tomikawaTT Model Railroader publishes what freelance authors and photographers submit. No submission, no publication! it's that simple. Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Model Railroader publishes what freelance authors and photographers submit. No submission, no publication! it's that simple.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
This applies to all model magazines, not just MR. During my 16 years as editor of Model Railroading I only published one Z-scale layout feature...it was the only one I ever received. Jeffrey White's Z-scale Union Pacific layout was featured in the October 2005 issue of Model Railroading, and is included in the BIG BOOK of Model Railroads digital book.
Randy LeeStationmasterHighlands Station
R. T. POTEET I was stationed in Germany in the early '70s when Märklin introduced their Z-Scale--the called it Mini-Bahn or something like that; it was definitely cute but was it model railroading?
I was stationed in Germany in the early '70s when Märklin introduced their Z-Scale--the called it Mini-Bahn or something like that; it was definitely cute but was it model railroading?
I feel that Z-scale is definitely considered to be model railroading. I think we need to take a step back and see where it fits in its relationship to other scales.
It may not fill the need of the model railroader in which prototypical operation, amassing a fleet of highly detailed rolling stock and switching are important, but it's perfect for the modeler who wants to do something different, someone that is tired of all the trends in the hobby toward hyper-realism and prototypical accuracy.
Anyone that's had their layout or trains criticized by a visitor for one thing or another may want to consider Z-scale. Other model railroaders may look at as a novelty or 'toy-like', but that's fine. Granted, it's diminutive size isn't for everyone, but I think it seems to be a rewarding scale regardless of popular opinion.
last mountain & eastern hogger R. T. POTEET As it is I have to pass; my aging hands are having a hard enough time with N-Scale and I am having to give consideration to going back to Horribly Oversized-Scale. R.T. Potent, may I remind you that "HO" stands for "Honorable Scale" and "N" is strictly "Nasty" Lol............ Johnboy out.....................
R. T. POTEET As it is I have to pass; my aging hands are having a hard enough time with N-Scale and I am having to give consideration to going back to Horribly Oversized-Scale.
As it is I have to pass; my aging hands are having a hard enough time with N-Scale and I am having to give consideration to going back to Horribly Oversized-Scale.
R.T. Potent, may I remind you that "HO" stands for "Honorable Scale" and "N" is strictly "Nasty"
Lol............
Johnboy out.....................
No! N stands for Noble and HO still stands for Horribly Oversized.
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
ccaranna R. T. POTEET I was stationed in Germany in the early '70s when Märklin introduced their Z-Scale--the called it Mini-Bahn or something like that; it was definitely cute but was it model railroading? I feel that Z-scale is definitely considered to be model railroading. I think we need to take a step back and see where it fits in its relationship to other scales.
My question
. . . . . . . . . . it was cute but was it model railroading?
As stated in your posting:
. . . . . . . . . . we need to take a step back and see where it fits in its relationship to other scales.
Z-Scale is just about 25% smaller than N-Scale which, by a quirk, is almost the exact reduction of TT-Scale to HO-Scale. TT-Scale was an attempt to mollify those modelers who were being forced into smaller living quarters following Big Brawl Two. Its size--1:120--was determined by the availability of motors at that time. TT-Scales reduction, I feel--and I got this years ago from an acquaintance who had spent his teenage years in the 1950s modeling in TT-Scale--was not quite small enough to attract anyone other than HO-Scale modelers who were really pressed for space just as were most HO-Scale modelers who converted to N-Scale in the '60s and 70's--and that includes myself although I was just a little bit later in my conversion. TT-Scale's attraction was primarily to new modelers just as N-Scale's was. N-Scale has survived--TT-Scale, at least as far as North American modeling goes and I am likely to get burned at the stake for this comment--has become one of those endangered species.
An 85' passenger car measures 12" in HO-Scale while the same car is 8.5" in TT-Scale--that difference may or may not be of significance to the established modeler; of more significance is curve radius: that 85' car, according to the NMRA curvature standards, will require a 35" radius curve while the same car would require 25.5" in TT-Scale. If your available layout space only allowed you that 25.5 inches as a curve radius you may or may not have given TT-Scale some serious thought. That same 85' became 6 3/8" in N-Scale and the curve radius became 19 1/8"; that curve radius was likely to assume a considerable matter of note as it did with me. Price would also play a part here: my hobby magazines from the '40s and '50s report TT-Scale as being more expensive than HO-Scale just as, today, N-Scale is slightly more expensive than HO-Scale.
Here is another of those "I-wish-I-could-eat-my-words" statements: N-Scale does not really lend itself to mass-superdetailing such as HO-Scale does . . . . . . . . . . but then one of the O-Scaler's retorts from the 30's and 40's and into the '50s was that
. . . . . . . . . . HO-Scale was simply too small for superdetailing!
