Model Railroader, then and now.

[dknelson]

Comparing page count is only half the discussion. Try counting words per column inch sometime -- when you look at issues from the 1950s and 1960s you will note that the pages are more filled with type than they are now (in addition to the magazine being physically smaller). Use the index sometimes and find articles by Joe Kunzleman such as "taking pains with panes" - a complete examination of how to make windows. Articles back then were very very long and sometimes entire pages would be filled with text -- no pictures, no graphs, just words. Some of the old Dollar Model Project articles were the same way, and people actually could built the model, step by step, following the article. On the other hand the actual quality of modeling as featured in the photo section was often rather disappointing by modern standards. I would hazard a guess that the standards for the very finest scratchbuilders of the time was higher then than now (thinking of guys like Jack Work, and Jock Oliphant) but the level of average modeling -- from the standpoint of physical appearance of a layuout that is -- has risen sharply.
Dave Nelson

[rogerhensley]

QUOTE: Originally posted by NightCrawler

one thing i get from this, the articles were much more technical and in depth back in 1983.

This says it all.
Kalmbach has apparently moved to putting the detail in new magazines that they want to pedal. I don't buy them and won't.

[rrinker]

I have to agree, the depth of the articles these days is far less than it used to be.

I have a pretty good collection, nearly every issue from '73 to present and a good helping of older ones. Prior to starting my layout I was pretty hardcore on collectiong old issues of MR. I still enjoy reading issues from the 50's and 60's.

[Anonymous]

I think MR is doing great ! The only thing is that they need more feature layouts that are small, and more pics of the layouts. Keep up the good work, MR staff !

[on30francisco]

I noticed there are less scratchbuilding articles and plans than there were years ago. There is also less coverage about minority scales and gauges. I usually purchase MR at the newsstand depending on the contents of the issue. I enjoy reading the older MRs from the 50s through the 80s. The public library has a complete collection of MR. There is a lot of useful information in those older issues.

[Anonymous]

I'm 12 but I have collected almost every MR published from1985-2004 and think the era 1992-1997 was the best, they had more layout tours then, they had Student Fare, and they had more kitbashing article then.

[Anonymous]

Magazines today are physically smaller and thinner. Look at the readers digest, looks like the TV guide to me pretty much. The competition is intense, people don't read as much, and they don't tinker as much overall.

It's the times we live in. How many people "take the time" - anymore? For many it is instant gratification. Buy a CD, a DVD, McDonalds, TV, playstation 2, etc. Many many are spectators of life only. They do not ever get the feelings of satisfaction, success, contentment, challenges, setbacks in doing something.

So, the demand just is not there for magazines. We who enjoy them notice the differences. But I am just thankful there is still a Model Railroader (and of mine they go back to the fifties with good stuff still) [:)]

[RhB_HJ]

Yep, looks like there's less steak and more sizzle.

Used to be that it took a week to get through MR and absorb everything. Now I can do the same in 2-3 days.
Of course there's two possibilities
a) I have gotten sooooo much better at speed reading and absorbing (Yeah, right![:o)][:o)][:I])

b) There is not as much to be absorbed.

A typical example would be "Working on the railroad" (Hi there Lionel! Yes I actually know the man!).
I'm sorry but I learned how to square up things, from tiny to large about 40 or so years ago, at the same time I learned to use vernier calipers, micrometers etc. etc. I've never had a scale ruler except the architectural kind.
And as a reminder to Lionel; no I never dropped a powerdrill on my precious layout![}:)][:I][:D]

Call me a bit jaded, but there is less in today's MR.

Even up-to-date subjects like DCC are not covered in depth. As an example "Third generation DCC" by Rutger Friberg was a bit of a disappointment.
OK so I'm partial to ZIMO, which has had a bi-dir method (Control-mobile decoder-Control) for some time. And uses it, together with STP, to very accurately control the engines including feedback of which engine number is in which section etc. etc.
There was one paragraph (3 sentences) on the ZIMO subject and no mention that their existing decoders had the bi-dir for years. Sometimes it isn't a bad idea to give credit where credit is due.

BTW I now get MR from the library (except the 70th anniversary issue), I decided spending money on European mags was a better investment.

[Morpar]

I wholly agree! It seemed like every month had something useful to everyone back then. I always enjoyed the "scratchbuilding a loco" articles the most. MR and RMC were even running them at about the same time in the early 80's! Seemed like more prototype drawings then too.

[Anonymous]

there seem to be quite a few discussions that come up about weither MR was better back a few years ago, or is better now. or weither there are more ads and less content now as opposed to then. well, since i have no life whatsoever, i did some searching and some calculations.

i picked a random month of MR, in this case, July. one issue from 1983 and one from 2003.

first, the number of full page ads or pages completely covered with ads: 1983 - 45. 2003 - 33

total ads: 1983 - 231. 2003 - 190

pages completely covered with content and no ads. this includes the classifieds and the dealer directory: 1983 - 59. 2003 - 66.

total pages: 1983 - 148. 2003 - 140

pages of classifides: 1983 - 3 1/2. 2003 - 5 partial pages, shared with ads.

dealer directory pages: 1983 - 9 1/2. 2003 - 7 1/2.

total numbers of advertisers (listed in ad index): 1983 - 199. 2003 - 175.

and last, the contents of the magazines and number of pages and photos/diagrams for each.
1983:
Superdetailing a pacific coast shay: 8, 29
conrail track scale and switchmans shanty (structure drawings): 2, 12
zero 1 for N scale (hornbys command control): 4, 12
Fred Gills diamond valley line (layout feature): 5, 7
Oscar Neuberts O scale SP F7 a and B units (model of the month):1, 1
Seaboard Coast Lines BQ23-7 (locomotive drawings):4, 13
a USRA Mikado in brass Pt 6 (scratchbuilding a brass steamer): 4 2/3, 12
the delaware and lehigh rr (layout planning feature): 2, 3
when is a rock mold not a rock mold? (using plastic fishing worms to make rock molds): 1 1/3, 4
repowering mantuas camelback mikado: 1 1/3, 4
improving the looks of your iron ore jimmies: 2, 5
48 star flags: 2/3 (little photos of flags you can cut out and use)
all aboard: scratchbuilding your first wood structure: 3, 12
the sierrs silverton rr (layout feature: 2, 4

Departments: off the train wire, railway post office, schedules, trade topics, hobbyshop window, at the throttle, trackside photos(4 photos), all aboard, club news, cartoons(2), bull session, railroaders library, paint shop, MR clinic, index of advertisers

2003:
Converting a big layout to DCC: 5, 5
Heart of a community (a small town depot you can model): 3, 10
the lost art of soldering: 4, 6
a model railroad work of art (building the chicago MSI layout): 7, 9
driving the golden spike (high tech diorama): 4, 7
David Haines Raton pass layout : 9, 10
Modeling a creek: 3, 8
8 tips for better passenger cars: 4, 13
realistic stainless steel: 2, 6
the crystal river district (ho, hon3 track plan): 3, 4

Departments: at the throttle, railway post office, product reviews, MR news, workshop, back to basics, trackside photos(6 photos), workin on the railroad, trains of thought, dcc corner, prototype info, coming events and club memberships, cartoon, index of advertisers, editorial flashback

well, there you go. if you havent fallen asleep by the end of this post, maybe you found new fuel for your arguments, or maybe you were proven wrong.

one thing i get from this, the articles were much more technical and in depth back in 1983.