 RH #4's and the crossover.  I'm still waiting for the last 2 #4 switches.  If they get hereby the end of this year, I'll be satisfied.

I still like the ScaleTrax, but if MTH is going to make it the centerpiece of advertising on their website and also include it in every new catalog that comes out, they should be able to deliver the parts when they are ordered.  I agree with your use of flextrack.  It allows a lot of flexibility in your design (flaws).

Thanks again for the update and also for bringing the topic up with Mike Wolf!

Paul

FWIW, yesterday at the Allentown train show I saw a bunch of the new MTH gondolas that have ScaleTrax turnouts onboard.  They weren't #4's though... more like O-31 or something with a very sharp radius.  So if MTH spent $$$ on making those O-31 turnouts for the gondolas, hopefully they were just a small part of the 2-tons of metal, and the more important SKU's (like the #4's and #6's) aren't too far behind for you folks looking to do some serious layout building.

David

O-31 turnouts have been pretty plentiful on eBay, followed by O-54 and O-72. The #4 and #6 turnouts are very rare and fetch retail+ prices. I suspect that the ones in the gons could be from unsold items from inventory.

Rich

Let me add my thanks for talking about this with Mike Wolf and passing along the information to us. It is good to hear from Mike that MTH will continue to support the existing Scaletrax product line.  I will be happy to see the new #4s and #6s, especially by the end of the year.  Hey, that is next month!

A few points stand out from your post.

He said that the O-80 are the worst selling pieces.  So why build larger ones?

A double track curve of O-72 inside of O-80 would have sold in the era where Scale Hudsons pulling Irvington cars defined big three rail O rolling stock.  But then MTH introduced scale Challengers, Big Boys, W-1 electrics, DD40 diesels, etc.  Others followed with more locomotives and scale passenger cars and modern freight cars over 80 scale feet long.  To run everything together on double track with O-72 minimum curves now requires six inch track centers.  That means O-72 and O-84.  Had MTH made O-84 instead of O-80 it would sell.   Ironically, O-80 misses the market that MTH helped to create.

I agree that flex track nicely fills the bill for greater than O-72 curves.  MTH flex track is easy to work with, especially for anyone experienced with HO or 2 rail O track laying techniques.  However, those coming from a traditional 3 rail O background who are used to plug and play track might be put off and go with another option with larger diameter sectional track.

As an alternative to more sectional track, MTH solder-in rail joiners for flex track would be a nice addition to the system.  Having them available from MTH or MTH dealers could make it easier for more people to try ScaleTrax flex.

As for Wyes, how many people will actually buy them?  They might sell hundreds in a year and will need to sell thousands to break even.  Tooling costs in excess of 10K+ per piece.  If you make $10 per piece, you need a 1000 pieces to break even.

That is a financially sound point of view for a manufacturer that designs, builds and sells locomotives, cars and accessories.  They tend to be stand alone items.  Each product has to sell enough in a short period of time to pay for itself and allow the money to be reinvested in the next new product.  Any manufacturer who does not run their business that way won't have money for new products or they won't be around at all after a while.

The problem with track is that the items are not stand alone.  Track customers are looking for a system of products that work together.  If you look at the makers of track in O and other scales I am sure that they all have several low sales volume items in their systems.  But it is OK, even necessary, to have a few loss leaders or low volume "halo" products that help sell more of the high volume products.  The sale for all of the track on a layout usually goes to the system that best meets all the needs of the whole layout.

Put another way, an O-72 wye might only sell a few hundred units a year.  But the each person who buys one or two wyes for a layout is also likely to buy several dozen O-72, #4 and #6 switches and hundreds of feet of track. 

It is too bad to hear that Mike is not interested in making a ScaleTrax wye.  It would be the lowest tooling cost addition to the system since there is only one needed (not a pair) and only the ties and a frog need new tooling.  All the other components are already made for existing ScaleTrax switches.

If anyone would really like a ScaleTrax wye they can be kitbashed  from a Scaltrax right and left with a Ross frog on O scale wood ties.  If built on the bench Rossbed makes an ideal base.

I appreciate your comments Ted, particularly about seeing the track as individual components or as a system.   I doubt if Lionel has recouped the cost of their O-72 Fastrack wyes.   But they are making a good money on the overall system, and are able to bring out new pieces on occasion.

Mike's thinking is perhaps one of minimizing losses (on pieces that do not pay for themselves), and preserving his new product capital for other locos, HO, etc that DO make an individual profit.   Its interesting, but in any case, Mike is the guy who built a large business, and has proven judgement and experience.

Every storekeeper knows that you can't make any money if you can't get the customer through the store.

If you have read the posts on why or why not someone chooses a particular track system it comes down to the offered turnout selection.  Both Ross and Atlas offer good selection and people are choosing one or the other or a combination of both. 

Atlas is in the same boat as MTH in that they require expensive tool development and large production runs to introduce a new product.  I would not be surprised that they have not recovered the cost of their double slip switch. 

Ross uses simple jigs and hand spikes and glues the rails to wood ties.  His setup costs is minimal and the time to produce one turnout is relatively constant.  He has shown that he can produce custom pieces quickly and cost effectively.

I use Atlas turnouts and would like yo see a 3-way and #5 double crossover produced.  I'm not holding my breath and have been working to incorporate the Ross equivalents into redesign.

For Mike to boost the acceptance of ScalTrax he needs to increase his turnout selection and overall availability of the total line.  He may lose money on the new turnouts but he can make it back on increased sales of the rest of the line.

Jan

Several good points to consider have been put forth here by Ted Hikel and others. Scaletrax is a very good system with the best sized rail of them all to be in proportion with our modern scale equipment. As pointed out by Rich Battista above, offering the few odd-ball items would greatly enhance the appeal to a new buyer looking for a complete system.

As nice as Atlas and Gargraves/Ross are, they both have 'oversized' components that look out of place with our scale locomotives and rolling stock. Atlas's ties are great but the rail itself is too big/tall and with the addition of the middle one, visually appears too 'bulky' and 'crowded'. GG is just too large overall for our O scale trains.

Scaletrax wins hands down here in the visual department but still comes up short with the odd spacing of the otherwise scale sized ties.  The flextrack is wonderful to work with and can easily create any desired curve needed. Cost is considerably less than Atlas too.

Would it be feasible for MTH to contract out to some independant firm (Ross?) to set up jigs for production here in America and hand make some odd-sized switches? Maybe on an 'as-ordered' basis? They might be expensive relative to a mass-produced product, but it could benefit overall sales of the Scaletrax system.

Ted's point of the 0-80 curves being slightly too small for the larger equipment when used in a concentric curve situation is a new on me and makes good sense. Could the existing tool for the 0-80 be modified to create 0-84 curves?

If Mike would just add a few larger (0-80/84, 0-96, #8s, etc) switches, including one or two curved switches to the line and the aforementioned wyes (0-72, 0-84, 0-96) it would definitely put Scaletrax out in front as the best system for anyone wanting a 'scale' 3 rail layout!

Have any of you tried scratchbuilding some custom switches?  The Hikels used a template from Ross to construct several large curved switches for the Northwest Trunk Lines several years ago with great success. Has anyone else done this?