What might be a good modeling size for a scale to propel itself into a 3rd place? As I stated earlier the problem with Z-Scale is that IT IS SIMPLY NOT SMALL ENOUGH! to be a serious contender for manufacturing assets. Maybe 1:280 which would set a track gauge at 5mm, that 85' passenger car would be about 3 5/8" and the minimum radius for that 85" car would be 11" . . . . . . . . . . or thereabouts. I sure that we would still get the proverbial "Can I run my X-Scale Big Boy on my 6" radius curves?" Such a size is too small for today's available motor sizes but I remember when available motor sizes mandated TT-Scale as the smallest of scales.
The only North American equipment I have ever seen running is F7s, GP7/9s, and GP35s; there may have been steamers but I just don't remember them. I remember seeing something about the introduction of an SD40. This is a rather limited supply of motive power for a scale that is thirty plus years old. But then again those old timers in N-Scale remember when the standard fare from manufacturers was F7s, GP7/9s, and GP30s; I never could understand why everyone wanted to manufacture a GP30!
american Z scale locos as follows,
American Z line: F59PHI, SD70M, SD75I from $179 to $220
Micro Trains: F7A from $95.85 to $110.95, also F7A and F7B dummy units; GP35 from $165.95 to $195.95
That's where the major kill for me is. I did take a look at Z scale, and a very good look too. The range in availalbe motive power is extremely limited, but I'm not worried with that. I forget who, it's in the front of the latests MR issue, but someone has made an RS2 body shell that will fit on Micro Trains GP9 chassis for $65. To me the kill is the price. From the prices an AZL and MT the average price is $167.06, and thats for basic DCC. NONE of them, even the 196 dollar ones, was DCC, just 'ready' for it. Just as a comparison a brand new DCC/sound equiped FP45 from Athearn goes for $229.95 from them, and I've seen N scale DCC/sound equiped locos listed as low as 55 bucks (Bachmann 44 tonner) on trainworld.
The second biggest killer is structures. Ironically, there is plenty of detail parts like towers and people and benchs and stuff that are American style, but not so many buildings. If you stick with a theme anyways, if it doesn't matter and you just want american style buildings your ok. This translates to probably 90% of your buildings being scratch built. I go that low because one company makes all their N scale houses in Z scale. I'm sure if scratch building almost everything is something I want to do when it's my first time around.
Now here's the part that intrigues me enough to consider Z scale over N scale (even though I already have about $250 invested in rolling stock for N). I will limit this somewhat because I'm sure a Z scale loco can't haul the same equivalent 20-25 cars that an N scale loco can, but for poops and giggles a 15 car consist of 50' PSI's and a GP35 in N scale would take up about 45 inches, while the same consist in Z scale would take up about 32.5 inches. that's like 2.75 feet compared to almost 4.
Freight car wise Z scale is not slacking. 50 foot gondolas, 40 foot tank cars, 60 foot bulkhead flat cars. Even small differences are there. 40 foot box cars of plug door, youngstown door, Pullman-Standard, and USRE. 50 footers come in the same, plus ACF and double doors. American Z Line even tosses in some Bethgon coalporter 4 car packs and hi-cube 50 foot box cars. I'm sure it wouldn't hard, or expensive, to buy the 61 and 60 foot bulkhead flat cars from Micro Trains and kitbash them into center beam flat cars or just plain old flat cars. Personally I think I would want to go with Z scale, I had a limited space avaivalbe which is now becoming more limiting because of some future exercise equipement (not mine by I will probably end up using it). I should say that the freight car prices are on par with N scale and HO scale, ranging from 20 bucks to I think one was 32 bucks, but that one type of car was the only one I saw over 29.95. But like I said, I think Z scales biggest interest killer is the prices and lack of available locomotives. Now I wish I had millions to spare, I'd by all the right equipment and start making my own Z scale stuff. Would definetly go Z scale if I could get my hands on a GP30 or three or four, or an SD40/45 or two, or one of my new favs (don't ask why because I don't) Dash 8-40 in four and six axle versions.
AZL is bringing out a GP30,they are re-introducing the Rougue GP38-2,MTL has the GP9,and a SD40-2 in the works.If memory serves me right MTL has an E-8 in the works.
For rolling stock,AZL has enclosed autracks on the way along with a modern tank car ,PS-2 covered hopper,and a 4 bay center-flo.MTL,ZTRACK,and ED Models have modern intermodel cars.AZL and ED Models both have 3 bay center-flos.
Biggest problem I can see for Z beyond the cost is there are not enough modern North American buildings,there are some but not nearly enough.We could definately use some more and better looking American vehicle models in Z too, my preference would be some fairly late model ones,but all eras are needed.
