Sergent couplers look good and far more accurate in appearance than those are those of the competition. Unfortunately, for me they come along a little late in the game. I love accuracy, but I cherish financial solvency. I have too many cars that would require retrofitting. Had they appeared on the scene earlier, I would be a fan.
Tom ________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Alan Lambert [[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 6:42 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} Re: Update From Sergent 2.0 From: Alan Lambert Ed, Don't forget that SHS was sold to MTH. Now if he will continue and bring back some of the early locos that had sold out. I would be a bbuyer. Now like you said Sergent has a "BIG" problem. Investment casting along with 3D printing have thier flaws,(unwanted air pockets that rarely show up in casting and wrong mateial used for 3D printing. It all takes money and know how to get it done right. Alan From: Ed <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 3:39 PM Subject: {S-Scale List} Re: Update From Sergent 2.0 > "John Degnan" wrote: > here I go again... trying to explain the issue... again... John....I give you an "A" for persistence. A lower grade for actual results. But maybe in time...... > ...we are and have been for some time experiencing manufacturing problems .... Accepting that as stated, I would propose he go hire a consultant experienced in the specific problems, whatever they might be, and get the matter taken care of. There is no better grade for doing it yourself -- even if we are all hobbyists at heart. > This technology works great when it works. However when troubles arise, > causes of problems are not typically simple to identify and correct. This is > where we are today. Time to call in an expert for assistance. That is what experts are for. > Please watch this space for updates that will be provided when available. John Degnan is a good Watch Dawg so the rest of us can go about other things. > I hope that Bill (and others) can now see that this is most definitely NOT > (as he assumes) an issue of money... Whoa.....!! Hold on there. The stated reason for not making stuff is "manufacturing problems". That could mean just about anything from the machines needing repair, adjustment, upgrading, etc. to a bad batch of raw materials, to the loss of experienced personnel, etc., etc. Most of these issues can be fixed with the application of money. > it is, as I have repeatedly stated, a legitimate problem with their > production machines. If it is a machine problem, why not get the machine fixed? If fixing it is beyond the knowledge of one person, find another person (consultant?) with a bit more knowledge at dealing with the specific problems at hand. > HO products are also suffering... so it is NOT a money issue. Well, that depends on how you define it. A "lost process" or a "non-working machine" or "inadequate skills" or whatever it actually is can usually be fixed in a reasonable amount of time. But the fix usually costs money and sometimes is not cheap. So, as Jim King points out, the desire for profit enters into the picture. So the cost of the fix has to be balanced against the profits to be gained from implementing the fix. Sometimes it is financially better to quietly discontinue a product than to carry it on forever. How's that for a wild thought? Remember the System One DCC system? Remember the NMRA X2f coupler? Remember brass rail? Remember SHS locos both steam and diesel? The list goes on......Mantua couplers, etc. I suspect each of those products could have continued if enough money (aka profit) were available to keep the wheels of production turning in the right direction. > Any questions? If so, let'er rip. > John Degnan No questions. Just stirring the pot on this hot summer day. Cheers....Ed L.
