model railroading???

[blownout cylinder]

CNJ831

No, no glitch there, Barry, you are just missing the point that the two differing figures are responses to two separate questions. The first was to all who were being surveyed as to what scale they modeled. The second figure is in response to the question that if you happen to model in more than one scale, which do you consider as your "primary" scale. Two different questions with two logically different answers.

CNJ831

Now that I reread the thing I can see where that misreading I did would come from---the dang thing is that I  am a little puzzled by that large a difference in response just from a different form of question.  Then again, a 15.7% difference does not really amount to much given the amount of answers received for each--and I'm in N scale----

To me I'd still be subscribing to MR---and getting the MRC as well-----

[challenger3980]

Brakie wrote:

My subscription runs out in July..

The question I must answer do I renew or drop MR in favor of N Scale Railroading and N Scale or do I continue to read all 3? Recalling as a N Scaler MR doesn't give me much bang for the buck..As a HO scaler its still a valuable magazine.

 

Larry,

   My subscription is paid through June 2010, but I have already answered that question. NO, I wont be reupping my MR subscription, I don't get the "Bang for the Buck" any more that I feel makes it worth the subscription price. I will however renew my CTT and Trains subscriptions, just not MR. I have also been debating whether or not to renew my club membership (HO), but as yet, I haven't decided whether or not the enjoyment that I get there justifies the time, money and effort spent on it. I did go down to the clubhouse last night, and I had the whole 4200 square foot layout to myself. It took a little running between the Union Station pit, and the cab tower to set everything up, but it was kind of Fun to get my Challenger(#3980) powered "Portland Rose" passenger train out with clear signals as far as I could see ahead of Me

 

Portland Union Station

 

.

 

Stockyard at Wishram, WA

 

Gosh Awful Gulch

 

Crooked River High Bridge (modeled over the Deschutes River, Modelers License applied here)

 

The Vista House and Crown Point

 

Multnomah Falls and Lodge

 

Hood River Mill

 

Portland's Steele Bridge (Fully raised) This is a working model of Portland's Steele Bridge, which is unique in that the bridge decks left independantly of each other. All the other double deck lift bridges in the world are rigidly linked, and both decks lift as a single unit. The Steele Bridge allows the lower deck (rail) to be lifted seperately, if that allows sufficient clearance for the river traffic, and thus not interfering with roadway traffic. Our Model mimics this operation, including operating counterweights.

I Hope that You have Enjoyed this Photo Tour of the Columbia Gorge Model Railroad Club, in Portland, OR. We model the Columbia River Gorge from Portland, OR to Wishram, WA plus a portion of the Oregon Trunk from Wishram to Bend, OR and also include a very nice Logging division in the layout as well.

 

I personally find the size of O-Gauge to be addictive. Both are Lionel. Ironically, I had 37 Lionel HO Challengers and 4 Lionel HO Veranda Turbines, before I bought even my First Lionel O-Gauge equipment.

Doug

[CNJ831]

blownout cylinder

CNJ831

N 29.9%

---and yet in the other:

 

CNJ831

In answer to the "primary scale" question, which is what he quoted, the percentages were

---the answer ends up--

 

CNJ831

N 14.2%

I suspect a statistical glitch in computation occured here. Any survey I ever saw had variations within the 5-7% bracket. Higher?----not so much

No, no glitch there, Barry, you are just missing the point that the two differing figures are responses to two separate questions. The first was to all who were being surveyed as to what scale they modeled. The second figure is in response to the question that if you happen to model in more than one scale, which do you consider as your "primary" scale. Two different questions with two logically different answers.

CNJ831

[CNJ831]

BRAKIE

CNJ831,Can you give us a link to that survey results?

I tried looking on the NMRA site and didn't have any luck..

Maybe I am looking it up wrong?

Also as we discuss before MR is loosing readers..

Where are they going?

I suspect to the speciality magazines.

A lot of these so called "one man" magazines has been around for years and just as good as MR or RMC and has top notch advertisers and authors.

Also we have NO idea how many of those 150,000 monthly issues are not sold.Only MR can answer that question.