The StationmasterThis applies to all model magazines, not just MR.
Once upon a time, MR used to assign staff writers to cover layouts.
That way, they didn't have to rely on submissions for 100% of their content. They could find and report on trends in the hobby--like modelers using Z scale--that were intresting but didn't supply them with articles.
Those days are gone, I guess.
Not true, one of the MR staff members just took a day trip on Monday to photograph a layout.
Sincerely,
Neil Besougloff, editor
Neil Besougloff
editor, Model Railroader magazine
Catt AZL is bringing out a GP30,they are re-introducing the Rougue GP38-2,MTL has the GP9,and a SD40-2 in the works.If memory serves me right MTL has an E-8 in the works. For rolling stock,AZL has enclosed autracks on the way along with a modern tank car ,PS-2 covered hopper,and a 4 bay center-flo.MTL,ZTRACK,and ED Models have modern intermodel cars.AZL and ED Models both have 3 bay center-flos. Biggest problem I can see for Z beyond the cost is there are not enough modern North American buildings,there are some but not nearly enough.We could definately use some more and better looking American vehicle models in Z too, my preference would be some fairly late model ones,but all eras are needed.
Any idea when they would come out with these? I know the GP30/35/38 were based off the same body designs so I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to buy an existing GP35 in Z and kitbash it to match. Should even eaiser since it is Z scale and would be too small to model the tiny variations that made differences. As long as the prices stayed under 200 I could deal the cost. I was even thinking about this on and off all day today at work and finally decided I would just stick with my N scale and then I came here and saw what you wrote. Now you got me all wondering again. Darn you. I think you owe me a beer
You guys in the larger scales need to take a closer look at the Z cars and locos.You will be surprized at the detail that is there.
As for operations ,we don't have magne-Matic couplers for nothing.It wasn't all that long ago that it was said there was no detail or operational possibilitys with N scale either.I have been told that HO was just a toy at one time too.
My Z layout only has 3 sidings but all 3 get switched on a reguler basis.
The only scale that is not operations capable is T and I suspect that will change by years end.
I think part of the problem has been lack of track components. The new track-and-roadbed style track from Micro-track may help solve that.
http://www.micro-trains.com/micro-track_z.php
Plus the perception is that Z-scalers are primarily modelling Europe, and that the only equipment available is European...which isn't the case.
http://www.ztrack.com/AZL/amerzlines.html
I know a Z-scale layout was featured in the December 1982 MR, and it seems to me one will turn up from time to time...about as often as they do an S-scale layout perhaps.
I suspect it's kind of the old Catch-22: Because MR doesn't do a lot of stories or reviews of Z equipment, Z scalers had to create their own magazines like Z track...and MR figures folks who read Z track probably don't bother to read MR, since they're getting all their info from Ztrack - so why bother doing stories on Z?? Kinda the same way decades ago MR would occassionally do reviews of O-three rail equipment; now because of sister mag "Classic Toy Trains" they don't bother anymore.
Catt You guys in the larger scales need to take a closer look at the Z cars and locos.You will be surprized at the detail that is there. As for operations ,we don't have magne-Matic couplers for nothing.It wasn't all that long ago that it was said there was no detail or operational possibilitys with N scale either.I have been told that HO was just a toy at one time too. My Z layout only has 3 sidings but all 3 get switched on a reguler basis. The only scale that is not operations capable is T and I suspect that will change by years end.
I agree that the level of detail is impressive for Z-scale, but not everyone is filming their layout in a close-up range. Now that I think about it, it's interesting to find Z-scale clips on YouTube. Most of the time I'd swear that I was looking at an N-scale layout.
Thing is, videotaping Z-scale (and N-scale for that matter) with the same close-up approach you see done in the highly detailed world of HO scale somewhat defeats the purpose and intent of the smaller scales. It wasn't until someone placed their hand into the frame to fix a derailed locomotive did I get the sense of how small Z-scale actually is.
I still feel that all of the super detailers should stick to HO (and even more appropriately) O scale. If folks are concerned with what type of wiper blades were used on an SD24 in 1962 or what color a '58 Impala's front turn signals were, there's really no business in Z-scale for that.
Apologies for coming on strong there, but there comes a limit to what is expected of Z-scale.
ccaranna folks are concerned with what type of wiper blades were used on an SD24 in 1962 or what color a '58 Impala's front turn signals were, there's really no business in Z-scale for that. Apologies for coming on strong there, but there comes a limit to what is expected of Z-scale.
folks are concerned with what type of wiper blades were used on an SD24 in 1962 or what color a '58 Impala's front turn signals were, there's really no business in Z-scale for that.
I do believe it was a highly polished metal dish with a clear lens cap held on by 3 tiny screws and a yellow colored bulb. But then again I might be thinking a little older than '58. I should know this, I love Impalas.
