Duplication In The Hobby

Is duplication in the hobby good or bad? I can understand the frustration some people have when it's revealed that two manufacturers have been working on the same model but it does seem like companies come under more fire about it than others.

When it comes to this topic I have what I suspect might be an unpopular opinion though. Watch on to find out what it is and maybe you'll agree with me...

Duplication in the hobby—multiple manufacturers producing models of the same locomotive or rolling stock has very much become a hot-button issue lately. So I want to explore why this happens, what it means for the hobby, and why I personally think it’s not always a bad thing. 

Hornby often gets the most criticism when it comes to duplication, especially after their version of the 00 Gauge Terrier appeared to rival Rails of Sheffield’s. While the James May TV program helped stoke the narrative that Hornby were being deliberately antagonistic,  if you look closer, Hornby had a long history with the Terrier. With the model originally being developed by Oxford Rail and Hornby later bringing it into their own range, it suggests a genuine business move rather than spite.

Outside of the Terrier case, Hornby is far from the only brand duplicating models. Accurascale, Bachmann, Cavalex, Rapido, and others have all released similar prototypes—like Class 37s, the 31s or the LMS Lowmacs—yet often without the same backlash. Most of the hate Hornby gets seems to stem from their size and visibility, making them an easy target. Even with their new TT:120 range (which was designed to get away from duplicating others) they were criticised for doing something different, showing that sometimes they can’t win no matter what they do.

People often argue duplication is bad because it wastes resources in a niche market. If manufacturers worked on different prototypes, we'd see a greater variety of models and fewer gaps in the historical lineup. While that sounds ideal, it overlooks the reality that these are businesses. Manufacturers choose projects based on potential sales and where they see gaps in the market. The problem is they're all working with the same market and since they can't legally collaborate, it’s not surprising that multiple companies occasionally pick the same model independently.

On the flip side, duplication can actually benefits us as modellers. When two brands go head-to-head with the same prototype, it pushes them to innovate and improve. A great example is Bachmann’s auto-uncoupling feature on their Class 31, which may have been motivated by Accurascale’s competing version. Additionally it can also end up becoming a price war as each manufacturer tries to offer as many features at the lowest price. It's not ideal for the manufacturers but when the cost of models seems to be rising constantly, it benefits us as consumers. Overall having more of a choice —whether in terms of features, price, or availability - is a good thing. If one model doesn’t quite live up to your expectations or fit your budget, another version just might.

Some manufacturers, like Rapido, try to avoid mainstream duplication by choosing quirky or unusual prototypes, such as the Jones Goods or Port of Par Twins, and their smaller production runs give them more freedom to take risks. This helps carve out a niche and offers something truly different, without needing to compete directly with bigger names. Still, it’s not a strategy that works for everyone—larger brands need bigger sellers to survive.

In the end, duplication isn’t ideal for manufacturers or retailers, but it’s not the end of the world for modellers. In fact, it’s often a sign of a healthy, competitive market where companies are fighting for our attention. It drives up quality, expands options, and sometimes even lowers prices. Rather than getting tribal or assuming bad intent, maybe we should appreciate that we now have more choice than ever. That sounds like a win to me.