Give me steam locomotives or give me DEATH!
Berkshire Junction, bringing fourth the cry of the Iron Horse since 1900.
Yeah, you're right, whatever floats your boat.
I think another difference between "HO" - "N" - "Z" (please pass the magnifying glass) and the "toy train" group ("O", "S" & Standard) is that the former are much too fragile to be considered serious toys. One of my AF engines recently took a flying leap off an elevated track that is 5 ft off the floor and put a good size dent in my hardwood floor. The engine, however, suffered no damage and continues to run. My guess is if it had been an HO engine it would have sprayed parts all over the room.
My opinion of the consumate HO modeler is one who would like to make his/her layout so realistic that when photographed, you could not tell whether it's a real railroad or not. But it's a hobby and whatever turns your fancy is o.k. For me, it's the "big" stuff with lots of play value.
Having said the above, it appears to me that the toy train category is receiving some interest in more realistic/scale appearances. In the pre-and post-war eras there was only minor attention paid to the production of true scale equipment. Look at all the scale stuff available today.
Bill
I dont think layouts like this one;
And $1000+ engines should be considered "toys".
"Lionel trains are the standard of the world" - Jousha Lionel Cowen
"And $1000+ engines should be considered "toys"."
Why not? Isn't playing what is going on? Toys are things we play with. Admittedly, we speak of playing golf, at the $20,000 per year posh country club, but we don't refer to the golf clubs as "toys." Because it's a grown up man's hobby perhaps, and must be given some gravitas. But chasing a little white ball inelegantly around a grassy course isn't exactly reading French symbolist poetry, molecular biology, helping the sick and poor or doing Biblical archeology. By the way, haven't you ever heard someone refer to their collection of Corvettes or Harleys or chain saws as their "toys?" Those puppies cost a lot more than $1,000 each in many cases.
So let's say that our trains aren't toys, are they "equipment" for our hobby, which is clearly a form of playing, and nothing else? So let's call our model trains, tinplate, pure scale, whatever, "equipment."
My point is that a Kohs model that you play with is no more or less a toy than a Lionel standard gauge locomotive like the Blue Comet. Both are either equipment or toys if we are playing with them. If they're being displayed but not played with, perhaps then they are objets d'art or models or antiques or collectors items. But no more so for the most scale like model train than for the historic toy trains. They have slightly different purpose and provenance, but they are both equivalently toys or models or equipment. Anyone who thinks differently is indulging in self-delusion in the hopes of giving (illusory) greater dignity and meaning to what is their recreational activity. We all engage in denial for all sorts of things, big and small, myself included.
Now Brio, that's a toy train :).
For me, Toy Trains refers to the use of large flanges and couplers such as found on American Flyer and Lionel and also Lionel 3 rail track. Scale uses smaller flanges and couplers and two rail. Proto uses even smaller flanges that are scaled down from the real thing.
Toy Trains also refers to models with less detail and more toy like appearance. This is changing as manufacturers other than American Flyer and Lionel make more detailed cars and engines for both the Toy Train and scale side - see Atlas and S Helper.
Personally, I use S scale with smaller flanges and Kadee couplers, but most of my rolling stock comes from S Helper and American Models and are the same pieces running on S Toy Train layouts. Actually, I am lucky that there are so many American Flyer guys, because they buy enough to keep S Helper and American Models in business.
I also have some Lionel trains with 3 rail track that I run. So Toy trains or scale, I have both and love 'em all.
Enjoy
Paul
nblum wrote: "And $1000+ engines should be considered "toys"." Why not? Isn't playing what is going on? Toys are things we play with.
Why not? Isn't playing what is going on? Toys are things we play with.
We do play with them. And playing is whats going on. But we do not think of them as toys. They are scale representations of something larger. They are "models".
Toys are something of little value. They are just something to pass the time for children. A Tonka truck with huge plastic wheels and rubber exaust pipe is a "toy".
A model railroad with very intricate details and scale equipment and expenisve locos and cars should not be considered toys, because they do not serve the purpose of toys.
toy Audio Help (toi) Pronunciation Key n.
