Lionelking313 WOW! I didnt think my post would make it to 5 pages! Trust me, I love this magazine, but I would like to see more photos of layouts when visited. The golden era of layout visits from CTT was in the early 90's, when Lionel layouts were plentiful! Stan Roy, Sergio DePinto, Bill Nole's Plasticville, Phil Klopps, Bob Boards Flyer Layout etc etc. I wish CTT would do a revisit to some of these if they are still around. I know of a layout that was shown in TM books and Model Railroader back in the late 80's..Michael Primacks O gauge layout which I though was one of the best at the time....how about a visit CTT??? And I also agree with some posts, PLEASE DONT FOCUS ON SCALE...Those are NOT CLASSIC yet...... Mark
WOW! I didnt think my post would make it to 5 pages! Trust me, I love this magazine, but I would like to see more photos of layouts when visited.
The golden era of layout visits from CTT was in the early 90's, when Lionel layouts were plentiful! Stan Roy, Sergio DePinto, Bill Nole's Plasticville, Phil Klopps, Bob Boards Flyer Layout etc etc. I wish CTT would do a revisit to some of these if they are still around. I know of a layout that was shown in TM books and Model Railroader back in the late 80's..Michael Primacks O gauge layout which I though was one of the best at the time....how about a visit CTT??? And I also agree with some posts, PLEASE DONT FOCUS ON SCALE...Those are NOT CLASSIC yet......
Mark
I did see an update on Phil Klopp's layout recently, but I don't remember where. He's building or has already built a new layout, the old version is mostly gone if I remeber correctly.
Classic is a tricky term. The 700E Hudson was an instant classic as were many other items like the 400E, GG1's and the FM Trainmaster. The trick is trying to spot the items that stand out above the rest. Lionel's Lionmaster engines will probably qualify, but only time will tell. Their hefty MSRP's will keep them out of many hands, but price alone doesn't define a classic in my book. To me the ubiquitous 2-4-2's, 2-6-4's and small diesels that many of us got in our starter sets are more classic than engines most collectors can't afford.
Becky
Trains, trains, wonderful trains. The more you get, the more you toot!
Not only did your thread reach 5 pages, but it spawned a second & third thread!
We did cover quite a bit of Large scale until we bought GR, then the content was shifted over there.
I continued to run some larger stuff in news after that, but I think the last Large scale item I ran was in 1998.
Bob Keller
Yes, some of my favorite articles were the "CTT Visits (manufacturer X)" stories. Remember when CTT visited Bachmann and the majority of the article was about G-Scale? I'm just curious, was that before or after Garden Trains came into being? If it was before, then there's already an outlet for G. But if it was after...
Jon,
I agree with you about Fundimensions/MPC era. I always enjoy the historical articles and think it would be appropriate to see some about post Lionel Corp. I imagine that many of the people involved with Lionel trains are still available for interviews/recollections. While mainly interested in Lionel, I would enjoy articles about MTH, Kline, Willaims, etc.
I'd like to see More magazine period.
I agree I'd love to see less Hi Rail and Custom layouts. I think from the last couple of issues you are going in that direction
The last issue was good but very thin.
Over in the Buddy L thread you said
"There is too much new material in our files to reprint old articles in the magazine".
If not go to 12 issues how about a few more articles each month? You could satisfy more people that way.
Banks, Proud member of the OTTS TCA 12-67310
Kooljock1 Tim, Seeing that CTT is a "shill" for Lionel, perhaps you could point out to me the last issue Lionel placed an ad in? Jon
Tim,
Seeing that CTT is a "shill" for Lionel, perhaps you could point out to me the last issue Lionel placed an ad in?
Jon
Jon:
That was satire. The Ogaugeoverlord "got" it and gave it all the attention it merited; maybe more.
Regards,
Timboy, The American Flyer Satiristic Nerd
On a more serious note: I will be 47 next month. I grew up in the Fundimentions/MPC era. It is time that our historical articles and research begin to focus here. Otherwise CTT will completely lose the demographic.
Texas Pete Question: What is the "point" of this hobby? I'm under the impression it's to have fun. Doesn't matter how. Whatever floats your boat and all that. Pete
Question:
What is the "point" of this hobby?
