Okay, so I hope this doesn't start too big of a brawl.
Recent threads on this and other forums have had people defending caulk versus track nails, or L-Girder Versus open grid or solid top plywood or........ How about how to build your mountains and other terrains, the selection of materials available for that is vast, yet some will never expand their experience by trying something new. How can us old geezers offer newbies advice if we know nothing about all that is now available to us.
We would still be running clockwork engines instead of DCC if not for trying something different. Experimenting is a wonderful thing. Why does the old tried and true seem to be so staunchly defended by some? Change is the biggest part of growth, so why do some want to let our hobby Stagnate.
Thoughts! Successes and failures if you are the more adventurous type.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
Do what works for you and don't disparage others who think or do differently.
Modeling the Baltimore waterfront in HO scale
BATMAN...have had people defending caulk versus track nails, ...
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
BATMAN ...have had people defending caulk versus track nails, ... From the Boston Public Library Collection, on Flickr
BATMAN ...have had people defending caulk versus track nails, ...
Okay, so that argument has finally been settled.
I tried Woodland Scenics 24" x 12" x 3/16" foam bed glued in place with Elmer's white glue followed by gluing the track in place and it worked as advertised and its a good method.
I returned to my preferred method of spiking the track down.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE I tried Woodland Scenics 24" x 12" x 3/16" foam bed glued in place with Elmer's white glue followed by gluing the track in place and it worked as advertised and its a good method. I returned to my preferred method of spiking the track down.
So Larry, what did you use before spikes were invented.
BATMAN Okay, so I hope this doesn't start too big of a brawl. Recent threads on this and other forums have had people defending caulk versus track nails, or L-Girder Versus open grid or solid top plywood or........ How about how to build your mountains and other terrains, the selection of materials available for that is vast, yet some will never expand their experience by trying something new. How can us old geezers offer newbies advice if we know nothing about all that is now available to us. We would still be running clockwork engines instead of DCC if not for trying something different. Experimenting is a wonderful thing. Why does the old tried and true seem to be so staunchly defended by some? Change is the biggest part of growth, so why do some want to let our hobby Stagnate. Thoughts! Successes and failures if you are the more adventurous type.
Good topic, good question?
A few thoughts:
My layout building and modeling style is very much a mix of old school and new (or newer, considering I got into the hobby in 1968) methods.
Sometimes us old timers simply resist change, but sometimes we have tried the new way and were "unimpressed".
Sometimes new methods are directly linked to new approaches to the hobby. So those who don't imbrace some new approach, have little use for the new method.
Sometimes it's just change for the sake of change, many of us old timers reject that. Show me that it is better, easier, less expensive, and I am likely all in. But if it is just "different", I will pass.
I glue down my track on to homasote roadbed
I still run DC
I use wireless radio throttles
I use a signal system built with relays........
I use every type of benchwork construction
I don't use semi scale wheels or couplers
Almost all my freight cars have sprung/equalized metal trucks
I use mostly Atlas code 83 track, even though I have the skills and experiance to hand lay
I don't have to have every model a super detailed museum piece, even though I have been building craftsman type kits since I was 13, 1970......
Am I opinionated about what works? Well just ask anybody on here.........
But I'm opinionated because of nearly 50 years of learning from other great modelers, and my own experiances, which have included trying lots of new things......and rejecting some of them........
My modeling goals are not driven by trends or new products, I have a set of goals and standards, they guide my purchases and my modeling.
Sheldon
Bias your topic much?
Some of us have TRIED multiple methods. Sometimes we find the old ones work better. I will never use expanded foam or caulk again. Note the word -- AGAIN!
Tried it, didn't like it.
Disclaimer: This post may contain humor, sarcasm, and/or flatulence.
Michael Mornard
Bringing the North Woods to South Dakota!
