| Author | Messages | |
Ole Toad Frog
1st Class Member
Roasharon, Tx.
Foreman
Posts:258
Send Message
 | | 08/28/2008 10:10 AM |
| Does any one know for a fact or slight fact what Kalback Publications are going to do? seems like there hanging on a thread?!
And so what other Mags are out there I could invest in?
I like hands on, grit in the teeth and full well knowing if some one showed me I know I could do it, I live in the sticks so I have no G scale people around me but HO and O scale.
Toad
Vic seen me get my thread pulled..I think, asking about the GRM... | |
 | |
| vsmith
1st Class Member
SoCal
Conductor
Posts:996
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 10:28 AM |
| Hey Toad, I feel your pain, you remember how many threads I had got nixed during the LGB flameout? 
I still like GR, but the Gazette has become by far my most important resource publication, even going so far as to collect as many back issues as I could get my greedy little paws onto when someone sold off their collection at my LHS. 
What I dont like about GR, for me, is the seaming emphisis on large yard filling layouts that tout the headlines, "great layout is a small space" small space? Holy crap its bigger than my whole backyard, thats small now? 
Overall I'm still happy with the rag, every time I think its waning they publish something redeaming, like the last issue featured a really well done indoor point to point layout that really was in a small space.  | |
 Kitbashing, welcome to the Dark Side | |
| Dwight Ennis
Moderator
Milpitas, CA
Engineer
Posts:1466
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 10:33 AM |
| And so what other Mags are out there I could invest in? For my money, the Narrow Gauge and Shortline Gazette is the best mag out there right now. Unfortunately it's only published bi-monthly.
If you're interested in plans and articles on how to scratchbuild stuff (albeit probably in HO, but much is still applicable to large scale), buy some back issues of Model Railroader from the 50s and 60s available at places like Railpub.com | |
Dwight Ennis
Milpitas, CA
SA #21
http://www.SantaCruzLumberCo.com
 | |
| Ole Toad Frog
1st Class Member
Roasharon, Tx.
Foreman
Posts:258
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 10:36 AM |
| Yeah I have 1st issue with typed letter.
They need to remember where there roots lay!
Oh there publication pick ups and people wanting to buy is going down.....I freakn think so!!!!!!! I hope they read this thread! They cannot nix this one!!!! And yes I remember them nixing yours that "they" (stormtroopers "SS") thought it was wrong. Tired of there wants and never want to hear our side.
Toad | |
| |
| Ole Toad Frog
1st Class Member
Roasharon, Tx.
Foreman
Posts:258
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 10:42 AM |
| Posted By Dwight Ennis on 08/28/2008 10:33 AM And so what other Mags are out there I could invest in? For my money, the Narrow Gauge and Shortline Gazette is the best mag out there right now. Unfortunately it's only published bi-monthly. If you're interested in plans and articles on how to scratchbuild stuff (albeit probably in HO, but much is still applicable to large scale), buy some back issues of Model Railroader from the 50s and 60s available at places like Railpub.com
Dwight,
Truthfuly I have all the way to s gauge. Old mags and some from across the pond. Will look up those! Thank you.
Toad
| |
| |
| NTCGRR
1st Class Member
Nebraska City NE
Conductor
Posts:833
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 11:37 AM |
| I just thought it was good to see an old loco brought back to life.
What a person can learn when he comes home for lunch.
back to work. | |
 Marty Cozad
North Table Creek GRR
Nebraska City, NE
Is it "REAL" or just 1:29 th | |
| Dougald
Moderator
Foreman
Posts:427
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 11:49 AM |
| Wow ... so many got really incenced at the message that a review was inaccurate taking it as a personal blast at their modelling approach. I read Kevin's review and have now reread Josh's critique ... while Josh worded it rather strongly, the suggestion was that not only did the review not say much about scale to gauge it even went so far as to say that the dims and proportions matched the drawings. Hmm if the track is actually about 17% too wide and the dims are correct for 1:24 ... then the model proportions must be off ...simple as that.