I'm under the impression it's to have fun. Doesn't matter how. Whatever floats your boat and all that.
Pete
I'll give that a
Celebrating 18 years on the CTT Forum.
Buckeye Riveter......... OTTS Charter Member, a Roseyville Raider and a member of the CTT Forum since 2004..
Jelloway Creek, OH - ELV 1,100 - Home of the Baltimore, Ohio & Wabash RR
TCA 09-64284
I wonder if CTT mail surveys give the same profile of us toy train nuts as this thread?
I am not disappointed with the latest issue.
In the March 2011 issue, you have the Misty Mountain Railroad. One of the finest O gauge layouts in the country. You show 8 photos and a track diagram. I could never afford the maintenance costs of such a thing, let alone the price of real-estate it takes up, but loved viewing the images. Great report.
A few pages later you are building another start up type layout, with 26 photos and 3 diagrams. I am still running trains on the floor or outdoors with temporary set-ups. Floor running is great for trying different track plans, but I would really like to have a layout on a table. I almost have room for a 5 x 9 layout, but not quite. These 4 x 8 layouts are just great. All those photos and step by step instructions make it seem so easy. The different construction techniques and track plans on each one have given me a lot to choose from. The only problem I have with these small layouts is... I want to build all of them and only have room for one. [:-(]
To the new guy (well, he only has 23 posts) who said, "Between the magazine and the website, there is more available for our subscribers than ever." -- If CTT was available as a PDF subscription I would choose the digital version.
Bob Keller Classic Toy Trains
CTT does not live up to its name? Classic does not mean "old."
Classic: something that is an outstanding or typical example of its kind.Toy: something meant to be played with.Train(s): a number of railroad cars pulled by a locomotive.
CTT is a good name for this magazine. [opinion]
..........Wayne..........
More Marx layouts and other articles would sure be nice. Those neat Marx accesories say "toy train" like little else! I model and collect PW Lionel, but I do have some Marx accessories.
O/w, I think CTT does a nice job of covering the various aspects of the hobby.
I have been a subscriber since the very first issue and still look forward to each new one with anticipation.
I didn't say I didn't like the hi-rail stuff or it was a detriment. I usually always find something a like about the article. I just like the look of toy-rail over hi rail. There was an article recently where the layout was covered in outdoor carpet with some standard and o-gauge together and I thought it looked great. But for everyone of those types of layouts you 5 hi-rail layouts. I just want it geared a little less to hi-rail that is all. If I wanted more realistic I would be into HO, not that there is anything wrong with that.
I have only been in the hobby for 3 years, and I subscribe to CTT and 3 other monthly publications. If I don't see what I need in CTT, I simply read another magazine, or go build something.
One thing I've learned about this hobby is it's as fun as you make it. Some days I scratch build, other days I just run my trains. It's all about perspective...Enjoy every aspect of this great hobby, 'cuz life is short. Peace!
I enjoy seeing other people's nice layouts. They don't have to be how to articles on the construction of the layout so they don't need to tell me anything. They are showcasing a great layout. Who built it or how it was built is completely irrelevant. For a nice feature layout, I'd like to see at a minimum, a track plan, which is usually there regardless of which magazine featured it, and a minimum of 10 layout pictures. The more the merrier. Especially on larger layouts. Obviously if it is a small layout, it may not need many pictures. I don't want to just see 3 or 4 select pictures that only show a fraction of a layout with an engine or piece of rolling stock being the focal point of the photo. I'd be content seeing some layout pictures that had no trains in them or at the very least not the highlight of the photo.
How-to articles, are different. These should be separate. Frank Ellison wrote many how to articles on structures he built for the Delta Lines as well as his scenery techniques but most of his articles did not describe the layout but rather one aspect. This is how I like to see layout how-to's. He did have a couple of magazine features on the layout itself but they weren't how-to's. They were overviews. This is how it should be done. A layout feature should not be an overview and a how to on it's construction all in one. You separate different things out to different sections in the magazine that way different people with different interests get to see different things rather than having it all jumbled together.
The CTT project builds are how-to's on layout construction. I like seeing them. These are some of my favorite issues.
