What is the most expensive era to collect? (1 Viewer)

[Napoleon1er]

Hi,
So I was wondering what people think is the most expensive era to collect. While I understand this is a hard call, as everyone collects at a different scale (a 15 figure versus a 200 figure diorama), let's try to imagine that the number of figures is proportional to the number of soldiers that would typically be involved in a given battle in a given era. For example, a Napoleonic skirmish will probably have more men than a WWII skirmish. Other factors are tanks/cavalry. For this poll, assume we are talking about figures of the same scale, quality, and finish. I am mainly thinking about # of men versus more expensive vehicles versus types of units, etc....
-Sandor:salute::

 

[ecuriel]

Tanks, Artillery, Trains, 88's, Planes, Multiple ranges and on and on and on....

 

[jazzeum]

The airplanes, particularly the wooden variety, can be very expensive to collect. Also, if you're a K & C collector, the WW II retireds can get expensive.

In certain areas, like Zulu, it can be expensive if you collect Trophy, for example. Your poll could have used a few variables.

 

[trooper]

It is blatently obvious that equipment is the most expensive. For the remainder figure prices should be constant whether they are Napoleonic, WW1 or Zulus. I fail to see the point of these polls, they inevitably lead to yet another argument about different companies pricing which we have all heard umpteen times already. For God's sake let's have something different for a change. Trooper

 

[PanzerAce1944]

It is blatently obvious that equipment is the most expensive. For the remainder figure prices should be constant whether they are Napoleonic, WW1 or Zulus. I fail to see the point of these polls, they inevitably lead to yet another argument about different companies pricing which we have all heard umpteen times already. For God's sake let's have something different for a change. Trooper

No comment here. Happy Collecting To All ! {sm3}

 

[Obee]

It's not the era thats expensive, its the number and quality of the figures you buy.

How can you compare 100 plastic WW2 'Army Men' with a St. Petersburg fine painted Knight....

The only expense is how many and what quailty, so any era can be expensive, and expensive is in the eye of the beholder, or how much money his has to spend.

John

 

[binder001]

I think John has it right in the previous post - it's very hard to compare "apples to apples". Even if we say "pre-painted metals" then there is still a lot of variation. WW2 has the tanks, artillery, etc, Napoleonics and ACW need ranks of infantry and a bunch of cavalry, knights are very intricate and need castles, the list can go on and on. Every person has his/her level of how far they take this hobby. Like any hobby, it's as expensive as you let it become, no matter what era you collect.

"It isn't the toys that make it expensive, it's the kid who keeps buying them"

Gary B.

 

[Napoleon1er]

When I started this poll, I explicitly stated that 'manufactures' was NOT a variable. The point is simply weather the massed infantry of early eras, the fortifications and buildings of many eras, or the tanks and equipment of other eras was more expensive. Please read the first post again if you skipped over it. Sorry if this poll is not to your liking, but I thought it might be helpful for people deciding on a range to collect. This was simply a question I was pondering for a couple days, and I decided to post it. Please, can we SKIP the manufacturers part. If we can't, and people seem to drift toward it, then we should probably end the thread. My other question (possibly a latter poll) will ask if people have a specific type of thing (forts, elephants, limbers, planes) that they just collect a lot of, regardless of era, manufacturer, etc.... For example, I buy gratuitous amounts of buildings, and am beginning to have quite a collection of redoubts.
Happy collecting,
Sandor:salute::

 

[lancer]

I voted for WW2, which I collect and the related planes, trains, and boats. I also voted for Napoleonic, which I do not collect because of the numbers involved. I like cavalry and Napoleonic is a big cavalry period. Too big for me. I can restrict what I buy in WW2 and have a good representation. A good representation in a Napoleonic cavalry charge, or an infantry battle, would take large numbers and then add in the tremendous number of different armies over such a large time span and it becomes too vast a subject, (read too expensive), for me to become involved in. WW2 is also very expensive but, like I said, smaller numbers will do. JMO. -- Al