My subscription runs out in July..

The question I must answer do I renew or drop MR in favor of N Scale Railroading and N Scale or do I continue to read all 3? Recalling as a N Scaler MR doesn't give me much bang for the buck..As a HO scaler its still a valuable magazine.

Your right, Brakie, it's not on the NMRA website. As indicated in my preceeding post, the figures appeared in the NMRA Bulletin in 1996 as part of the results of a very broard hobbyist survey. MR even cited a few of this survey's results in their own pages.

You already know my feelings on where the MR readership is going, so it's best not to resurrect that hot topic! However, there is nothing to indicate any reader migration to the seconday magazines. Their numbers have been constant or in slow decline as well, for some years now. As I already pointed out, several are essentially at the minimum survival limits concerning readership.

Regarding the numbers of MR magazines sold per month, we do know that figure exactly. The circulation figures are published annually in the January issue. For the end of 2008 it was 156,676 copies, with an actual press run of just over 220,000.

CNJ831  

[blownout cylinder]

CNJ831

N 29.9%

---and yet in the other:

 

CNJ831

In answer to the "primary scale" question, which is what he quoted, the percentages were

---the answer ends up--

 

CNJ831

N 14.2%

I suspect a statistical glitch in computation occured here. Any survey I ever saw had variations within the 5-7% bracket. Higher?----not so much

[CNJ831]

alco_fan

Boy, you guys sure are lettign CNJ get your goat. Of course, he _is_ hiding the ball a bit. The survey he's referring to is the NMRA survey from Model Railroader magazine, May 1996. In it, in answer to the "scales modeled" question, it was:

HO 81.4%

N 29.9%

O 17.7% (not distingushed between scale and hi-rail)

Large 10%

S 4.7%

Z 1.3%

In answer to the "primary scale" question, which is what he quoted, the percentages were:

HO 54.6%

N 14.2%

O 16.3%

Large 8.9%

S 3.9%

Z 1.2%

_Since_ 1996, empirical evidence suggests that N scale and large scale might have gained. On30 might also be taking modelers away from HO.

But my best suggestion is to avoid the irritant, as I usually do ...

Yes, that is indeed the source for the multi-scale modelers numbers and there's no reason not to consider them valid. Our hobby's demographics generally change very slowly over long periods of time. If you get the NMRA's Bulletin, you'd also have seen this table was only a very small part of what was probably the most detailed and informative hobbyist survey ever published.

What really gives me a smile is the bit about empirical evidence showing the surge in N since that survey was published. I have been hearing claims about this for three decades now and not a single survey has ever indicated that any such thing has or is occurring...it's always a product of the rumor mill. What's presented as the "evidence" are claims of "I think; I feel; I heard at the hobbyshop; this guy I know said; somebody posted on the xxx Forum; a poll we took on the N Scale Forum shows..." I'm afraid that never once have I seen offered an actual published or cited study in evidence to back this up...and outside of modeling, the hobby's demographics has always been my biggest interest so I tend to think I'd have come across such info if it was actually out there. By all means, if you have such documentation please post it as I would be very interested in it...unless this is this just another case of ignorance is bliss?

As to Large Scale, I certainly hope that it has grown to a significant degree over the past 13 years, since probably 75% of its equipment appeared within that interval. Nevertheless, it's still just a small niche within the hobby.

CNJ831

[alco_fan]

Boy, you guys sure are lettign CNJ get your goat. Of course, he _is_ hiding the ball a bit. The survey he's referring to is the NMRA survey from Model Railroader magazine, May 1996. In it, in answer to the "scales modeled" question, it was:

HO 81.4%

N 29.9%

O 17.7% (not distingushed between scale and tinplate)

Large 10%

S 4.7%

Z 1.3%

In answer to the "primary scale" question, which is what he quoted, the percentages were:

HO 54.6%

N 14.2%

O 16.3%

Large 8.9%

S 3.9%

Z 1.2%

_Since_ 1996, empirical evidence suggests that N scale and large scale might have gained. On30 might also be taking modelers away from HO.

