ccarannaI was always under the impression that RTR equipment was mainly produced for the toy train world. Nothing against Lionel or toy trains, but wasn't HO initially designed to be a separate "craftsman" scale for those that wanted to build things? (sigh)
I wasn't around when the HO charter was formulated so I can't speak to the original purpose for the HO scale. I will say that I am interesting in building something. I am interested in building a layout. To do that, I don't need to build every last individual component of that layout. If I can buy something prebuilt, why should I feel it necessary to build it myself?
How many of us churn our own butter or slaughter our own beef? Do we feel we are missing something because we can go down to the store and buy a pound of butter and some steaks. A little over 30 years ago, if you wanted a personal computer, you had to build one from components. Today you can go into a big box store, buy one that is ready made with lots of software preloaded, and features that a previous generation could only dream of. It is also cheaper, faster, and way more powerful. I think it is safe to say that if we still had to build our PCs from the ground up, this forum would not exist because there wouldn't be enough people around to sustain it and probably not enough to even make the internet viable.
Technological advances are being made all the time to make all facets of our lives simpler and easier. Why should we deny ourselves those advantages when it comes to model railroading?
jecorbett I just completed construction of Walthers Wood Water Tank kit which I bought shortly before they came out with the built-up version. It looked like a fairly simple kit to build so I figured it would be no problem. WRONG!!! Had I known the aggravation I would go through putting this thing together, I would have pitched it in the trash and bought the built-up version. While most of the kit is pretty straight forward, there were two major exceptions. The first came with construction of the timber framing for the tower. This consisted of four major pieces connected with diagonal bracing. Trying to get all the little nubs in the diagonal bracing to simultaneously line up with all the little holes in the timber framing was more than a little aggravating. These diagonal braces are fairly thin plastic which tended to bend and warp when it must be kept perfectly straight to get the parts to mate correctly. The air was filled with lots of the words you can't say on television. This aggravation was minor compared to that of trying to thread the cabling through the tiny holes on the water spout, pulleys and counterweights. Some of these holes were smaller than the typical eye of a needle. I do not have a jeweler's eyes or hands and this proved to be nearly impossible. Somehow I finally imagined to get the thread through all those tiny holes. Once this was done, I had to tie it off on the counterweights with very little thread to work with. In addition, I had to be very careful not to pull the thread out of the spout and pulley on the other end of the line while I tied these very small knots. This too proved to be almost insurmountable. What I ended up with is a structure that looks no better than one I could have bought off the shelf at my LHS and plopped down in place on the layout. The only advantage I see to buying the kit is that it makes custom painting the tank a little easier, but I have no doubt I could have hand painted the built-up kit with far less aggravation than I experienced putting together the tiny little plastic pieces. Out of curiosity, I checked the Walters website to see if the kit was still available and how much I saved by buying the kit instead. The kit is still available and the list price is all of $3 less than the built up. To save that $3, I estimate I spent 12-15 hours of my time, whereas if I chose to hand paint the built-up, I could probably have done it in an hour or two. If they want to pay some cheap Chinese laborer to put these kits together for me, I'll gladly pay a few extra bucks for the convenience. Now here's the final insult. Walthers currently has the built-up version on sale for $5 less than the kit. I actually had to pay more for the aggravation of building it myself. I've learned my lesson. From now on if the same or similar structures are available in both kit and built-up, I'm going with the built-up every time. I would much rather spend a little more of my money to save a lot more of my time.
I just completed construction of Walthers Wood Water Tank kit which I bought shortly before they came out with the built-up version. It looked like a fairly simple kit to build so I figured it would be no problem. WRONG!!! Had I known the aggravation I would go through putting this thing together, I would have pitched it in the trash and bought the built-up version. While most of the kit is pretty straight forward, there were two major exceptions. The first came with construction of the timber framing for the tower. This consisted of four major pieces connected with diagonal bracing. Trying to get all the little nubs in the diagonal bracing to simultaneously line up with all the little holes in the timber framing was more than a little aggravating. These diagonal braces are fairly thin plastic which tended to bend and warp when it must be kept perfectly straight to get the parts to mate correctly. The air was filled with lots of the words you can't say on television. This aggravation was minor compared to that of trying to thread the cabling through the tiny holes on the water spout, pulleys and counterweights. Some of these holes were smaller than the typical eye of a needle. I do not have a jeweler's eyes or hands and this proved to be nearly impossible. Somehow I finally imagined to get the thread through all those tiny holes. Once this was done, I had to tie it off on the counterweights with very little thread to work with. In addition, I had to be very careful not to pull the thread out of the spout and pulley on the other end of the line while I tied these very small knots. This too proved to be almost insurmountable. What I ended up with is a structure that looks no better than one I could have bought off the shelf at my LHS and plopped down in place on the layout. The only advantage I see to buying the kit is that it makes custom painting the tank a little easier, but I have no doubt I could have hand painted the built-up kit with far less aggravation than I experienced putting together the tiny little plastic pieces.
