Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Today, I buy MR mostly for the pictures - which are ALWAYS head-and-shoulders above any competing mag. And not just for the "eye candy" but for ideas. The reviews are well done but its just simple statistics that few are relevant to me, especially since I have not moved to DCC. I'd say that only three or four times a year do I find a text article that really teaches me something, or that motivates me to do a project. The problem they have for me is finding a middle ground; most project articles are either too basic, or numbingly complex. To be fair, part of the issue is the modest skills and experience I've acquired over the years. But the direction the magazine is taking is also a cause. Its not just about beginner articles; I actually always enjoy the project railroads. The electronics column, the paint shop column are both history as part of an editorial decision. I'll miss Lionel's column but it appears that this was more his decision than the editor's. Koester's column was usually good when he had an operating layout; IMO its been worthless since then. I also concur with others that I miss the features on short lines. So given the lack of actionable information, I've already decided that, without any changes (or I should perhaps say, positive changes) the next price increase will be the end for me. But if they've taken the decision to go with the "eye candy" approach - then why not give us more? Its obvious that there is no lack of material since they routinely publish layout articles that were written and photographed as much as five years previously (the article on the West Virginia Northern in the current issue is at least three years old since one of the modellers died in 2002). And of course they also have plenty of material for the annual Great (well, not always that great, but that's another topic ...) Model Railroads. I do get sick of the self-puffery in the mail bag. I've written several letters or e-mails, not criticizing articles per se, but taking issue with certain recommendations, but none were published. One example from maybe 10-12 years ago was a feature on building your own walk-around throttles by Keith Gutereiz (sp?) that in my opinion left out some vital information. Two issues later, MR acknowledged that many readers had written about this exact point, but my recollection is that no letters were published. Another example was an article claiming to give a few easy steps to "flawless" car-truck mounting. The article itself was seriously flawed and I personally know of two others who wrote to take exception - but nothing in the mail bag. I no longer bother; if at least most of the letter is not cringingly adulatory, it will NOT be published. I'll also say that while I cannot judge the worth of my efforts, after several draft-article submissions and a couple of idea submissions, its my impression that you need something really special to get them to reach out beyond their established stable of contributors. Once again, I've stopped bothering.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag

Update Reply

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Model Railroader Newsletter See all

Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!

Subscriber & Member Login

Edit post

Post Body

Tags (Optional)

Subscriber & Member Login

Users Online

Search the Community