On the theory of "good enough..."

[twhite]

Et nihil dictum quod non dictum prius, Dave. 

-Crandell

Crandell: 

Semper ubi sub ubi. 

(I learned that from my favorite Jesuit priest at the high school) 

Yah, I know it doesn't have anything to do with the topic, but just thought I'd throw it in.

Tom

[loathar]

...and per usual, here were are...

Sic semper threadendus.

See what you started...

[MAbruce]

...and per usual, here were are...

Sic semper threadendus.

And you've been around this forum long enough to know not to play with matches. 

[CNJ831]

Same error and misinformation as always, a chronic problem on this site since folks so often speak before doing the required research.

Now, instead of picking out a past date and simply comparing it with today, try examining the trend of pricing over that whole interval. What you find is that pricing evolved very slowly, or even stood still, during long periods. And many of the products improved progressively over this course, too. Try Mantua's pricing of its locomotives, or Athearn's, as an example. You need to do the necessary homework...I already have.

CNJ831

Oh that's right. If anyone disagrees with you, they're wrong by definition since you are the world's greatest living authority on the hobby. Sorry, I forgot that. I must warn you, however, that I will continue to disregard your "authority" in the future. I wouldn't feel too bad about that, however, as I also disregard the "authority" of the great mass of financial "experts" out there as well (I was buying financial stocks when others were running screaming for the exits). 'Course, the financial "mavens" do have the comfort of pointing to each other as backing their claims where as you are, from what I can see, the only hobby "expert" out there. At least you're the only one claiming that title.

Andre

It's sad to see you go through the same old bluster routine once again in an attenpt to cover the fact that you have not examined the situation in question at all but simply posted something for effect that in no way reflects what actually occurred over the interval - you seem to do this all the time.

In the posting of accurate, verifiable information regarding model railroading, just as in offering sound advice in the stock marked, there are the "mavens" and "experts". What separates them is that the former usually speak either before they think, or out of a lack of actual knowledge, while the latter are the ones who've researched the subject in detail and have something worthwhile to offer...if you'll only bother to listen. 

CNJ831  

[corsair7]

Same error and misinformation as always, a chronic problem on this site since folks so often speak before doing the required research.

Now, instead of picking out a past date and simply comparing it with today, try examining the trend of pricing over that whole interval. What you find is that pricing evolved very slowly, or even stood still, during long periods. And many of the products improved progressively over this course, too. Try Mantua's pricing of its locomotives, or Athearn's, as an example. You need to do the necessary homework...I already have.

CNJ831

Oh that's right. If anyone disagrees with you, they're wrong by definition since you are the world's greatest living authority on the hobby. Sorry, I forgot that. I must warn you, however, that I will continue to disregard your "authority" in the future. I wouldn't feel too bad about that, however, as I also disregard the "authority" of the great mass of financial "experts" out there as well (I was buying financial stocks when others were running screaming for the exits). 'Course, the financial "mavens" do have the comfort of pointing to each other as backing their claims where as you are, from what I can see, the only hobby "expert" out there. At least you're the only one claiming that title.

Andre

It's sad to see you go through the same old blust routine once again in an attenpt to cover the fact that you have not examined the situation in question at all but simply posted something for effect that in no way reflects what actually occurred over the interval - you seem to do this all the time.

In the posting of accurate, verifiable information regarding model railroading, just as in offering sound advice in the stock marked, there are the "mavens" and "experts". What separates them is that the former usually speak either before they think, or out of a lack of actual knowledge, while the latter are the ones who've researched the subject in detail and have something worthwhile to offer...if you'll only bother to listen. 

CNJ831  

The thruth is the really that both mavens and experts have the same kind of track record where the stock market is concerned because it is really unpredictable what will happen since people's actions in a given situation is unpredictable because most people make ther decisions based on perceptions rather than information.

AS for the trends in the hobby, I think you'll find statements to the effect that model railrtoading is going down the tubes in the early issues of Model Railroader too. After all not everyone was happy to not have milled parts or machines to hel produce those parts in the early years because the only real modellers were those who could build from scratch.