Out of curiosity, I checked the Walters website to see if the kit was still available and how much I saved by buying the kit instead. The kit is still available and the list price is all of $3 less than the built up. To save that $3, I estimate I spent 12-15 hours of my time, whereas if I chose to hand paint the built-up, I could probably have done it in an hour or two. If they want to pay some cheap Chinese laborer to put these kits together for me, I'll gladly pay a few extra bucks for the convenience. Now here's the final insult. Walthers currently has the built-up version on sale for $5 less than the kit. I actually had to pay more for the aggravation of building it myself.
I've learned my lesson. From now on if the same or similar structures are available in both kit and built-up, I'm going with the built-up every time. I would much rather spend a little more of my money to save a lot more of my time.
I purchased the built up 1940's steel water tank from Walthers in black and am extremely happy with my purchase. My time is better spent doing things I would rather do, rather than getting an extreme case of eye and brain strain. However, I do appreciate the folks who have to put these kits together for probably next to nothing and the finished work is noticably better than I could do.
I also purchased a second set of prebuilt Snyder diesel fuel cranes and diesel sanding tower from American Limited Models. I initially built the first set, but these we damaged during various moves. The pre-built completed structures were as good or better than what I initially did.
Larry
jecorbett I wasn't around when the HO charter was formulated so I can't speak to the original purpose for the HO scale. I will say that I am interesting in building something. I am interested in building a layout. To do that, I don't need to build every last individual component of that layout. If I can buy something prebuilt, why should I feel it necessary to build it myself? How many of us churn our own butter or slaughter our own beef? Do we feel we are missing something because we can go down to the store and buy a pound of butter and some steaks. A little over 30 years ago, if you wanted a personal computer, you had to build one from components. Today you can go into a big box store, buy one that is ready made with lots of software preloaded, and features that a previous generation could only dream of. It is also cheaper, faster, and way more powerful. I think it is safe to say that if we still had to build our PCs from the ground up, this forum would not exist because there wouldn't be enough people around to sustain it and probably not enough to even make the internet viable. Technological advances are being made all the time to make all facets of our lives simpler and easier. Why should we deny ourselves those advantages when it comes to model railroading?
jecorbett If I can buy something prebuilt, why should I feel it necessary to build it myself?
Valid point. There is a middle ground. My concern is that the people for whom the subject header of this thread is the vision for the future of the hobby.
My contention is that there as certain skills at performing certain tasks with certain materials and certain tools that are necessary to superdetail, kitbash or scratchbuild. Once you master those skills, you pretty much can do anything you choose to do. Unless you master those skills you will lose the option of choosing to do those things. If the OP decides to give up on kits, fine, he can buy stuff RTR and that will work.
Up to the point he can get RTR stuff. The one day he needs something one off or something that nobody produces RTR at all, he is trapped. He can't build anything himself because he hasn't practiced the skills. Studies have shown it takes about 10,000 hours of practice to becaome an expert at something. Lets say you only wanted to become a fraction of an expert. That still could be thousands of hours of practice.
If the OP had stopped and tried to figure out why he had problems (the eyes were too small to thread through so maybe he needs an optivisor, or maybe he needs a small drill to clear out the holds or maybe he needs to replace the plastic eyes with ones made from wire or maybe he needs to coat the timp of the thread with wax to make it stiffer and smaller) then the next time he built a structure he would be better prepared and would have fewer (or at least different) problems. So the one day that the only way he can get what he wants is to built a higher end kit or kitbash or scratchbuild, he's screwed. He will fail again.
Which brings us to the next point that seems to get overlooked in these discussions....
How many of us churn our own butter or slaughter our own beef? Do we feel we are missing something because we can go down to the store and buy a pound of butter and some steaks.
Very true. And its really good as long as you want beef. The stores around all have beef. But what if I want something else? What if I want venison? the people I know that like to eat venision do go out and hunt down their own deer and kill their own deer and many of them dress their own deer.
So as long as you want EXACTLY what the manufacturer sells, you are in tall cotton. but if you want something else, you are on your own. I am well aware of this since I model the 1900-1905 era. Except for one engine, there hasn't been a new model of a wood underframe car or engine introduced by a mainstream manufacturer in the last 30-35 years. If I was relying on RTR I would have been buying the exact same cars and locomotives for the last 35 years. And since the push to RTR, there are very few kits for those limited models around, so there isn't even any fodder to kitbash anymore.