But my best suggestion is to avoid the irritant, as I usually do ...

[blownout cylinder]

BRAKIE

Also as we discuss before MR is loosing readers..

Where are they going?

I suspect to the speciality magazines.

In order to find THAT one out ---still need to do a survey---ooopps

BRAKIE

The question I must answer do I renew or drop MR in favor of N Scale Railroading and N Scale or do I continue to read all 3? Recalling as a N Scaler MR doesn't give me much bang for the buck..As a HO scaler its still a valuable magazine.

 

I keep in the MR as well as the others myself. If all N scalers left MR--then you'd have a 'ghettoized' hobby----each behind their fortress walls---throwing barbs at each other--------not that there weren't times-----

Yeeesh! talk about a split market then----

 

[BRAKIE]

CNJ831,Can you give us a link to that survey results?

I tried looking on the NMRA site and didn't have any luck..

Maybe I am looking it up wrong?

 

Also as we discuss before MR is loosing readers..

Where are they going?

I suspect to the speciality magazines.

A lot of these so called "one man" magazines has been around for years and just as good as MR or RMC and has top notch advertisers and authors.

 

Also we have NO idea how many of those 150,000 monthly issues are not sold.Only MR can answer that question.

 

My subscription runs out in July..

The question I must answer do I renew or drop MR in favor of N Scale Railroading and N Scale or do I continue to read all 3? Recalling as a N Scaler MR doesn't give me much bang for the buck..As a HO scaler its still a valuable magazine.

---------------------------------------

Barry,Marketing uses a lot of tools to include in store samples..I can recall getting small 2-3 sheet box of "Bounce" fabric sheets in the mail..

 

 

[CNJ831]

blownout cylinder

BRAKIE

Then how about us bi scalers or tri scalers?

Where do we fit in with these polls since most polls I seen in the past said chose one?

I've used the ol' subscribe to mag---buy same mag that survey showed up on---did both.

BTW. Even if the question was a choose 'X' number of scale your in--it STILL would be likely to have split the way it does. +/- 5%.

BRAKIE

.We all know MR doesn't do much for the O Scaler,N Scaler,G Scaler,tinplater and other modeling groups nor does it do much to impress advance modelers regardless of scale.One doesn't need to look far to see these scale specific magazines.N Scale has 2 magazines..O Scale has 2.S Scale has one.There are others as well.

And the subscription numbers aren't very high for any of those--so the polls derived from those won't be of much use either.

Interestingly enough, the NMRA did a survey a while back that addressed the first question, concerning those who indeed model in multiple scales. The question addressed was: "If you model in more than one scale, what is your primary modeling scale?" Although I'm sure the N-gauge folks won't like the outcome, these were the results:

O       16.3% (undoubtedly including Hi-Railers and tinplaters)

HO     54.6%

N       14.2%

Z          1.2%

LS      8.9%

And concerning the circulations of the other magazines/specialty magazines beyond MR/RMC as sources of hobbyist data, most have almost insignificant readerships (i.e. sales of around 10,000 copies per month, as compared with MR's ~150,000 and RMC's 60,000 per month), which would make them an unreliable source for general hobby information. Honestly, most of these are pretty much one man operations at the point of operating month-to-month.

CNJ831

[blownout cylinder]

BRAKIE

Then how about us bi scalers or tri scalers?

Where do we fit in with these polls since most polls I seen in the past said chose one?

I've used the ol' subscribe to mag---buy same mag that survey showed up on---did both.

BTW. Even if the question was a choose 'X' number of scale your in--it STILL would be likely to have split the way it does. +/- 5%.

BRAKIE

.We all know MR doesn't do much for the O Scaler,N Scaler,G Scaler,tinplater and other modeling groups nor does it do much to impress advance modelers regardless of scale.One doesn't need to look far to see these scale specific magazines.N Scale has 2 magazines..O Scale has 2.S Scale has one.There are others as well.

And the subscription numbers aren't very high for any of those--so the polls derived from those won't be of much use either.

BRAKIE

And that's my point..Magazine polls isn't worth the paper committed to them.