It seems here at MR forums we have to rehash and restate things ad nauseum. This seems to be a bit like that popularized saying: definition of insanity is, in this case, discussing the same topics over and over and over and over and over and over and over, yeah and over and expecting a different result. I think I'm going slowly insane here.
I'd say put a fork in it but I know you all too well after this much time, this will continue until one by one each is 6' under. Shall we rename this forum The Dead Horse Flogging Society? I dont see that emoticon.
I was thinking maybe everyone was extra bored with summer dragging on but no, time of year doesnt matter much. This will continue as long as the insanely repetitive are still breathing. Here is a novel thought, how about a topic where we discuss something new and useful?
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
BATMAN BRAKIE I tried Woodland Scenics 24" x 12" x 3/16" foam bed glued in place with Elmer's white glue followed by gluing the track in place and it worked as advertised and its a good method. I returned to my preferred method of spiking the track down. So Larry, what did you use before spikes were invented.
Stick pins.
My club's layout design committee is trying to examine as many options as we can for doing all the different things that are involved in building a layout. For some things we are going old school, for others we are going to use newer methods and some will be a combination.
For example, we are going to use Homasote road bed but we are going to use a cutting method that I had never heard of (that doesn't mean it is necessarily new). One of our members discovered that Homasote can be cut perfectly cleanly by using a smooth blade such as those designed for cutting several layers of fabric at once. There is literally no dust and the cuts are as clean as if they had been molded. The angle can be changed easily just by tilting the base plate on the scroll saw.
We will use white glue instead of caulk to secure the track. Very old school I think, but the reason is that it is easily softened if corrections need to be made, and given that there will likely be a bunch of different people laying the track, we are pretty sure that corrections will have to be made.
We will use foam sheets as much as possible for forming terrain. Some wanted to cover them with plaster cloth. Others, including myself, would rather use Sculptamold or a home made equivallent to hide the seams.
We are going to use 3/4" plywood ripped into 3 1/2" strips for the benchwork, with a couple of exceptions where pieces longer than eight feet would be desirable. We will also have a mixture of box frame and 'L' girder construction. Box frame for the flat places like the yard and service area, and 'L' girder for the elevated track and terrain areas.
So far, nobody has said 'no' immediately to any methods. Each has been discussed in turn and we have chosen whatever method(s) best suits our needs.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
I can't see myself using foam as sub roadbed ever again as I don't think it is solid enough. I really like spline a lot. This layout was the first I used both on and so it was one win, one, "it was just okay at best". I won't try and convince you not to use foam if you wish to do so and I will tell you my experience if asked.
I really want to hand lay my track next time as I have never done that and I think it looks great. I am not sure how hand laying track on spline will be, but as I said I will try something new. It might be impossible, however, I seem to be able to stick pins in the spline relatively easily, So who knows.
The gist of this thread was to try and figure out why, instead of people just accepting that people like to do things differently and letting it go at that, they need to argue Ad nauseam that their way is the only way to do things. I have put down much more track with nails than caulk, which one I prefer depends on the circumstance. I now have experience with both and will gladly share it if asked. The inaccurate horror stories about various methods that are out there surprise me.
I don't smash ties to bits hammering in my track nails and I don't have any caulk whatsoever left on track I have pulled up. If done right this should always be the result. With experience, it will eventually be done right. So have experience in a method before telling stories of how bad it is.
Dave, I am really interested in hearing how the homasote cutting works out, please keep us posted.
That is all.
Not a brawl, but it is a many layered topic, the deeper one goes.
BATMAN Why does the old tried and true seem to be so staunchly defended by some?
I say could because I’ve recognised on my time on the forums, there are persons who, in particular when answering a newbies question, are very dogmatic in their reply but only because they genuinely do not want the newbie to make the same mistake (s) they perhaps have made.
BATMANChange is the biggest part of growth,...
Cheers, the Indubitable Bear.
No, can’t agree unless “Change” is qualified!!
I consider this an axiom.
