Is CTT useless?

[Anonymous]

I subscribe to both also OGR seems to have more how to articles while CTT has more (lets take a tour of this 2000 square foot layout) stories
I think the reviews are weak in both with OGR being the better of the 2.
It's understandable that they don't wi***o upset their advertisers or subscribers but the one that calls a spade a spade will end up with a loyal following.

[Anonymous]

I subscribe to both. OGR has carved out the hi rail niche which CTT seems to pay lip service to now and then. I suspect the strategy is to keep that wall up between "toy" trains and the 2 rail crowd so as to protect Model Railroader's flanks. CTT seems to me a little slicker than OGR but most of CTT's articles are of little interest to me. I subscribe mainly to catch the ads.

[Anonymous]

I think CTT has a good balance and being "lite" in its coverage with lots of visual material (yes, fluff)and that is why I enjoy it so much. As a minority collector(AF), in-depth articles about Lionel motors or other three rail issues does not appeal to me.

[Anonymous]

I myself prefer ogr because i believe for me anyway that ctt is lionel heavy in the toy side of things. However i do read and enjoy their reviews, but more of them and less in the past would do well.

[Anonymous]

I collect both prewar Marx and prewar Lionel. I have been collecting track side stuff for some time now and will soon put the first permanent track in. I subscribe to neither mag, but buy many at hobby stores and etc. I browse through to see if there are any articles that I may be interested in and I probably buy ten CTT to one OGR because of the browsing.

[cheapclassics]

I have been pondering a suitable answer to this question since it appeared. I must admit a slight bias as I occasionally write for CTT, but I was a subsciber long before I was a writer. I think the main difference between OGR and CTT is perspective. CTT is partly a historical magazine with articles about trains stretching back to the early 1900's. OGR is more about the present. OGR only covers O, while CTT writes about S to G. I collect and operate both O-27 and Standard gauge. I read OGR on occasion, but I subscibe to CTT. They are both good magazines and they both help the hobby grow.

[Anonymous]

DIFFERENT STROKES FOR DIFFERENT FOLKS,IF IT WAS SAME-0,SAME-O,IT WOULD BE DULL WORLD,I ENJOY BOTH MAGAZINE'S,AS I ALSO ENJOY READING ALL FOURMS,ON THIS WEB SITE, A PERSON NEVER KNOWS WHAT ONE CAN LEARN FROM=====HUB

[Algonquin]

Hi Thomas,

I enjoy both magazines. I am a collector and operator of mostly Lionel trains. I have a lot of postwar trains and continue to buy todays trains. I enjoy the CTT articles on the history of certain pieces and the postwar repair articles. I don't collect Pre-war, but I realy enjoy the articles on these classic trains. I also enjoy the articles on American Flyer S-Gauge.

Each magazine serves a slightly different crowd. CTT was started to serve a "classic train" oriented crowd. Essentially, post and prewar Lionel and American Flyer, Prewar Ives and others. Newer trains and G-gauge are also covered. CTT covers these "classic" trains which OGR does not.

O-Gauge Railroading started out as O-Scale Railroading which covered mostly two rail O. Myron Biggar bought the magazine around 1985 (I am not sure on the exact year) and started to expand it to cover three rail (with a lot of hi-rail) Lionel and others. Today, it no longer covers traction or much 2-rail. For the most part today, OGR covers only three rail O-gauge.

I enjoy both magazines just as they are. OGR covers a lot of information that is useful in the construction of my layout and CTT helps bring my knowledge of the history of the classic trains and also helps me keep my postwar beauties running like new.

I an not a rivet counter, so the OGR reviews of how the new Lionel engine is reproduce compared to the prototype is interesting but not required. I care more for the pictures of the train and how well they run. Over the last ten years both magazines have moved closer to the hi-rail side of the hobby. But we need to remember that there are many sides of the toy train hobby. If both magazines covered the same material to the same criteria we would have no need for both of them.

As for me, I enjoy CTT just the way it is.

Tim P.

[LittleTommy]

On the LOTS website, the question is posed "Is O Gauge Railroading a far better publication?", and I began to ponder some of their premises. Do you find the reviews in CTT nothing more than "cheerleading'? Do you find the technical articles in CTT either too elementary, flawed, or not applicable to two or three railed operation? do you find, as I do, that their S gauge historical articles are full of elementary errors of fact? Do you find their profiles of collectors layouts so devoid of technical data that they are more appropriate to "House Beautiful" that a Model Railroading publication? Am I the only grouch out there, or is this forum site so inaccessable that nobody responds or even sees these postings