And we spend a lot of the time crabbing about useless surveys?  They must've been useful to somebody--even if they were useful to a ---ohno ohno--a--a " Marketing man"

[CNJ831]

wjstix

OK then....Is this a model railroad??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8__pRxVSyyw

I know it's hard for people to understand, but in recent years "hi-railers" have been building layouts that are true 1:48 scale, using the many full scale products made by Lionel MTH and others. Heck, Lionel now even sells scale couplers as a retrofit!! Except for the fact that it runs on three rails (which ALL O scale layouts did for many years, except some put the third rail on the outside) these layouts are NOT TOY TRAIN LAYOUTS!!

 

By the long accepted definition of "Hi-Rail", the answer is no, it is not. It is still just a Hi-Rail layout. No matter how elaborate a layout may be, if it employs "toy trains", it does not qualify as a part of what MR long ago termed "adult scale model railroading." This is not a judgement on my part, only an acknowledgement of definitions long established in the hobby. I appreciate that a lot of newer hobbyists have difficulty understanding and accepting the old, established rules and definitions, or even being aware of why and how such definitions came about, but they nevertheless exist and have been a part of the hobby for many decades.

CNJ831

 

[blownout cylinder]

jeffhergert

About the only truly accurate count would be if the U S Government asks on the census form, "Are you a Model Railroader?" and "If so, what scale do primarily model in?" 

 

And criticisma arise in census results as well---the questions aren't specific enough or are too picky or---etc for example.

jeffhergert

Sales, like surveys where you have to choose only one, also don't take into account someone who is modelling in two or more scales.

 

And here again, the questions would have to be very specific---and there are scales that are even more obscure than the ones we hear about---for example, lokes that are done in 1/250 or 1/32---

jeffhergert

I don't see that sales would be any better than a survey in a magazine.  Spending habits can fluctuate skewing the results.  Someone starting out or expanding may be buying more scale specific items than a well established modeller.  Someone with more disposable income can buy more than someone with less. 

 

I have to say, again, that there is no perfect way to get SOCIAL data than what we have right now--the data is what it is---imperfect, yes----but we still use it for what it is. As long as there is no Scaleometer that was designed by something outside of our mere human selves you'll just have to deal with the data as is------

[jeffhergert]

About the only truly accurate count would be if the U S Government asks on the census form, "Are you a Model Railroader?" and "If so, what scale do primarily model in?" 

I don't see that sales would be any better than a survey in a magazine.  Spending habits can fluctuate skewing the results.  Someone starting out or expanding may be buying more scale specific items than a well established modeller.  Someone with more disposable income can buy more than someone with less. 

Sales, like surveys where you have to choose only one, also don't take into account someone who is modelling in two or more scales.

Magazine surveys show the direction the magazine should take to keep subscribers.  Sales figures show the manufacturers what's most likely to sell in the future.  I bet they both breakdown about the same as to popularity of scales.

Jeff  

[BRAKIE]

rclanger

Doug,

The most accurate would be sales.  That would be the only source that would be believable.

Just a thought.  None of us have enough information to say one way or the other.

 

Exactly! And those that have those facts and figures-like(say Atlas) isn't talking.

BTW..The reason I chose Atlas because they have monthly releases in all 3 Scales-4 scales if one counts 3 rail O Scale releases separately.

 

 

[BRAKIE]

Bruce,Actually a poll from 59 years ago does not impress me since the hobby has become one of many factions with specialized magazines and as we have read on this forum many no longer see MR as the magazine.We all know MR doesn't do much for the O Scaler,N Scaler,G Scaler,tinplater and other modeling groups nor does it do much to impress advance modelers regardless of scale.One doesn't need to look far to see these scale specific magazines.N Scale has 2 magazines..O Scale has 2.S Scale has one.There are others as well.

 

Now,if the readership of MR is mostly HO modelers the survey will overwhelmingly be HO..Now let  a scale specific magazine run a survey then that scale would dominate.

And that's my point..Magazine polls isn't worth the paper committed to them.

Then how about us bi scalers or tri scalers?