If I had a talent for drawing I would make a cartoon showing Adam and Eve after being thrown out of Eden with Adam saying to Eve "We really don't need that Garden. Now we can start from scratch and do it the right way."

Irv

[Anonymous]

While Dave's initial charts were enough to make my eyes melt (and seemed way too much like work . . .) a quick reading of the various postings in this threat convinces me that:

 

1. Way too many model railroaders worry too much about how much things cost. I don't look at a layout and say "Wow, he must have spent $20 grand on it" - I enjoy the finished layout for what it is.

2. Are thinking that every big layout has to be bought and paid for by someone (I know of a number of model railroaders with significant financial means who build their own layouts for their own enjoyment. If they "job out" some aspect of it, who gives a #$%?? I'm not rich, but after spending time in our last house that could have spent on the layout finishing the basement I sucked it up and paid someone to finish the layout room for me - Does that mean I'll be lambasted for that every time (and if) the layout ever appears in a magazine article?

 And, most importantly -

 

Many of you need to dig out the V&O Story and re-read what Allen McClelland's "Good Enough" philosophy actually means.  It has nothing to do with how much your layout, or the next guys, costs.

 

Marty

 

[trainnut57]

That's what good lawyers do. If you would have read the post rather than look for a way to dig at someone you would have seen the compliment there. However, when you change my screen name to provide a dig or snide remark, you've gone too far. Would you like it if I started all my posts "fignewton writes".

 

Get a new life and pick up a sense of humor with it.

 

 

ET

[jfugate]

As the builder of a large layout, I live by the "good enough" philosphy constantly. Time (or the lack of it) is my biggest concern, and cost is often down the list a ways. If it costs more but it saves time, that's often the greater concern.

"Cheap enough" isn't often the primary concern, in other words!

[tomikawaTT]

--- irrelevant verbiage deleted ---

If I had a talent for drawing I would make a cartoon showing Adam and Eve after being thrown out of Eden with Adam saying to Eve "We really don't need that Garden. Now we can start from scratch and do it the right way."

Irv

About half a century ago, when injection-molded plastic was replacing die-cast zinc alloy as a major railroad model material, Model Railroader published a cartoon in which two Fred Flintstone dressalikes were standing at the block of stone which served as the LHS counter.  On the other side of the counter, the similarly-attired clerk had just opened a box for their perusal.  The caption:

"I don't care what anyone says about these newfangled metal kits.  I still prefer stone."

As Robert Heinlein observed, the main problem with experts is that they (and, frequently the media) assume that their expertise in one field carries over into other fields where their knowledge does NOT come from their own experience or academically rigorous research and reasoning.  (At this point I will bite my tongue and restrain my fingers rather than provide examples.)

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

[Dave Vollmer]

Huh huh...

While the Andre-CNJ thing was entirely predictable, the discussion about money and which professions are represented in MR was unexpected...  I don't get it one bit.  One of my favorite modelers of all time was Bill Henderson (Coal Belt), and he was a truck driver.  Oh, and he did a lot of creative, craftsman things.

Besides, who cares, really?  Very few of us have bottomless wallets; I say focus your spending and you'll have a better layout.  Model the modern-day CSX?  Then you may want to reconsider buying that Athearn Big Boy that looks really cool.  Save your cash and use it to buy more scenery materials, or equipment more appropriate to your era and locale.  It never ceases to amaze me how many model railroaders buy random, high-priced stuff that looks great but has no real bearing on their modeling efforts.  If they can afford it, great!  But then they can't complain when they "can't afford" to finish their layout to MR standards.

Just stirring the pot again!

...and to think...  I thought I took the hobby too seriously!  Some of you guys...  wow.

[twhite]

  It never ceases to amaze me how many model railroaders buy random, high-priced stuff that looks great but has no real bearing on their modeling efforts.  If they can afford it, great!  But then they can't complain when they "can't afford" to finish their layout to MR standards.

Just stirring the pot again!

...and to think...  I thought I took the hobby too seriously!  Some of you guys...  wow.