In an RTR world you only have the choices that the manufacturer thinks is best for HIS interests, which by the way are not the same as the modeler's interests. If it were, why would the manufacturers be building these weird exceptions to the rule (the Triplex, the Aerotrain, the UP 9000, the UP Big Boys) and virtually ignoring engines that would be really fit most model railroad's needs (2-8-0's, 2-8-2's, 4-6-0's).
A little over 30 years ago, if you wanted a personal computer, you had to build one from components. Today you can go into a big box store, buy one that is ready made with lots of software preloaded, and features that a previous generation could only dream of. It is also cheaper, faster, and way more powerful.
Please tell me where to buy a copy of "Great Naval Battles of the North Atlantic" for Windows XP. You won't be able to because they don't sell that software for that game for that operating system. Since my software is RTR, I can't play the game (unless I install some backwards emulator), because the manufacturer doesn't sell it. I traded more convienience for fewer choices. And because I lack the skills, I can't "roll my own". I lack the skills to kitbash or scratchbuild my own software.
On the other hand, when it comes to operating paperwork (timetables, train orders, car cards, switch lists) I do have the skills in some software and I do write my own reports, forms or applications for those. I learned how to use some tools and materials and can "scratchbuild" my own operating systems.
I have nothing against RTR, I wish there was more choice in my era.
My concerns are not abandoning the skills that will "fill in the blanks" between RTR equipment and realizing the reality that if you rely on RTR you rely on the benevolence of the manufacturer and his willingness to support your interest. If you rely on RTR you are doomed to stay part of the "herd'. If you don't mind buying the same engines and the same cars and the same buildings as every other layout has, you will be OK.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
BRAKIE tatans Sounds like the above posts want nothing to do with actually working with your hands, so I guess will go to the bank, take out a loan and go to the LHS and buy tons of ready-made stuff, stick it all over my layout and pretend this is my "hobby'' , maybe the "kitbuilders'' should try a scratchbuilt project ( it's not as hard as you make it out to be) see you at the hobby shop ! Tell ya what. Try this.Tape your tumb and forefinger together on your dominate hand and use your off hand.. Then try to build a kit-even a simple blue box car kit.It can be done but,its ackward working with the "wrong" hand. Try to picture a person that is all thumbs and their kit building is well -uh,mmm,gee,shoot ok,-shall we say leaves a lot to be desired? Personally I like the prebuilts gives me more time to add details.
tatans Sounds like the above posts want nothing to do with actually working with your hands, so I guess will go to the bank, take out a loan and go to the LHS and buy tons of ready-made stuff, stick it all over my layout and pretend this is my "hobby'' , maybe the "kitbuilders'' should try a scratchbuilt project ( it's not as hard as you make it out to be) see you at the hobby shop !
Sounds like the above posts want nothing to do with actually working with your hands, so I guess will go to the bank, take out a loan and go to the LHS and buy tons of ready-made stuff, stick it all over my layout and pretend this is my "hobby'' , maybe the "kitbuilders'' should try a scratchbuilt project ( it's not as hard as you make it out to be) see you at the hobby shop !
Tell ya what.
Try this.Tape your tumb and forefinger together on your dominate hand and use your off hand..
Then try to build a kit-even a simple blue box car kit.It can be done but,its ackward working with the "wrong" hand.
Try to picture a person that is all thumbs and their kit building is well -uh,mmm,gee,shoot ok,-shall we say leaves a lot to be desired?
Personally I like the prebuilts gives me more time to add details.
You have got that right.
I do lots of kit building and I am missing the index and middle finger on my dominate right hand.
You can do it but it is more difficult and now as my eyes start to fade a little, I find that I am far more selective in the kits I purchase. And sometimes scratch building is the answer.
To each his own, thats why it is the world's greatest hobby, everyone can find his or her own niche.
Nuff said.
Johnboy out for now..........................
from Saskatchewan, in the Great White North..
We have met the enemy, and he is us............ (Pogo)
The one reason I'm in MR is the enjoyment, I don't have any new things on my project, I own one beat up brass engine(wrong tender) used tank locos, one used plastic loco, many flat cars made from old boxcars, modified tank cars, etc etc, buildings and trestles all scratchbuilt, the reason? economics ! ! I would love to be able to just whip out to the LHS and pick up anything in my vision, but my age and the company that took my pension from me prevent that kind of luxury, so I am in my glory ripping apart old cast off cars and accepting used "stuff" from other MR's and it keeps me in the hobby and helps a bit with the encroaching insanity, "snooty" would hardly describe me.
selector ccarannaI was always under the impression that RTR equipment was mainly produced for the toy train world. Nothing against Lionel or toy trains, but wasn't HO initially designed to be a separate "craftsman" scale for those that wanted to build things? (sigh) I doubt it. Seriously. What would lead you to think that it was that way? Maybe you are being factious? -Crandell
I doubt it. Seriously. What would lead you to think that it was that way? Maybe you are being factious?