That does not mean that folks who model in 1:22.5 or 1:24 are doing anything wrong ... nor does it condemn the loco in question ... c'mon guys get a grip - the criticism was of the review not of each of you personally. And, I didn't hear anyone say that a modeler shouldn't run what pleased him nor was there any suggestion from the Fn3 crowd that the first new (well slightly revised perhaps) loco in many years for the 1:24 guys should have been done only in 1:20.3 Has the "silly season" as they say in the UK begun here and thin skinned folks read into something not what the writer said but what they want to hear?
In terms of magazines, there are a few scratchbuilders ( Dwight and Toad for example) out there who do not like the current MR and favour stuff from a half century ago when a modeler had to build. The emphasis then was on building a model ... and it took a lifetime to complete even the smallest layout. Most model railroads that actually ran were in the hands of large clubs as private individuals rarely got more than a loop of track running. Today, most modelers see themselves modeling a railroad not just modeling a piece of equipment. And just as the scratchbuilder buys castings and stripwood to make a model, these modelers buy cars and locos to build the model rialroad.
I have no problem with both types of modelers enjoying their creative worlds. But surely the scratchbuilders still left could be more tolerant of the changing world around them. It hardly means that the mags have gone downhill just because a modeler's favoured activity finds little expression in the popular press. The fact that the Gazoo is almost the only scratchbuilders mag left suggests that this type of modelling activity is very much in the minority. And doubly so amongst large scalers.
Regards ... Doug
| |
Doug Matheson
Manotick Ontario
SA #122 | |
| vsmith
1st Class Member
SoCal
Conductor
Posts:996
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 12:07 PM |
| Posted By Dwight Ennis on 08/28/2008 10:33 AM And so what other Mags are out there I could invest in? For my money, the Narrow Gauge and Shortline Gazette is the best mag out there right now. Unfortunately it's only published bi-monthly. If you're interested in plans and articles on how to scratchbuild stuff (albeit probably in HO, but much is still applicable to large scale), buy some back issues of Model Railroader from the 50s and 60s available at places like Railpub.com
Add to that Uncle Russ's now sadly only-quarterly mag as a 'valued resource' to scratchbuilders and kitbash modelers. | |
Kitbashing, welcome to the Dark Side | |
| Dwight Ennis
Moderator
Milpitas, CA
Engineer
Posts:1466
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 12:19 PM |
| Doug - I'm not condemning the RTR crowd, and I fully realize that the Model Railroading hobby has changed substantially from what it once was as better and more detailed RTR stuff has become more and more available. What I am saying is that the MR magazine has gone downhill. Most railroads featured in its pages anymore are large layouts, and most today simply don't have the space or resources for such a large pike. The articles which do feature "how to build it" stuff are far shorter than they once were, and most articles featuring how to build a layout are now nothing more than some captioned photos. Maybe that's what the large majority of modelers want today, but it isn't what I want, and I can't help feeling that much has been lost. And I'm not talking about just scratchbuilding articles, though that's certainly part of it. The example I used of the MA & PA early in the series had as that month's installment several pages of which a large chunk was creating the history of the railroad and the region it served. That not only made for some entertaining reading, but exemplified a very enjoyable aspect of the hobby which gets little emphasis these days. In fact, it was even mentioned in said article that "imagineering" such a history for one's pike was not only a lot of fun, but added to the overall quality of the layout as it provided a yardstick of "believability" by which to measure one's efforts and against which to plan the layout.
Each to his own, and I bear no intolerance to folks who want to do it different from what I may do. But my opinion (and that's all it is - my personal opinion) is that much that once were enjoyable facets of the hobby have been lost, and the magazine does nothing to point them out, where once it did.