Where do we fit in with these polls since most polls I seen in the past said chose one?

 

[citylimits]

CNJ831

_______ O ____HO____OO

1936     58%     36%      2%

1938     49        37        11

1940     38        46        14

1942     31        54        14

1947     28        59          9

1949      22       69          2

(source: MR March 1950)

CNJ831

These figures probably resulted from some kind of readership survey by MR so as to be able to identify the popularity of the scales by who is buying and reading MR in order to better understand their readership when it comes to writing articles of interest to their readers. If a MRR magazine readership is heavily weighted in one scale/gauge, then it would be sensible not to overload your magazine with articles of interest to people who modeled in less popular scales - the correct balance is important.

A careful and responsible editor would want to this so that his magazine reaches the greatest number of people - sustain their primary interest and to offer sufficient interest to modelers of less popular scales.

Survey's have become more scientific these days and it's all a matter of mathematics and clearly understood formulae.

In surveys such as the ones taken by MR over the above period, 1936 - 1949, it's the trend in results that is important that's why a simple readership survey like MR's is relevant for that time because it would have been interpreted against other data taken from other surveys - NMRA - as a latter example.

These surveys weren't carried out to trick anybody, but to gather information so as to provide a better focused magazine and to make sure the magazine was satisfying it's readership. If they got it all wrong they would be screwed!  If all the survey question asked is the scale being modeled then it would be a very simple survey and one that would be helpful to the editors. If the survey included many of the other of MR's readers preferences, age, income, marital status, occupation and so forth,  then that would be a very different thing altogether and not within the focus of what it seems their 1936 - 1949 survey was trying to determine.

A similar survey, should one have been undertaken, by the other general interest MRR magazine of the time, RMC, would probably have revealed similar results given the trends revealed in the MR survey - general trends that have continue today including scales they were not being modeled in the 1930's to the late 1940's A survey by one magazine would probably confirm the results of the other.

Public attitute, market, target group and personal preference reearch surveys and all the stupid questions they ask - I think it might be these that you are refering to Brakie, are a different thing altogether and they were a vary rare occurance back in the 1930's. When I joined the advertising industry in 1964  - as a very junior s++t kicker, in what turned out to be only a four year stay, market research surveys were only in their infancy. Now, no nobody will cross the road, let alone launch a new product without some survey company say it's cool to do so - that's why they demand the big dollars - don't you know

 

Bruce - trying to live a simple life without surveys and telephone poll's

 

 

[rclanger]

Doug,

The most accurate would be sales.  That would be the only source that would be believable.

Just a thought.  None of us have enough information to say one way or the other.

[blownout cylinder]

wm3798

 Here's a hard and fast fact.  At my house, 100% of the model railroaders and layouts are N scale.  Therefore, anyone who isn't working in N scale, is doing it wrong.

Just to make sure, I'm going to head up to the layout room to survey it again and run some trains instead of sitting here staring at the monitor and prosyletizing...

 If you follow this methodology yourself, you'll quickly find that Model Railroading is indeed fun, and it matters not a lick what the other fellow is doing.... (even if it's wrong!

Lee 

Finish that off with ----So there--HHHAAAAARRRUUUMMPPHH!!!

[wm3798]

 Here's a hard and fast fact.  At my house, 100% of the model railroaders and layouts are N scale.  Therefore, anyone who isn't working in N scale, is doing it wrong.

Just to make sure, I'm going to head up to the layout room to survey it again and run some trains instead of sitting here staring at the monitor and prosyletizing...

 If you follow this methodology yourself, you'll quickly find that Model Railroading is indeed fun, and it matters not a lick what the other fellow is doing.... (even if it's wrong!

Lee 

[IRONROOSTER]

I think this endless attempt to judge others as having a layout (and by inference, being a model railroader) is pointless.  Self certification is the way I go.  If you think you have a layout, then you do.  If you think you are a model railroader then you are.  For a hobby that attracts less than 0.5 % of the population, we sure can get snooty.

For me, model railroading is having fun with trains whether that's recreating a railroad scene right down to the trash on the ground, shooting exploding boxcars with a missle launcher,or something in between.