Now, in the case of a 6 year old who gets a Lionel starter set for Christmas and runs it around the tree at break-neck speeds and crashes the cars into each other, the train can be considred a "toy"
A highly detailed layout with many scale details and realistic scenery, in my opinion, should be considered a "model"
The only people doing true O-Scale are the proto-48 crowd (OK some of the narrow gauge stuff is scale). Most real world trains do not run on 5 foot gauge track. A "model" is either scale or it isn't. You don't get to pick the apsects you consider "important" and ignore the rest. If the track is the wrong gauge, it's not scale. If the wheel sets or flanges are over sized, its not scale, couplers, passenger car lengths, curve radii ... If it's scale, it's scale. If it's not, it's not scale and it isn't a realy an accurate model.
The "cost" of a "toy" or it's "value" (which can be distinctly different) shouldn't be used to distinguish a "toy" from a model. If someone is playing with it, (aka recreational purposes) it's a toy. If the model is being used for purposes other than playing it's not a toy. Examples of the later are architectural/engineering models, models used as sets/props for entertainment purposes (TV/movies/computer games), or models used to simulate the real world for training purposes. There are some interesting twists on the later. I believe that one of the railroads used TMCC equipment for simulation/training purposes several years ago. aka they were using toys as models.
"An amusement; a pastime"
So a model railroad doesn't fit this definition of a "toy?" I think it does. It's just that "toy" has negative pejorative meanings and model railroaders don't like to be thought of as juveniles playing with their toy trains or model trains. I don't believe the public at large is going to change its views of model railroading just because we insist on being called model makers instead of people who play with trains. Sometimes it's best to be honest about what one is doing, and ignore the idiotic comments of the public at large. The average ignoramuses are well known for their ability to mock those different from themselves, including the lame, halt and otherwise challenged or ill.
Thus I say, if recreation with model trains, whether it be toy, scale or Brio, is your thing, wear the badge proudly, and a pox on those who would criticize or mock you. They're bigger fools than they know.
Let's face it, all hobbies are pretty frivolous or silly compared with real work, family life or helping others. But we all need something amusing and pleasant to relieve us of life's day to day cares and distract us from the implacable fact we are only born to wither and eventually die. Trains sure aren't any sillier or more pointless than golf or collecting barbed wire, to choose two at random. :)
"No childhood should be without a train!"
It is clear to me that they are all toys. Some may have a greater fidelity to scale, but in the end we all like to get down to eye level and enjoy the view of these mechanical beasties in motion. We all have to suspend disbelief when we view them that way so that the illusion is sustained in our minds.
The strength of the greater hobby is in its diversity.
My granddaughter's dolls beg to differ with you guys. They think the trains are real and that they, the dolls, are the toys.
Jack
IF IT WON'T COME LOOSE BY TAPPING ON IT, DON'T TRY TO FORCE IT. USE A BIGGER HAMMER.
The definations of "toy train", "model train" and "scale model train" are very fluid, and open to intrepretaion.
and yes, in theory ALL model trains are "toy trains", in the sense that they are toys..even a $1,000 brass locomotive.
But..IMO, some trains fall firmly in the "toy train" catagory, and some fall more in the "scale model train" catagory.
The difference, IMO, is the question "Does the model train at least attempt to replicate the prototype as close as possible??"
and yes I know..no model train can ever be perfectly accurate.
But the majority of HO scale trains attempt to be accurate, as close as possible, to the prototype... scale track gauge, 2 rails, scale length to locomotives, detail as fine as humanly posible, etc..these are NOT in the "toy train" catagory.
"Toy Trains" on the other hard, using the defination of "toy trains" as often used by something like, say "Classic Toy Trains Magazine".. dont care much about prototype accuracy..(not that there is anything wong with that"! ;) and you find "Toy Trains" mostly in the O-scale "lionel" tradition:
3 rail, incorrect gauge, really sharp curves, diesels too short (because of the tight curves) diesel pilots that are attached to the trucks and swing with the trucks (again, because of the curves) lots of heavy smoke, really fast speeds, stylized structures and accessories...etc.. none of which is terribly prototypically accurate, and doesnt care that its not.