Most of Kalmbach's magazines - at least the train related ones - seem to suffer from the same deficiency which I'd call "fluff over meaningful content." Those who disagree are welcome to their different opinion and can continue to buy the mag. Me, I'm also entitled to my own opinion, and I can choose not to engage in what to me seems a waste of my money. I will buy Kalmbach's more specialized books if they appeal to me and contain info I need. For a model railroad periodical, I'll spend my bucks on the Gazette and Finescale. Possessing or expressing that personal opinion does not indicate intolerance... merely my opinion on what constitutes a good periodical. | |
Dwight Ennis
Milpitas, CA
SA #21
http://www.SantaCruzLumberCo.com
| |
| Ole Toad Frog
1st Class Member
Roasharon, Tx.
Foreman
Posts:258
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 12:35 PM |
| Dwight, very true and when I asked Rene on the phone she said it was because of "down sizing" which means what I don't know but she did just get a new job in GR so it could have been anothers job and cut them out so she fills 2 different boots. Could GR go under, yes.
Toad | |
| |
| East Broad Top
Moderator
Centennial, CO
Conductor
Posts:601
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 12:41 PM |
| ...I am probably more in Josh's (and Matt's - Slate Creek's) corner in wishing for reviews of models that were tougher on their scale infidelities.
The question becomes how often do you beat up a manufacturer for a specific scale choice they made? When Aristo introduced 1:29, they suffered a great deal of criticism for "inventing" a scale. History has demonstrated this to be a wise marketing move on their part, and they've carved out a rather large segment of the hobby. Are we--as reviewers--supposed to continually point out the fact that the rails are technically too close together, or are we allowed to accept that a practice has become so commonplace that it has become its own standard? Models built to that scale deserve to be reviewed on those merits, and not compared to another--albeit more "accurate"--standard. Look at O-scale (1:48), whose rails are 5' apart. That's an accepted compromise which rarely--if ever--gets mentioned in reviews. The same holds true for HOn30 and On30 products based on 3' and 2' gauge prototypes. The fact that the wheels may or may be too close/far apart for the prototype doesn't often make its way into the review, and rarely is it mentioned in a way that detracts from the overall quality of the model.
...if the track is actually about 17% too wide and the dims are correct for 1:24 ... then the model proportions must be off ...simple as that...
I disagree. The proportions (height, width, length) are all near accurate relative to the drawings. The only difference is that the wheels are set slightly wider than the prototype. That has a minimal, arguably negligible impact on the overall proportions of the model. None of the dimensions (width of the cab, boiler diameter, tender) were widened to compensate for the wider gauge. Possibly the cylinders sit farther out, but that's it. It's no more out of proportion than any of the O and HO scale examples alluded to above. If the cab was widened to where it scaled out at 1:22 or something, then the proportions would be off-kilter and worthy of comment. But save for the space between the wheels, the model matches the advertised scale very reasonably, nearly identically in all the key dimensions. To that end, it lives up to its advertised specs and when compared with other 1:24 products, gets a passing grade. (In fact, the two key dimensions where the model is compressed--overall length and wheelbase--are compromises along a completely different axis having nothing to do with gauge.)
Personally, i do not find the reviews generally to be sufficiently critical of shortcomings nor sufficiently praiseworthy of the many good things present - in short most reviews are just way too bland to be helpful.
That is, perhaps, the most common criticism of product reviews (not just those in GR). The raw facts such as performance are easy enough to report, but sometimes difficult to translate into "real world" language. If I say a locomotive can pull 2 pounds, what does that mean on your railroad? Difficult to say, since it depends on track, grade, curve, etc. Thoughts on scale fidelity depend on the reviewer's familiarity with the prototype. If I know the prototype, I can pass a much stronger judgement on how well a model matches, but I also have to temper my comments to balance against the next review I write in which I may know nothing of the prototype. It's not fair to rail against one product because the brake lines are 1/2" too narrow, then give the next product a pass although it's actually 10' shorter than the prototype and I didn't know it. I won't ignore the issues, but I won't dwell on them, either. I'm always asking myself "is this something the average modeler--not I--would worry about?"
I think Josh's point that GR has never stated its criteria or perspective for its reviews makes the reviews difficult to situate for many of us...