Remember Gomez Adams?  Now there was a guy who had fun with trains! We should all be so fortunate.

Enjoy

Paul

[blownout cylinder]

There was, in a class I took on statistics at UWO many moons ago, a fellow who said, and I'm quoting from my old notes I kept---

"There is no perfect system upon which one can design an unimpeachable survey. Every one of those surveys that were done had flaws. BUT--and this is key here--BUT, these surveys are, in fact, the only way that we can get at any SOCIAL DATA."

Again- UNLESS we have a detached observer from MARS do this type of survey some will never trust ANYTHING. This radical type of neo scepticism seems to hover around a kind of subjectivist ploy----

"I am the only one who/that is real--all about me is but mere shadow"---another type tends to float around the idea that they did not do the thing itself hence someone else did ---so they must be false----or summat.

This may just be the only way we'll really know---we may have to trust these publishing guys as there is still NOTHING I've found in any Dissertation Abstracts or what- have- you indicating otherwise.

 As a professor I once argued with put it----"If you do not believe the results others got --DIY"

[challenger3980]

Thank You Stix,

  That was a wonderful find, the vast majority of layouts in ANY scale, pale in comparison to that. That is a Perfect example of what a High-Rail layout can be.Unfortunately, I doubt that anything that I create will ever equal that, but it does set a very good standard to shoot for.

Doug

[wjstix]

pastorbob

SpaceMouse

CNJ,

Why would O gauge be considered a different hobby. Certainly there are O gauge railroads with the same level of detail as HO if not more. And the modelers can operate their trains just as HO operators do.

I'm curious.  

While I hate to presume for CNJ, O gauge Scale and Lionel O are two different animals.  I dabbled early in O but saw early on I would probably never have the space to build what I wanted and the offerings for O scale were limited.  I do have one O scale steam loco that I kept, and which graces a shelf in the train room, far away from wandering hands.

Bob

OK then....Is this a model railroad??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8__pRxVSyyw

I know it's hard for people to understand, but in recent years "hi-railers" have been building layouts that are true 1:48 scale, using the many full scale products made by Lionel MTH and others. Heck, Lionel now even sells scale couplers as a retrofit!! Except for the fact that it runs on three rails (which ALL O scale layouts did for many years, except some put the third rail on the outside) these layouts are NOT TOY TRAIN LAYOUTS!!

 

[BRAKIE]

CNJ831

BRAKIE

One simply can't write off such published figures presented by a respected magazine without presenting facts that demonstrate that they are erroneous. Do you know for a fact that MR's methodology was faulty? Can you show that their hobbyist sampling wasn't large enough? As I pointed out up-stream, situations aren't untrue simply because one chooses to say that they are. It has to be clearly demonstrated.

CNJ831 

------------

Sorry,but,I still maintain those surveys are not all that  actuate..How many of us never seen one let alone filled one out?

 Where are your facts? Remember my friend you ask me now I am asking you.

Can you show any proof those surveys done by MR and RMC is 100% actuate and speaks for the hobby or just a select few MR/RMC subscribers that took the time to fill out the survey and mail it back??

No more then I can.

So,its still your opinion you are posting-just like the rest of us.

Brakie, do you understand than in any study one starts with the most reliable published data/information source available, typically that from the leader or most prominent entity in whatever field is under investigation and one works from there? In this case, that would be MR. They have something like 150,000 subscribers, probably accounting for  better than 50% of all the individuals of any real significance as model railroaders in the hobby today (arguably it could be as much as 75%). When one conducts such statistical examinations for a business, it is not likely to be done in any haphazard or approximate fashion since the company's future depends on recognizing situations and trends. In fact, I would expect that currently Kalmbach likely employs an outside scientific firm to do such work. Likewise, this is first hand data that would probably not be available with better accuracy from any other source. If Kalmbach chooses to indicate the methods they employ, along with the probable errors in their figures, that's up to them, but there are no grounds that I can see for not accepting them at face value. 

CNJ831  

Twist it anyway you want but,I still see no proof..