Now, now, David--that brass Sunset Great Northern Z-6 4-6-6-4 I have on order for my Rio Grande Yuba River Sub is just a LOANER to help my railroad through a 'power shortage',  understand, LOL! 

Tom

[Scarpia]

Huh huh...

While the Andre-CNJ thing was entirely predictable, the discussion about money and which professions are represented in MR was unexpected...  I don't get it one bit.  One of my favorite modelers of all time was Bill Henderson (Coal Belt), and he was a truck driver.  Oh, and he did a lot of creative, craftsman things.

Besides, who cares, really?  Very few of us have bottomless wallets; I say focus your spending and you'll have a better layout.  Model the modern-day CSX?  Then you may want to reconsider buying that Athearn Big Boy that looks really cool.  Save your cash and use it to buy more scenery materials, or equipment more appropriate to your era and locale.  It never ceases to amaze me how many model railroaders buy random, high-priced stuff that looks great but has no real bearing on their modeling efforts.  If they can afford it, great!  But then they can't complain when they "can't afford" to finish their layout to MR standards.

Just stirring the pot again!

...and to think...  I thought I took the hobby too seriously!  Some of you guys...  wow.

I've been saying this, but no one listens to the new guy

"it isn't about saving money, it is about spending it wisely."

[GraniteRailroader]

Et nihil dictum quod non dictum prius, Dave. 

-Crandell

Crandell: 

Semper ubi sub ubi. 

(I learned that from my favorite Jesuit priest at the high school) 

Yah, I know it doesn't have anything to do with the topic, but just thought I'd throw it in.

Tom

You boys and your Latin....

 

Great isn't it?

[dehusman]

Everything any modeler does is some level of good enough.  We are all just at different points on the continuum.

Dave H.

[GraniteRailroader]

Everything any modeler does is some level of good enough.  We are all just at different points on the continuum.

Dave H.

But go too high and you're some mean spirited, ill intentioned, cold hearted rivet counter that just drives the cost of the hobby up by requiring all new products to have near perfect detailing down to the last knick in the paint on that XYZ boxcar and DCC with sound and interior detailing on locomotives

Just kidding. 

In actuality, after reading Dr. Vollmer's rail blogs and going through his MRR's website, his work as well as some of the other RIVET COUNTERS as some of you keep putting it, has inspired me to better my own modelling. Maybe it's time to start on that craftsman kit, or accurizing my diesels to match the ones that they modelled after.

Guess I'm next. Rivet counting here I come.

[selector]

I believe I have stated in earlier such threads (maybe just one of them) that I get the impression the use of the term "modelling" is misused by many of us.  I call myself a railroad modeller, but I don't do it.  Sure, I have mostly NYC and PRR engines and rolling stock, but if that's all it took we'd all be able to say we model a given railroad.  No, I don't.  I like what is available to me that is a scale approximation, a "facsimile" of the real items, but anyone who has seen my images would be dishonest (my opinion) if they said the scenery resembles anything either of my two concentrations would have frequented.  Where's the dark rocky outcrops, or the grey?  How come so few deciduous trees?  And let's not forget all the trackside details I seem to have forgotten.  And on it goes.  So, I am not a railroad modeller, and I guess not a model railroader...or whatever.  I just purchase toy trains, mock up something like a setting, place track on it that works okay, wire it up, and then place the rolling items on the tiny rails.  The rest is just fun.

Is Bob Boudreu a model railroader?  Or a railroad modeller?  I get the feeling that he is more into modelling, with sometimes a heavy railroad theme, but I believe he has to go to a club to actually operate trains...his or others'.  But, holy smoke, can he build the models...and image them.

Dave's railroad is a very close approximation, in scale of course, to the real thing and he has understandably received compliments for his eye and his work.  I would say he is a railroad modeller.

I guess you could argue about everything/one being on a continuum, and there would be lots of agreement.  Some of us pay more attention to little details, and I can't think of a reason to find fault with that, even if they point out the lack of detail in my own layout.  Which they haven't.  So you will never hear the term "rivet counter" from me.  I'll just remark on the observation that something is not quite right with X model and move on.   Or not if it suits me.