My Dad made a little all steel hammer in 1930 in shop class. We used it in the early 1960s to hammer in track nails while building our first layout together. I still use it and will bring it when I come to New Zealand.
Well your last paragraph makes the point. I promote the caulk method because I've now used it sucessfully on two layouts. It's the new thing. Nails are like the clockwork train, I did that 40+ years ago when i was a kid Same with foam vs plywood. I took the plunge, tried new things (in order - DCC, foam, and caulk).
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
BATMANWe would still be running clockwork engines instead of DCC if not for trying something different. Experimenting is a wonderful thing. Why does the old tried and true seem to be so staunchly defended by some? Change is the biggest part of growth, so why do some want to let our hobby Stagnate.
Most people's first reaction to change is to resist it. We're comfortable with our current condition - we understand it. We defend it, because we all want to feel that what we are doing is right. Change requires admitting the way we are doing something is not the best or right way to do it. Once we have taken a public position, we're even less open to change because we then have to admit to others we're not doing it the right or best way.
Of course, sometimes the new thing is not the best.
Paul
BATMANDave, I am really interested in hearing how the homasote cutting works out, please keep us posted.
Hi Brent:
I have seen Henk's (the member who used the smooth blade) N scale layout. The Homasote isn't covered up yet so it can be seen quite clearly. I was amazed at how smooth the cuts were! I'll let you know how we do when the time comes.
Just to clarify a previous remark regarding the use of foam, we will use it to build scenery, not sub-roadbed. All the sub-roadbed will be 3/4" plywood with 1/2" of Homasote and HO cork roadbed on top. The elevated areas will use the 'cookie cutter' method of creating the roadbed. We are not going to lower the track in the sidings by using thinner cork. We want the layout to run smoothly more than we want it to look pretty. Apologies to the purists, but this is a club layout. We will use Homasote in the yards and service areas so we can cut in ditches and other terrain features where desired.
BATMANI consider this an axiom.
BATMAN I still use it and will bring it when I come to New Zealand
riogrande5761Here is a novel thought, how about a topic where we discuss something new and useful?
Well said JaBear!
There is only so much new stuff that comes up in model railroading. If we wish to rehash the old stuff leave us alone! I say "Nay" to the nay sayers!
Beautiful horse by the way!
BATMAN....Recent threads on this and other forums have had people defending caulk versus track nails, or L-Girder Versus open grid or solid top plywood or........ How about how to build your mountains and other terrains, the selection of materials available for that is vast, yet some will never expand their experience by trying something new.....
I don't think anybody's defending their methods, only offering them for consideration. If I use a method that works, is easy to do, and gives me the results I want, then I have no need to use another method. On the other hand, if my method were crap, I wouldn't mention it for someone else to use, and perhaps I'd be asking for assistance rather than offering it.
I use track nails, someone else uses caulk, I use DC, they use DCC...I'm having too much fun to worry about the mistakes they're making if they don't want to follow my methods.
BATMAN....How can us old geezers offer newbies advice if we know nothing about all that is now available to us....
Waddaya mean "know nothing..."? We're geezers, and we know everything that's worth knowing....and that doesn't include any new stuff.
Wayne
doctorwayneWaddaya mean "know nothing..."? We're geezers, and we know everything that's worth knowing....and that doesn't include any new stuff. Wayne
By the way, how old do I have to be to be a geezer?!?
doctorwayneI don't think anybody's defending their methods, only offering them for consideration.
I'll insist on gently disagreeing with Wayne. Some of us do seem to be insisting that only our personally-vetted method works - or that's the way it's presented.
Personally, I agree with Wayne's take, though. I offer up what I've done based on my situation. You should conisder it solely in that light. I'm not insisting it suits anything but my situation, but if you find something useful, you're welcome to it. Someone's else's methods may be better or worse, but if I mention it it is simply to add some contrast and, often enough, to suggest that there are alternatives you should also consider.