DennisB-1 LittleTommy: ...I am glad we don't get many of the "I always wanted a layout and I have a pile of money, so I got a professional to build it for me and this is what I got and it is fun" articles about these layouts anymore. Little Tommy I've always wondered about the reasoning behind statements like this. Is it because the the layout wasn't built by the owner himself and therefore he has no sweat equity in it? Is it because most people can't afford to have a layout built for them? Dennis Brennan
LittleTommy: ...I am glad we don't get many of the "I always wanted a layout and I have a pile of money, so I got a professional to build it for me and this is what I got and it is fun" articles about these layouts anymore. Little Tommy
...I am glad we don't get many of the "I always wanted a layout and I have a pile of money, so I got a professional to build it for me and this is what I got and it is fun" articles about these layouts anymore.
Little Tommy
I've always wondered about the reasoning behind statements like this. Is it because the the layout wasn't built by the owner himself and therefore he has no sweat equity in it? Is it because most people can't afford to have a layout built for them?
Dennis Brennan
So since you asked so nicely Dennis, I'll tell you my reasoning. Because that type of article didn't tell me anything other than the guy wanted a layout and he got it. It didn't teach me any new techniques, it didn't show me anything about the layout's operational capabilities, it didn't even, usually, have a track plan. The article didn't add anything to the photos, which, I'll grant you were nice, but the article didn't add anything that couldn't have been said in a 2 sentence caption to each photo.
The same formula was used so often that it got to the point that I felt that I had read the same article the month before, except for the fact that the name of the layout owner had been changed.
The point I was making was that the writing is better now than it used to be, although I would prefer if it were a little more technical. I realize that might not suit everyone. Like I said, the last issue was 'vanilla', it didn't have anything I hated but it didn't have anything I loved either.
LittleTommy
I would agree with the first statement in that I am sure there are many folks who love trains but simply don't have the skills to make it happen. I mean there is a lot involved with building a layout. You have to decide how much space you have for a layout, or if you're married, how much space will the spouse allow. Then in today's world, you have to decide on what track system. Then you need to sit down with pencil & paper and design a workable layout, decide what type of trains to run, then design and build the bemchwork, then lay the track, then wire it, then you have to deal with operating accessories, then scenic it. Taking this and so much more together, not even considering the time and effort of trial & error, can be quite intimidating for folks, and yet, they love trains, so what else are they to do.
As for the second statement, I would absolutely love to build layouts as an occupation.
DennisB-1 A great looking layout is a great looking layout, regardless of who built it. Just because a layout is built by a professional doesn't diminish it's creativity nor make it any better or worse than any of the great layouts created by their owners. You have to realize that many of the guys who do it for a living are hobbyists themselves who've decided to make some money doing what they love. Creativity isn't somehow enhanced by the addition of money. Dennis Brennan
A great looking layout is a great looking layout, regardless of who built it. Just because a layout is built by a professional doesn't diminish it's creativity nor make it any better or worse than any of the great layouts created by their owners.
You have to realize that many of the guys who do it for a living are hobbyists themselves who've decided to make some money doing what they love. Creativity isn't somehow enhanced by the addition of money.
A few comments:
Photos I love photos of layouts, high rail, low rail, 3 rail, 2 rail, Lionel, MTH, American Flyer. The text in the layout articles can be cut down to make room for them.
I like the quick tricks type of articles.
Put my in for 12 issues per year I'd gladly pay the extra money.
Did I mention photos?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Exactly, Pete.
I think that CTT magazine is stalking us.
I just received an email offering me a FREE TRIAL ISSUE.
LOL
It goes on to say that "Classic Toy Trains evokes a similar era when boys dreamed of getting Lionel train sets ..."
Now I am never going to subscribe!
As a kid, I dreamed about getting American Flyer train sets, not Lionel !!!
LOL X LOL
Rich
Alton Junction
"You can’t study the darkness by flooding it with light." - Edward Abbey -
LittleTommy ...I am glad we don't get many of the "I always wanted a layout and I have a pile of money, so I got a professional to build it for me and this is what I got and it is fun" articles about these layouts anymore. Little Tommy
As long as I'm on a roll here, statements like:
"I would also like to see more traditional sized layout features rather than these hi-rail ones where most of us cannot or can't afford or don't have the space to do."