-Crandell

[diezmon]

[Grampys Trains]

Hi Dr. Dave:  That has a nice ring to it!  This thread has been interesting reading, to say the least. As to your original premise, I'm reminded of the times my father used to say to me, "you're too picky, that (fill in the blank) is good enough. We definitely had different opinions of what was good enough. It seems to me that applys to model railroads, too. As to the money argument, people ask me what kind of gas mileage I get with my vehicle. I tell them I don't really know.  I don't check it.  It serves my needs, and I have to put gas in it, so gas mileage is irrevelant to me. That' my personal opinion, and doesn't necessarily apply to anyone else. I don't really know how much money I've invested in my layout, maybe $5,000 over a span of approx. 5 years. That's an average of about $80 a month. From the start, I knew I'd have to invest time and money to achieve my goal of a nice layout. I don't regret a minute or dollar invested. BTW, I was a "blue collar" worker most of my life. I was a machine operator for a major construction machine equipment manufacturer. P.S. I flunked Latin in 9th grade.  The only thing I remember is "Amo, Amas, Amat (what ever that means).

[joe-daddy]

Amazing commentary, this thread.  Some of us on this thread are the most outrageous advocates of do it my way or you are  . . .  What we mean is "what is good enough from my personal view".

Case in point, I just visited the Greeley Transportation Museum last night, for the third time.  This layout consumes a 70' x 140'  building and in a word, is "amazing'.  Thousands of trees, probably a dozen trestles, canyons with backgrounds to die for.  Thirty car trains winding their way through the trees, Doug Geiger engineered signaling system with CTC. Oh, and all that outrageous mountain scenery towering 15' high is built on stacked blue foam.

 

But if one measured this incredible work by the yardstick of many on this website who proport "good enough works for me," Greeley Transportation Museum is, well, all code 100. Atlas code 100 at that, with watermellon sized tie plates and outrageous rail heights some 30 thousandst of an inch too high.  And to add misery to the stack the turnouts are outrageously unreliable commercial, right out of the box.  As for the use of blue foam; well I know a fellow who is adamant bout that little point.

 

No,  Greeley Transportation Museum is not 'good enough'.  

FYI, the museum opens to the public on Memorial Day, 2009.  (Unless you are a member of the Northern Colorado Model Railroad club.) 

 

Back to the train room, I got work to do. . .

My

 

Joe Daddy 

 

 

[steinjr]

 We definitely had different opinions of what was good enough. It seems to me that applies to model railroads, too.

 As to the money argument, people ask me what kind of gas mileage I get with my vehicle. I tell them I don't really know.  I don't check it.  It serves my needs, and I have to put gas in it, so gas mileage is irrevelant to me. That' my personal opinion, and doesn't necessarily apply to anyone else.

 I don't really know how much money I've invested in my layout, maybe $5,000 over a span of approx. 5 years. That's an average of about $80 a month. From the start, I knew I'd have to invest time and money to achieve my goal of a nice layout. I don't regret a minute or dollar invested.

 Well said! People (including myself) should probably spend more time working on our layouts (striving towards the kind of quality you have achieved on your layout) and less time arguing about what is "good enough" in general terms

  Now, it is back to my warehouse for me - I need to make a new concrete loading dock for trucks on the back side of it and get the door frames painted. I'll try to make it look as good as I can given my current skill level and available time. That will just have to be good enough for now.

 Grin,
 Stein

 

[Autobus Prime]

I believe I have stated in earlier such threads (maybe just one of them) that I get the impression the use of the term "modelling" is misused by many of us.  I call myself a railroad modeller, but I don't do it.  Sure, I have mostly NYC and PRR engines and rolling stock, but if that's all it took we'd all be able to say we model a given railroad.

s:

That's an interesting distinction to draw. I think that today the "railroad modeling" end is highly promoted, and a lot of what we see as odd in the old days came out of a "model railroading" view. The best of yesterday's modelers often saw themselves as railroaders who used models, the best of today's modelers often see themselves as modelers who are replicating railroads, real or imagined. You can see the difference in the layouts. Older ones are full of paired industries, which is a sort of reality stretch (given the distance) but allows the layout to be operated like a railroad in concept, moving traffic. Newer ones have lots of staging, which is a newer sort of reality stretch, which we do so that the layout can simulate dense traffic, even though a lot of it goes from staging to staging, that is, nowhere except in the imagination.