Where is your proof?

 

[tomikawaTT]

tatans

When I think of "model Railroading" I only think of HO scale, even though I have an old o27 but not running. I guess it's because I'm running HO, A question :   what percentage of  model railroading is HO??   there is zz, n,  HOn3,  HO,  027, G,  and I'm sure I missed some.  Is HO that much ahead of any of the others?

Disregarding the entire scale/toy/percentage of participants/prices...

My definition:

Model Railroading is the practice of assembling a miniature representation of a railroad and operating it in a manner consistent with the practices of prototype railroads of similar era and class.

This can be done with hyper-precise scale models or with Lionel O27 track and trains - or even with little blocks of painted balsa on a 'layout' drawn in crayon on a sheet of cardboard.

As for the vast majority of the foregoing posts to this thread, Shakespeare had it right...

Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - but not a fanatic about it)

[CNJ831]

BRAKIE

One simply can't write off such published figures presented by a respected magazine without presenting facts that demonstrate that they are erroneous. Do you know for a fact that MR's methodology was faulty? Can you show that their hobbyist sampling wasn't large enough? As I pointed out up-stream, situations aren't untrue simply because one chooses to say that they are. It has to be clearly demonstrated.

CNJ831 

------------

Sorry,but,I still maintain those surveys are not all that  actuate..How many of us never seen one let alone filled one out?

 Where are your facts? Remember my friend you ask me now I am asking you.

Can you show any proof those surveys done by MR and RMC is 100% actuate and speaks for the hobby or just a select few MR/RMC subscribers that took the time to fill out the survey and mail it back??

No more then I can.

So,its still your opinion you are posting-just like the rest of us.

Brakie, do you understand than in any study one starts with the most reliable published data/information source available, typically that from the leader or most prominent entity in whatever field is under investigation and one works from there? In this case, that would be MR. They have something like 150,000 subscribers, probably accounting for  better than 50% of all the individuals of any real significance as model railroaders in the hobby today (arguably it could be as much as 75%). When one conducts such statistical examinations for a business, it is not likely to be done in any haphazard or approximate fashion since the company's future depends on recognizing situations and trends. In fact, I would expect that currently Kalmbach likely employs an outside scientific firm to do such work. Likewise, this is first hand data that would probably not be available with better accuracy from any other source. If Kalmbach chooses to indicate the methods they employ, along with the probable errors in their figures, that's up to them, but there are no grounds that I can see for not accepting them at face value. 

CNJ831  

[TMarsh]

Here's an idea. Since we are dismissing any and all written material as biased, out-dated, or of questionable credibility and/or variety of scales polled, (it would stand to reason the more of a scale you include, their percentage would.....?). Why not everyone go to their LHS's and ask them what they sell the most of and the approx percentages. This is a large, as we are from all parts of the world, grouping that would not be polling individual model railroaders of any particular scale, but the market as a whole. (as I understand it, that is where the figures really come from. I don't factually know this. I just recall the term manufacturers being used.) Then report back and do the math. Or, you could just look at the shelves and see what they stock the most of. Usually a store doesn't stock a lot of what they can't sell.

Personally I don't care. I like them all. HO I can see and fits well with what space I have. Plus, it is plentful in my area. Larger than HO I don't have enough room to do close to what I'd like, N would be my choice for the space and I could get more in the area, but is to small for me to deal with, and Z, well in person I'm not sure I could even see the stuff at all. My eyes, my choice. But I like your choice too. 

EDIT: I intended to congratulate each and every one of you on the work that you do in whatever scale you choose. There is truly some outstanding workmanship Craftsmanship out there. And to thank you for participating in these Forums where you share your talents and encourage people like me to better my own layout.

[Ole Timer]

 The main reason HO became so popular was they sold engines for $ 10.00 and were plastic .... were in every 5 and 10 cent store .... even drug stores at xmas . They even had those styrofoam complete layouts ... tunnels -track and all for $29.99 . A big difference from diecast - smoking O scale lionels and others . If you handled the cars and engines too much all the rails and trim broke off .