There is a definate "toy-train" tradition, that incorporates all those features..traditionally Lionel O-scale.. its just a different aspect of the hobby, quite distinct and different from "scale modeling". (proto-48, and HO and others).. there is no right way or wrong way to enjoy model trains..just different ways.
to me,those reasons are why most O-scale is considered "toy trains" and why most HO-scale is "scale model trains"..using that particular defination of "toy trains" which generally refers to the whole "Lionel Style" of model railroading..
Scot
I really don't know the reason BUT when I was in HO (50+ years), I considered myself as a miniture train "operator" in a miniture world. Now, into O27, I consider myself a "player".
The size, weight, sound and overall appearance of the O size, to me, reminds me of the very first "electric trains" that were my toys back in the late forties. I find myself worrying less about appearance and details and more like just having fun running them.
Two observations:
One Lionel model is actually built to the correct gauge: The General. The prototype ran on the 5-foot-gauge track of the Western and Atlantic.
The one element that is not modeled in scale models is the size of the model. If any consideration is given this feature, O-scale and S-scale "toy" trains score higher in this aspect of realism than HO, N, or Z.
Bob Nelson
As far as I'm concerned they're all toys in some way. Regarding the comment that O is a toy because of large couplers and wheel flanges, that too describes every other scale. N scale has oversized wheel flanges. Many still come with square rapido couplers and the rail is much too tall. I even heard a "rivet counter" gripe about n-scale because scaled down it's rails weren't scale distance apart. He praised HO and models On3. All scratch built for absolute accuracy. Many HO still comes with rail that is too tall. What about the old couplers in HO? They look very weird. I don't even know what they are called. Nothing prototypical about that. Sure you can get aftermarket parts to make things appear more prototypical but we could do that in O if we really wanted to.
O had many things that the other scales didn't have for a long time and many still don't and they were everyday available things. Working electric crossing gates, uncoupling tracks, log cars that dump over, automatic signals, etc and most of these have been around for 50 years now! O was on top of many realistic aspects before some of the other gauges even existed.
I have always done N scale due to space limitations. I have quite a bit of HO and of course I have lots of Lionel that I used to set up on the floor and still do from time to time. I even have a G scale that goes under the Christmas tree. All of them are fun and there are some very nice aspects of all of them. Within the next year I'll be buying a new house and one of the things I'd like to find is a room above a 3 car garage that I could make a dedicated train room. If I get my wish, my dream layout will go there and guess what it will be? 3 rail! It's layouts like Rich Battista's and others that have made me realize that I can have O and still have a realistic looking layout. It can look every bit as good as another other scale set except for the center rail. I'm completely fine with that. I don't want to go 2 rail O either. Somehow the 3rd rail just maintains an aspect of fun that I always had with playing with them on the floor. I've never had any issues with my Lionel trains derailing. They can take very sharp corners at very high speeds and not derail so moderate curves at slower speeds would be a non issue. The largest scale trains are always the ones that seem to draw the most attention at open house layout tours and there's a very good reason for that. Large is fun! I don't care if I don't have the exact number of rivets as the original. Fun is fun.
"IT's GOOD TO BE THE KING",by Mel Brooks
Charter Member- Tardis Train Crew (TTC) - Detroit3railers- Detroit Historical society Glancy Modular trains- Charter member BTTS
It's simply semantics.
A Corvette could be considered a toy, a ski boat could be considered a toy, etc.
Enjoy what you have, be happy and ignore the envious knuckledraggers.
Jon
So many roads, so little time.
I like to think of them as hobby trains. O scale hobby trains and HO scale hobby trains. I never really thought of my trains or my hobby as a toy. I'm not offended by the term but just don't think it fits. My family has always been into RC planes which are often called model planes and rarely called toy planes.
http://home.mchsi.com/~ironmaster1960/wsb/html/view.cgi-home.html-.html
The overall affect to me of watching O gauge trains run is more like standing trackside watching a real train than the smaller scales are owing to O's larger size. If I had the space, and could afford it, I would probably go to 1:29th trains or live steam. It seems to me that the larger the miniature trains get the more impact they have, even though you can take a scale ruler and find things "wrong" with them.
George
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