How is a large size or realistic scenery a detriment to what can be learned from a layout? Every well done layout, large or small, is made up of tiny scenes that have nothing to do with a layout's dimensions. A large layout simply has more of them. Creativity has nothing to do with a layout's length and width. To turn away from a featured layout because it's too big or very realistic is short sighted and missing the point of this hobby.
I don't have a problem with the beginner layout series. I actually like them because they show, from beginning to end, what is involved with building a nice, well-scenicked layout. My layout efforts have stalled just short of scenery and structures (I have solid benchwork, track laid, wiring, control panel, accessories, but no grass, trees, or buildings). I have been reluctant to go the next step to scenery for a number of reasons (time, cost, and fear of the unknown). I like the look of of the scenery of some layouts I see in CTT, but not others, so I appreciate the how-to articles because most of them produce results that I would love to have on my layout.
As for areas/suggestions for CTT in the future, I have a few. First, I love the insider stories from former Lionel and Gilbert employees (although I recognize that many of the folks who were around in the postwar era are sadly dying off). I really like Roger Carp's investigative stories on display layouts, toy train mysteries, etc. It seems like CTT used to include more of an emphasis on Standard Guage, and I really enjoyed the articles (even though I am strictly an S gauge guy). Lionel and Flyer guys love to debate the merits of each company's products, so I think it would be fun to see a comparison of the effectiveness of Lionel Magnetraction vs Gilbert Pullmor (i.e. which traction-enhancing technology transferred more of the locomotive weight into tractive effort?). I'd also like to see an article on the Gilbert No. 8 1/2 Erector Hudson, a fascinating toy train model that is prized by collectors.
I recently was asked about how I felt about the last issue in an "official" survey by CTT.
I said that the whole issue was "vanilla". I didn't hate anything, but I didn't love anything either.
I have been a subscriber to CTT since the first issue, and to MR since the late 70's so I am getting a little tired of entry level layout construction articles. I look at these only to see if there is a new technique or a new material being used that may have some utility. If there is nothing new, there really is no need to rehash the same old stuff, you can put it all in a book and sell that seperately to the newbies.
What I would like to see with the articles about the huge "Super Layouts" is the kind of information we used to get when John Armstrong wrote about a layout design in MR, namely, "what kind of things (operationally) does this type of layout design allow you to do?" ( i.e. run three trains completely independently, or run a mainline train independently while switching the industries without having to clear the mainline, or display a whole lot of rolling stock and run only one train at a time) .
I am glad we don't get many of the "I always wanted a layout and I have a pile of money, so I got a professional to build it for me and this is what I got and it is fun" articles about these layouts anymore.
The only problem I have with CTT is that it isn't published every month. Those two-month waits in the summer months is disappointing and frustrating!
I'd like to see more Marx layouts (not that I have one; I have Lionel) but I always find Marx layouts jaw-droppingly cool.Like many others, my first train set (1952) was a Marx, so there is a big nostalgia factor there.
I imagine the problem with doing this is the dearth of Marx pikes out there.
CTT, IMO you do a great job. I even like those 4x8 layouts since that's all the room I have for one in my spare bedroom. Seeing giant maga-pikes is wonderful, but how many of us can ever hope to find the room to build them?
CTT, keep up the good work!
I just bought a subscription this morning. Amazon is offering a $10.00 promotional code for future purchase if you spend at least $20.00 in the Magazine store.
I am looking forward to having CTT delivered to my home again (sure would be nice if it were 12 times a year!).
I promise to use my trains for good, not evil.
BlueBoxTrains.com - The Industrial Rail Archive
Holy I didn't know that! I love Batman!
I enjoy the magazine. True I don't always find the info I'd be specifically interested in, but I do enjoy seeing pix of other's layouts. And I always seem to find some detail in those pix to where I'll buy that issue for future reference. I too have to watch my money as, amoung other things, I'm trying to help my daughter through nursing school, but I always seem to have the $6 for that issue. One day I hope to have enough $6 at one time to get a subscription.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month