I understand it is sometimes difficult.

[Anonymous]

It's not about being ungrateful. It's about being constructive. If they do not know that customers are unhappy then they would be sitting around going what's happening to circulation. At least by getting feedback from this forum they know why people are unhappy and can change or correct the problem. There are a few things I do not like but overall I like the magazine. You cannot please everyone, even the beginner articles have value. This issue looked like they brought nothing to the table.

RMax

[Anonymous]

I wrote Terry with very specific suggestions (and a note that telling me to submit was NOT a solution since it's not a co-operative but a product I pay for); he responded that I would be pleased with the next few issues.

Not yet. No change seen in this issue. Still vague, generic stuff. You can't honestly say his two pages on passenger cars is very helpful. It's pretty obvious material.

Let's stop with the "USA Today" style quick reads, pretty (but unhelpful) graphics, and re-instate the detailed, multipage articles with substance the magazine used to have. Remember when we'd get 5 pages on a project? Now, we get two pages with little textboxes and small photos.

It's pretty but not very informative.

[Anonymous]

This is what I see; The magazine is attempting to cater to all skill levels. Naturally if a few articles in an issue are written for the beginner, it's viewed as worthless to the intermediates and experts! I guess I don't have a problem with this and expect it. I'm a tool freak! Anything to do with tools, I love and all the articles I've read in the mags. on tools has a tool I find I could really use! Guess what guys, RMC's latest magazine that I have has an article on what? Yes, tools!!!

I don't know what to say to you guys! I am happy with most every MRR's magazine.

As a matter of fact, I would like to see them reprint one article every month, which was published in a way back issue! Stuff by some of the true instigators of this hobby would be great fun to read. It would be interesting to see how little stuff was available and how fantastic a job these folks did with what little they had!

Bill, they've invented a new thing, it's called a paragraph! Try it before some of these folks expire from not taking a breath!

I like to belly ache, too. I just sorta think it's ungratefull to use a media paid for by Model Railroader to critisize them with! However, I'm probably wrong, again!

[simon1966]

I have found the last few issues to be really quite helpful. I started my first significant layout about 2 months ago and some of the recent articles have appeared just as I was pondering what to do with a particular part of the design. For example, the lift up staging using the cut off Atlas re-railers came out just as I was struggling to get a lift out bridge in my entry way working correctly. It works fine now as a result of this article. I am now easing into scenery in one section of the layout room and this months issue has provided good support for my plans for this. So from the point of view of a relative novice, I have enjoyed the recent issues. I also subscribe to RMC and can certainly appreciate why more advanced members of the group would gravitate to its content. So not only must it be tough to get new marterial every month, it must be very hard to make it appeal to neophytes like me and experts alike.

[Anonymous]

Once upon a time, not too long ago, MR featured some really great articles on kitbashing, scratchbuilding, adapting prototypes to model railroading, etc. Or am I getting that confused with another publication? I realize that publishing a monthly magazine is a daunting challenge at times, having done that approx 20 yrs ago in the automotive/hot-rodding field. Model Railroader has always been my 'bible' and I've been a subscriber on and off for many years, but lately I have been disappointed in the content and depth of much of the material and I am particularly annoyed at what is beginning to evolve into primarily a RTR/expensive approach to the hobby -- that is a part of the overall hobby, but not what will maintain my interest. I refer back to my old and ragged, dog -eared early issues repeatedly, esp now that I am starting on the layout I've only been able to dream of in the past. Those older issues are keepers, and for the most part, timeless in their long term value to a modeler. I've rediscovered RMC recently and frankly it is of more value to me than the current -day MR - and I hope that it is okay to utter such constructive critisism on this Forum. My observation is that Kalmbach's releasing annuals (eg "Model Railroad Planning" & "Great Model Railroads"), as well as having introduced, taken over, or is 'involved' with in some fashion, "Garden Railways", "Short Line & Narrow Gauge Gazette", etc. , is spreading out much of the content of what used to be part of Model Railroader. From a marketing sense this may be successful for Kalmbach, but is it for the hobby? One could argue that those only interested in large scale should go for "Garden Railways", or those into narrow gauge should. . .etc., etc. At the current cover price of $4.95 MR is reasonable, although one would hope that loyal subscribers should get a better deal. . . What concerns me is just how thin MR appears to be getting and what do I really get out of it. One only has to look at what Kalmbach has done to "Scale Auto Magazine" aka "Scale Auto Enthusiast" and "Car Modeler" before Kalmbach 'bought out' both, merged them together and cut the quality, content, and number of pages-and now it's going to an issue every other month. Maybe the move by advertisers to the Internet has eroded a significant amount of Kalmbach's revenue. It would be refreshing to see Kalmbach comment on some of this, and if they need assistance re: ideas, techniques, prototypes of rolling stock, motive power, railroad infrastructure, or even prototype railroads worth modeling, they should ask for our inputs-after all, catering to the modeler over the years has been the key to MR's success. I for one hope that MR is around for another 70 years.

[pmsteamman]

You can always send them pictures or ideas. I'm sure the staff reads this. To the few staff who got to operate the White Creek Railroad (live steam) I hope you had fun and you need to see the Michigan Central and Pennsylvania Pine Creek Sub.

[Anonymous]

I agree that it was pretty boring. But who can do better. hm?
It's hard to put out something every month and make it all great.
For the most part they have a great magazine.

[Anonymous]

No I am not a critic I am a subscribing customer. For the most part MR has a very good publication. Every once in a while they put out something that is not so great. This time I thought from looking at the cover that it sounded like a very good issue. Opened it up and read it. Hmmm that's really bad. They look like they are struggling to come up with anything just to put out the magazine. Let's go to the closet and see what's left over we can use. Wasn't even dull or that boring just lack of anything.

RMax

[Anonymous]

The easiest job on the planet is being a critic! I thought you guys all though last months issue was lousy. What up with this? I just don't see the same magazine you guys do, I guess. However, you must have oodles of great projects you can share with MRR and dazzle us all! Hey, if what's being printed in these current issues is drivel, come on, get on the stick and share!!!

[Anonymous]

But what was with this month's issue. 3 pages of this is a hammer and this is what is used for? I read the passenger trains on a budget article 3 times and it was generic and grasping for something but what I do not know. Almost worhtless. The table in the upper lright corner was ok. I liked the kitbashed warehouse and the sectional change outs. There was the giant boring layouts. They are pretty but after you have seen a couple of hundred so what. 8 tips was so so. Just a thin issue.

RMax