Of course, we haven't abandoned the former plan, and our forebears did have simple staging tracks at times (usually called "sneak offs"). The difference is in the emphasis...realism of concept vs. realism of appearance.

[Weighmaster]

I took Latin in 10th and 11th grade, and passed (sympathetic teacher).  All I remember is "ubi ignis est?"  Gary

[twhite]

Gary:

"Semper ubi sub ubi" means "Always wear underwear." 

Learned that from my favorite Jesuit priest at the Catholic boy's school at which I teach.  Other than that, my Latin's pretty poor, myself (well, except for possibly some of the more ribald sections of "CARMINA BURANA" )

Tom

[tangerine-jack]

Interesting, eight pages later and I'm still God's gift to the model railroading world!  People, people, please, "good enough" is when you attain my high standards, not before.  I believe that should settle the topic.

[marknewton]

That's what good lawyers do. If you would have read the post rather than look for a way to dig at someone you would have seen the compliment there. However, when you change my screen name to provide a dig or snide remark, you've gone too far.

You were quite happy to do the same to me, so I reckon you're fair game. But like many people, you can dish it out but can't take it.

Would you like it if I started all my posts "fignewton writes".

I couldn't give a toss if you did or didn't, like a lot of American slang/vernacular, "fignewton" means nothing to me. Go hard.

Get a new life and pick up a sense of humor with it.

Spoken like a true churl. Someone doesn't find your brand of infantile humour amusing, so they therefore don't have a sense of humour/ Yeah, whatever you reckon.

Take your own advice, get a new job that pays well, and lose that chip on your shoulder.

Cheers,

Mark.

[jasperofzeal]

Gary:

"Semper ubi sub ubi" means "Always wear underwear." 

Learned that from my favorite Jesuit priest at the Catholic boy's school at which I teach.  Other than that, my Latin's pretty poor, myself (well, except for possibly some of the more ribald sections of "CARMINA BURANA" )

Tom

Am I the only one that finds this distrubing?  See you on the news at 6.

[PASMITH]

Holy Cow Batman, over 5,000 views of this thread and still climbing!

Peter Smith, Memphis

[dehusman]

Holy Cow Batman, over 5,000 views of this thread and still climbing!

So is that good enough??

 

I have seen this on virtually every forum.  Post a question that actually asks for a technical answer or some constructive input and get a half dozen constructive answers (if you are lucky).  Start a thread about some esoteric point or some undefineable aspect and you can get a dozen pages and keep it going for weeks.

Opinions are evidently more common than knowledge. 8-)

Dave H.

[loathar]

Gary:

"Semper ubi sub ubi" means "Always wear underwear." 

Learned that from my favorite Jesuit priest at the Catholic boy's school at which I teach.  Other than that, my Latin's pretty poor, myself (well, except for possibly some of the more ribald sections of "CARMINA BURANA" )

Tom

Am I the only one that finds this distrubing?  See you on the news at 6.

No doubt!!

 

[howmus]

Gary:

"Semper ubi sub ubi" means "Always wear underwear." 

Learned that from my favorite Jesuit priest at the Catholic boy's school at which I teach.  Other than that, my Latin's pretty poor, myself (well, except for possibly some of the more ribald sections of "CARMINA BURANA" )

Tom

Am I the only one that finds this distrubing?  See you on the news at 6.

I'm a lot more concerned about that "Carmina Burana" thing.....  I once had an Orff addiction myself.  Even kept a copy of his Shulwerk in my desk at school for those times I had to have it.  It came from an addiction to Kodaly.  I even sang his Te Deum in collage.....  You have seen Close Encounters of the Third Kind haven't you?  Guess I shouldn't really say more here on line,  but hopefully ol' Tom can get some help for this...