 

[Napoleon1er]

I voted for WW2, which I collect and the related planes, trains, and boats. I also voted for Napoleonic, which I do not collect because of the numbers involved. I like cavalry and Napoleonic is a big cavalry period. Too big for me. I can restrict what I buy in WW2 and have a good representation. A good representation in a Napoleonic cavalry charge, or an infantry battle, would take large numbers and then add in the tremendous number of different armies over such a large time span and it becomes too vast a subject, (read too expensive), for me to become involved in. WW2 is also very expensive but, like I said, smaller numbers will do. JMO. -- Al

Exactly why I voted for those two. I collect Napoleonic, and am quickly discovering the same. I also voted for Sudan, as most Sudan ranges involve gunboats, and for Zulu, as Rorke's Drift ranges are often designed to represent the entire (or most of)
the battle, and the buildings add up...
-Sandor:salute::

 

[Mitch]

I think you cannot but have a manufacturer as a variable or else it cannot work. FL Naps are more expensive than others so, that is a variable. each range has its very expensive sets and some not so. I cannot see how a Nap range can be more or less than a WWII range or roman ranges etc one may want to collect like I have several hundered LAH parade figures which would make that range more expensive than say AE collector who buys less, I just don't with respect see how this works. A mounted Nap is similar to a WWII mounted for one manufacturer but, more expensive for other manufacturers. Collection expense very much matters on who you collect from IMO
Mitch

When I started this poll, I explicitly stated that 'manufactures' was NOT a variable. The point is simply weather the massed infantry of early eras, the fortifications and buildings of many eras, or the tanks and equipment of other eras was more expensive. Please read the first post again if you skipped over it. Sorry if this poll is not to your liking, but I thought it might be helpful for people deciding on a range to collect. This was simply a question I was pondering for a couple days, and I decided to post it. Please, can we SKIP the manufacturers part. If we can't, and people seem to drift toward it, then we should probably end the thread. My other question (possibly a latter poll) will ask if people have a specific type of thing (forts, elephants, limbers, planes) that they just collect a lot of, regardless of era, manufacturer, etc.... For example, I buy gratuitous amounts of buildings, and am beginning to have quite a collection of redoubts.
Happy collecting,
Sandor:salute::

 

[Napoleon1er]

I think you cannot but have a manufacturer as a variable or else it cannot work. FL Naps are more expensive than others so, that is a variable. each range has its very expensive sets and some not so. I cannot see how a Nap range can be more or less than a WWII range or roman ranges etc
Mitch

I totally get your point, but if you read the posts below, you will see what I am going for. For example, would a FL last stand of the Imperial Guard or a FL Tractor Factory dio cost more? Both are about equal portions of a battle in their respective eras, but one involves cavalry and massed infantry, while the other has tanks et all, but less total figures.
All in good faith and humor, civility and a love of history^&cool

Vita nostra brevis est
Brevi finietur.
Venit mors velociter
Rapit nos atrociter
Nemini parcetur.

Pereat tristitia,
Pereant osores.
Pereat diabolus,
Quivis antiburschius
Atque irrisores.

-Sandor:salute::

 

[thebritfarmer]

You raise some good points Mitch but I think in general a Napoleonic cavalry dio is going to be more expensive than say a Rorkes Drift dio no matter who the maker is.

 

[Mitch]

can you imagine the price of 4,000 zulu's from Britains I bet that would dent the pocket probably more than most nap cavalry charge. I suppose if we take out manufacturer its down to wallet size and, just how detailed you want to be. My biggest range (which, is not to everyones taste) is the LAH and I set out to get the original 1st LAH compliment of 117 volunteers. That was expensive. with the cost of things now I would not do large displays like that with the caveat that a trooping the colour range was started then I would be in trouble.

Sandor...