Did some fittling around last nite, came up with this quick-'n-dirty plan. Single deck, fits along two walls of an 11 1/2 by 10 foot room, has full yard, first two spurs laying at an angle to main line are saw mill tracks, second spur parallel with main is a siding for fuel oil in early times or LP in later times, and last siding on the right is a concrete business, either a concrete maker or something that makes concrete products like piping. It could also work as any number of things such as a grain elevator. Squares are 1x1 foot by the by, the back wall portion and right side portion would be around 14-18 inches deep I figure and the yard section would be just big enough for a yard, maybe 9-12 inches deep. I also did a quick-'n-dirty N scale plan. It required making it a double decker but it was good enough to make me think of sticking with N scale. Again, alot of has to come down to cost and availability of locos. I could get an N scale Atlas GE U25B, have someone paint, super detail it, and add DCC w/sound for the price of a straight laced DC Z scale loco. Add another 35 bucks for a cheap 2 function Digitrax decoder or buy another one and hope it fits, plus no sound. As much as I'm starting to like Z scale I don't think it's for me. I just want too much out of it to be going with such small equipement. Maybe someday though I'll build a smaller Z layout, just for shoots and googles.
MILW-RODR american Z scale locos as follows, American Z line: F59PHI, SD70M, SD75I from $179 to $220 Micro Trains: F7A from $95.85 to $110.95, also F7A and F7B dummy units; GP35 from $165.95 to $195.95 That's where the major kill for me is. I did take a look at Z scale, and a very good look too.
That's where the major kill for me is. I did take a look at Z scale, and a very good look too.
I have to agreee, price is the biggest killer for me - I can and am willing to make do with a limited selection, but I just can't get past the price.
When I got into Z scale in July of last year it was with the proviso I could find MTL locomotives for under a $100.00.Well I found 2,one is a GP35 and the other a GP9.I now have a 24" x48" layout that isn't quite big enough.
There is no doubt that Z is expencive but if you start looking at the prices of the other scales you will notice that they ain't cheap either.To my way of thinking there are to many manufacturers in Z that think their stuff is an instant collectable there fore it is priced accordingly.
I can see a bright future for Z but it will take getting a lot more folks involved in it.
Catt When I got into Z scale in July of last year it was with the proviso I could find MTL locomotives for under a $100.00.Well I found 2,one is a GP35 and the other a GP9.I now have a 24" x48" layout that isn't quite big enough.
Did you get them on-line or at a local dealer?
Are they DC or DCC?
Do you have a link for them?
Catt There is no doubt that Z is expencive but if you start looking at the prices of the other scales you will notice that they ain't cheap either.To my way of thinking there are to many manufacturers in Z that think their stuff is an instant collectable there fore it is priced accordingly.
Some of it may be that Z scale equipment just is not being manufactured as a mass market item, and that is a part of the reason that the price is so high.
Catt I can see a bright future for Z but it will take getting a lot more folks involved in it.
True, but which comes first, lower price or more people getting into it? I suspect that with the economy the way it is today, price is going to be the deciding factor. Unless MR is going to assist the Z scale hobby, by doing a "micro train" issue that devotes almost an entire issue to Z scale, it is just not going to get the attention/promotion that Z scale deserves to get a leg up and become anything more than a curiosity to most people.
Got both online,the GP9 came from ebay and the GP35 came from a hobbyshop no longer in business
They are both DCC ready
You can check them out on MTL's website
Most manufacturers seem quite content with the way things are now ,but IMHO lowering their prices to at least match the N scale pricing would entice more people to Z scale .This again IMHO would benefit everybody, the hobbiest could afford to buy more which in turn would give the manufacturer the incentive and the income to produce more.I just increased my fleet of rolling stock by 4 and also purchased 2 houses and garages for my layout.
MRR needs to do more Z stories but people have to let them know they have the layouts and want MRR to publish stories on Z.
Ok, I admit that the prescription pain killers I took for my migraine today are probably affecting my ability for clear thinking.
What is MTL?
Sorry about that Greg,MTL is Micro Trains Lines
Thank you.
What you get for the price is a fine running locomotive. The MTL GP9/35 is comparable with Atlas/Kato N with a split frame, brass flywheel 8mm DC motor. The AZL GP7 is similar with a thinner carbody. The level of detail is very good for the scale.
The MTL F7 is old technology and is now OOP. THere is just so much MTL can do with old dies.
It appears the new MTL SD40 is delayed till Sept. Conditions in China may change that. A E unit based on the SD40 may have to wait till next year. AZL has a lot of product in line for later this year.
Z could appeal to model railroaders that don't have a huge basement or spare bedroom to have a modest layout. You can shop carefully for sales & Ebay to get deals.