In an ideal situation, the perspective should be invisible. The "ideal" review should lay out the facts as they're determined, then let the reader decide whether the product is right for their use. Part of the difficulty in writing reviews for a magazine with such a diverse readership as GR's is that the extremes are so far apart that tailoring a review for the "average" modeler still leaves a lot of territory uncovered. I look at each scale within the large scale umbrella as its own individual pursuit, none any more or less valid than another, each with its own strengths and compromises. Those strengths and compromises are inherent in the scale, not the product. I will not criticize a product for the sins of the scale.
Later,
K | |
Tuscarora Railroad
Friends of the East Broad Top | |
| Great Western
The English Riviera, Torbay, Devon
Foreman
Posts:250
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 12:57 PM |
| I have been reading reviews in UK model magazines for many years. Whatever the report says I will decide whether I want the loco or not.
I have only been reading GR for just over two years so have no guide about its history. I like the mag. - its' emphasis is on US railroads which is what I run.
GR and Classic Trains are the only RR mags I purchase.
Mention has been made of 1:20.3 and some other scales - fine models - if you have the $$$ and are not ham-fisted, like I am.
The 1:22.5 and Aristo 1:29 were what I was able to comfortably afford and in my opinion are pretty good models. In recent threads where the mention of encouraging newcomers into the hobby was discussed quite a few folk said that the overall cost of getting started were often a frightener to many and they soon lost interest.
| |
regards,
Alan Lott (G1AEU)
http://picasaweb.google.com/FSigs52
http://www.paignton-steamrailway.co.uk
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
People will accept your ideas much more readily if you tell them Benjamin Franklin said it first.
David H. Comins
| |
| livesteam5629
1st Class Member
Elkton, MD
Foreman
Posts:128
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 1:10 PM |
| Josh - GR has changed since its first inception back in the late 80s, but it was never ever a scale model magazine, so I am a little suprised at your reaction. The scale mag, Outdoor Railroader, which became something else, was the only real scale model magazine that I can recall, and it is gone.
Outdoor Railroader is gone as a quarterly publication for several reasons. One is that material to publish was becoming difficult to obtain (How many times can you do an article on the Sundance Modules?), but more importantly Clambake was the distributor. Per Uncle Russ "Never have your distributor be competing for the same market you are." (or something to that effect) Correct scale is important to me but not so much so as to kill my enjoyment of the hobby. Sometimes we have to compromise to get what we wish. My live steam 1:20 (almost 0.3) Mason Bogie is a case in point. Driver spacing is wrong, boiler a little too large, cylinders the same but when up and running it looks very very close to a heavy Mason Bogie becasue the incorrect dimensions are not detectable unless you have a caliper and scale drawing in hand.So is it to scale? Only I really know(I think). BTW I have pre Gazette issues and #1 to current, Some pre issues and #1 to current of Outdoor/Finescale MRRng and all issues of Steam in the Garden. Not bragging so please do not interpret my comment as such. It is that these publications IMHO are the best in the hobby and I do not wish to part with them. Have tons of back issues of RMC, MR, Trains, plus some dead publications which will go to the local library soon.
Noel | |
Noel Crawford | |
| Curmudgeon
Foreman
Posts:401
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 1:22 PM |
| Odd.
You mean the width of the cylinders were changed to accomodate the different gauge?
"Possibly the cylinders sit farther out, but that's it. " doesn't tell us much.
"Are we--as reviewers--supposed to continually point out the fact that the rails are technically too close together, or are we allowed to accept that a practice has become so commonplace that it has become its own standard?"
Continually. If for no other reason than to alert the "newbies" as to what they are getting into.
Facts is facts.
You have not reviewed the facts.
| | | |
| markoles
1st Class Member
Lancaster, PA
Conductor
Posts:814
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 1:34 PM |
| Noel,
I though Uncle Russ was publishing "Finescale Modeler". Doesn't it include more general scale modeling that just outdoor trains? The last couple of times I looked through one (I don't see them often), the stuff wasn't large scale trains. And I think the adventures of the railroad man were gone. That was what I really read Outdoor Railroader for anyway, those great stories. The gods of steam, the fig newtons, the white dustbuster minivan...it was too much!! Thanks. Now I have to dig out an old issue I have stored in the basement.