It was not a dig at all an interesting comment just thought the manufacturers were important
Mitch

You raise some good points Mitch but I think in general a Napoleonic cavalry dio is going to be more expensive than say a Rorkes Drift dio no matter who the maker is.

 

[Napoleon1er]

can you imagine the price of 4,000 zulu's from Britains I bet that would dent the pocket probably more than most nap cavalry charge. I suppose if we take out manufacturer its down to wallet size and, just how detailed you want to be. My biggest range (which, is not to everyones taste) is the LAH and I set out to get the original 1st LAH compliment of 117 volunteers. That was expensive. with the cost of things now I would not do large displays like that with the caveat that a trooping the colour range was started then I would be in trouble.

Sandor...

It was not a dig at all an interesting comment just thought the manufacturers were important
Mitch

Wow{eek3}. Do you have picks of that LAH display? I have 4-6 main "scenes": Hougoumont (right now 175), Napoleonic cavalry and squares (100), 95th Rifles outpost (20 and counting), Vicky reviewing the Scots Guards (40 and counting), Coldstream band + street (50+), and many small things. By far the most expensive is the cavalry and square, but I have also started on some Sudan matt, and have my eyes on that gunboat.....

Sorry if I am a bit hasty to man the defensive lines, but I am very nervous of getting pushed into a manufacturer debate. Sorry 'bout that, guess I misread your post, bonam fortunam,
Sandor:salute::

 

[thebritfarmer]

can you imagine the price of 4,000 zulu's from Britains I bet that would dent the pocket probably more than most nap cavalry charge. I suppose if we take out manufacturer its down to wallet size and, just how detailed you want to be. My biggest range (which, is not to everyones taste) is the LAH and I set out to get the original 1st LAH compliment of 117 volunteers. That was expensive. with the cost of things now I would not do large displays like that with the caveat that a trooping the colour range was started then I would be in trouble.

Sandor...

It was not a dig at all an interesting comment just thought the manufacturers were important
Mitch

That is true but who would have the space for a Zulu charge of 4,000. I think we need to be more realistic with our views and contain it to a reasonable sized dio. I collect the Zulu range and I passed on the Naps as I find that it would have cost me more to do a 4x8 Nap dio than a Zulu one.

 

[Mitch]

then its a very hard question. Having seen some of the dio's on here I would say its WWII
Naps... Probably equal between the two

Then other ranges such as ACW, AWI and, with the release of the ancients rome greece etc these may start becoming expensive lines.

You can very easily get into spending many thousands on a range of a small nature before you even know where you are
Mitch

 

[PanzerAce1944]

I would agree with some of the comments that Mitch made.If you stayed with just one company and collected one of each figure, figure set, vehicle,aircraft,etc then I would think WWII would be the most expensive.....based on aquiring one of everything produced and again sticking with the same company. But........Things would change IMO if you collected series such as for example.............. American Civil War,Napoleonics,Revolutionary War etc and had many multiples of marching riflemen,dozens of standing firing figures,dozens of kneeling firing figures and so on.Would it not then be based on how many figures of these ranges the individual collector wants to add to their diorama or collection that determines which turned out to be most expensive ?????? Again only stating my opinion here.

 

[Currahee Chris]

i would think Ancients- as Sandor defined them "Roman/Greek/Egypt" as we are essentially talking several millenia of potential conflicts and various different poses/ armor etc. Most of those lines are done by Russian manufacturers and can get exceptionally expensive- anyone in the market for a St. Pete Carthaginian War Elephant- I've owned several cars that cost less than that beast.

 

[Napoleon1er]

i would think Ancients- as Sandor defined them "Roman/Greek/Egypt" as we are essentially talking several millenia of potential conflicts and various different poses/ armor etc. Most of those lines are done by Russian manufacturers and can get exceptionally expensive- anyone in the market for a St. Pete Carthaginian War Elephant- I've owned several cars that cost less than that beast.

Sorry about the large grouping-I had to fit in some other eras.
-Sandor