As for old school versus new school, there were/are dumb and smart about both. YOU have to sort out what applies to YOUR situation. To do one or the other just because you want to be consistent...that's the hobgoblin of limited vision. Go for it if it suits, otherwise consider the world is a vast and variable place where much is to be learned - and it's always far more than any of us know.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
mlehman doctorwayne I don't think anybody's defending their methods, only offering them for consideration. I'll insist on gently disagreeing with Wayne. Some of us do seem to be insisting that only our personally-vetted method works - or that's the way it's presented. Personally, I agree with Wayne's take, though. I offer up what I've done based on my situation. You should conisder it solely in that light. I'm not insisting it suits anything but my situation, but if you find something useful, you're welcome to it. Someone's else's methods may be better or worse, but if I mention it it is simply to add some contrast and, often enough, to suggest that there are alternatives you should also consider. As for old school versus new school, there were/are dumb and smart about both. YOU have to sort out what applies to YOUR situation. To do one or the other just because you want to be consistent...that's the hobgoblin of limited vision. Go for it if it suits, otherwise consider the world is a vast and variable place where much is to be learned - and it's always far more than any of us know.
doctorwayne I don't think anybody's defending their methods, only offering them for consideration.
Well said Mike.
A few more thoughts:
I too try to simply put my methods out there for consideration. BUT, I will admit I can become defensive when some other "expert" starts responding with "well that won't work" or starts telling me how "backward" I am.
A common theme in the replies so far is the idea that change, or new, is not automaticly better.
Yet there have been many on this form over the years who have been rather nasty to those who choose to stay with older methods. Often much more so than us old timers telling folks the old ways are better.....
I was once told by a panel of "experts" on here that my Kadee sprung trucks with Intermountain wheel sets simply can not work.........my 1000 freight cars, and those of several other modelers say different..........as does Sam at Kadee.......
Well, maybe I will offer more thoughts latter,
Can we do one of these every Friday. Kind of as a kicking a dead horse joke type thing, or live ones, whichever you all prefer.
Then we have folks that just wants to have fun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNyuMsWSLGc
Sheldon, I have always been totally fascinated by the way you and Brother Lion have designed and run your layouts. Not being as technically savvy as I wish I was, I understand it reasonably well and I am sure I would "get it" completely if I were to see it in person. That being said after eleven years on this forum, I have witnessed some of the snickers and sneers that have come your way when you have talked about the way you have designed and built the technical part of your layout. It is these kinds of people that I was addressing the question to.
I wish I was talented enough and had the time to learn how to do it the way you have. At least then if I were to give an opinion, it would be coming from a common point of understanding. In the meantime, I will continue to be fascinated by it, as I think anyone wanting to learn more about the hobby should be.
BATMAN Sheldon, I have always been totally fascinated by the way you and Brother Lion have designed and run your layouts. Not being as technically savvy as I wish I was, I understand it reasonably well and I am sure I would "get it" completely if I were to see it in person. That being said after eleven years on this forum, I have witnessed some of the snickers and sneers that have come your way when you have talked about the way you have designed and built the technical part of your layout. It is these kinds of people that I was addressing the question to. I wish I was talented enough and had the time to learn how to do it the way you have. At least then if I were to give an opinion, it would be coming from a common point of understanding. In the meantime, I will continue to be fascinated by it, as I think anyone wanting to learn more about the hobby should be.
Brent, thank you for those very kind words.
I know that I march to my own drum, and I guess it bothers or confuses some people.
I know that on some topics I seem "elitist", large curves, close coupling with diaphragms, signaling/CTC, my "large but simple layout concept.
While on other topics I am much the opposite, shorty passenger cars, happy with Blue Box rolling stock, no semi scale couplers or wheels, etc.
But there are carefully thought out reasons for every choice. Reason not driven by what others are doing, and only partly driven by the available products in the market.
Again, thank you for your thoughtful comments, I am happy to share the knowledge others so willingly gave me as a young modeler many decades ago....