Mark | |
Mark Oles
Millersvillanova Railroad, Lancaster, PA | |
| livesteam5629
1st Class Member
Elkton, MD
Foreman
Posts:128
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 1:35 PM |
| Odd.
You mean the width of the cylinders were changed to accomodate the different gauge?
"Possibly the cylinders sit farther out, but that's it. " doesn't tell us much.
Sorry Curmudgeon,
No the orginal locomotive which was a outline 1:20.3 MB from OZ has been modified by me so much it is hard to tell which was orginal. The cylinders are now Roundhouse and also highly modified that they no longer look like a Roundhouse product. They are mounted on the original frame in place of the original cylinders which did not stand up to my mods. The engine now has a "scale" David Fletcher MB valve gear in stainless steel, Barry Big Trains side and main rods and tender truck, plus numerous other detail parts. Boiler still orginal but undergoing scrutiny for possible replacement.
Scratch building, modifying and etc is my fun in the hobby.
Noel | |
Noel Crawford | |
| livesteam5629
1st Class Member
Elkton, MD
Foreman
Posts:128
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 1:44 PM |
| Mark;
You are correct. Finescale covered all aspects of Narrow Gauge Railroading from 1:1, On30 (or is it On21/2) On3 and outdoor. Still a good mag in spite of it now being published as a Narrow Gauge Annual (twice yearly or quarterly?) and only available by subscription I believe. Uncle Russ really took it in the shorts with Kalmbach. A real shame since there was/is a market for both.
Noel | |
Noel Crawford | |
| NTCGRR
1st Class Member
Nebraska City NE
Conductor
Posts:833
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 1:45 PM |
| Posted By Dwight Ennis on 08/28/2008 12:19 PM
Doug - I'm not condemning the RTR crowd, and I fully realize that the Model Railroading hobby has changed substantially from what it once was as better and more detailed RTR stuff has become more and more available. What I am saying is that the MR magazine has gone downhill. Most railroads featured in its pages anymore are large layouts,
Dwight
Do you realize how long some of us complained about not seeing enough modern mainline ??? Fors years it was just narrow gauge scratchbilt ...what ever .
I'm greatful to see modern cars being weathered and new articals on new stuff.
If 4 car log trains with shays was all that was out there I'd be gone.
I wish some of this energy spent currecting things was spent on getting more folks into the hobby. | |
Marty Cozad
North Table Creek GRR
Nebraska City, NE
Is it "REAL" or just 1:29 th | |
| vsmith
1st Class Member
SoCal
Conductor
Posts:996
Send Message
| | 08/28/2008 1:51 PM |
| Posted By markoles on 08/28/2008 1:34 PM
Noel,
I though Uncle Russ was publishing "Finescale Modeler". Doesn't it include more general scale modeling that just outdoor trains? The last couple of times I looked through one (I don't see them often), the stuff wasn't large scale trains. And I think the adventures of the railroad man were gone. That was what I really read Outdoor Railroader for anyway, those great stories. The gods of steam, the fig newtons, the white dustbuster minivan...it was too much!! Thanks. Now I have to dig out an old issue I have stored in the basement.
Mark
"Finescale" started out as "Outdoor Railways", when Klambake aquired the distribution rights to Outdoor Railways, a power struggle occured due to a name dispute over "Outdoor Railways" name being to similar to thier own "Garden Railways" so Uncle Russ changed the name to "Finescale Model Railways" and added emphisis on other smaller non-garden scales, but the damage was done and eventually (some say deliberatly) Klambake slowly eroded Finescales distribution until it was finally dissolved with the remaining publication being 2 bi-annual "Modelers Annual" 1 "Mining, Logging & Industrial Annual" and 1 "Narrow Gauge Annual" but these continue to be top notch info publications. | |
Kitbashing, welcome to the Dark Side | |
| Dwight Ennis
Moderator
Milpitas, CA
Engineer
Posts:1466
Send Message
| |
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 |
|