-Crandell
Sorry Crandell, but it is Chuck who is largely correct in this instance. As I have pointed out here a number of times, by the late 1930's HO had essentially set itself appart from the Lionel and Flyer crowd, the basically out-of-the-box/RTR toy train segment of the hobby, regarding itself as a strictly craftsman's hobby.
As I've also previously indicated, during the mid 1950's the feeling of separation was so strong that the hobby's major publications formally divorced themselves from the publication of any articles regarding the "toy trains", including Hi-Rail. MR referred to our hobby as "adult scale model railroading" to indicate that it involved skill and craftmanship to participate and not just playing with store bought toy trains. RTR equipment, other than perhaps some locomotives, in those days was commonly called "plastic tin-plate" and looked upon with disdain.
Like it or not, that is the true nature of our hobby, although many latter day hobbyists fail to recognize it, or refuse to accept the fact. Anyone doubting this need only consult issues of MR and RMC from decades past.
CNJ831
CNJ831 and all,Let us not forget the HO RTR cars and locomotives of the 50/60s..RTR isn't anything new..However,that was before its time..RTR time has arrived as we are seeing.
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Thanks for your reply, John. I will happily defer to you because I simply don't have the history or knowledge that you have. It just seems odd that, of all things, the HO scale became the defacto repository of all that is 'good' about the hobby in terms of the way it should be practiced by adults. Why not S, or still O? Was there something unique and specific, a driver of sorts, or a draw, into this one scale and none of the others?
Thanks, again. Seems it is to be a classroom day for me on this and other subjects.
jecorbettIf the skills I acquire from model building could be applied to other areas of my life, skill development might be a consideration, but for the life of me I can't think of where else I could apply these skills.
Well, you could learn to be patient. I'm told that patience is a virtue.
maxman jecorbettIf the skills I acquire from model building could be applied to other areas of my life, skill development might be a consideration, but for the life of me I can't think of where else I could apply these skills. Well, you could learn to be patient. I'm told that patience is a virtue.
Spare me.
jecorbettSpare me.
Ah ha! Proves my point! LOL
selector Thanks for your reply, John. I will happily defer to you because I simply don't have the history or knowledge that you have. It just seems odd that, of all things, the HO scale became the defacto repository of all that is 'good' about the hobby in terms of the way it should be practiced by adults. Why not S, or still O? Was there something unique and specific, a driver of sorts, or a draw, into this one scale and none of the others? -Crandell
HO was referred to as the "jewelers' scale" for many years since it required real talent to be good at and one had to build most everything (both Mantua and Varney did offered a limited number of built-up locos in the late 30's and 40's but at a stiff price). In fact, 2-rail 1:48 or 17/64ths O scale (as opposed to toyish 3-rail O-Gauge) was included as part of the adult scale model railroading hobby during that period, but the number of individuals involved in that scale was quite small by the 1950's in comparison to HO. S -gauge was, of course, limited to Flyer trains in that period and was without any real true scale representation. Considering that the era in which HO became the dominant scale had smaller new homes with less space to model in, plus cheaper kits by scale, it's not surprising that HO became the scale of choice of the hobby's true craftsmen.
MR and RMC had become pretty much HO scale magazines by the early 50's and were aimed toward advanced scratchbuilding, kit building, clever kitbashing and similar articles penned by a host of highly accomplished and skilled hobbyists...because that was what the hobby was about! Likewise, Trackside Photos illustrated a great diversity of talent from the readers. Hobbyists took great pride in their abilities to create realistic models and this is clearly illustrated by negative comments regarding RTR and simplistic car kits that appear in the MR letters-to-the-editor column, reflecting the concern that HO might become just a down-sized Lionel toy train scale. I would also point out that Kalmbach for a time even produced a separate entry-level HO magazine intended to guide and assist folks in developing the basic modeling skills necessary for becoming a traditional HO hobbyist before graduating to reading Model Railroader.
jecorbett If the skills I acquire from model building could be applied to other areas of my life, skill development might be a consideration, but for the life of me I can't think of where else I could apply these skills.
It all depends on what you do outside your hobby. If you don't do anything "crafty" or "artisan" or "handyman" outside of your hobby, then you may be right. But building something big takes a lot of the same skills as building something small, just using different sized tools. Measuring, making or reading plans, figuring out sizes of parts figuring out how things go together is all about the same concepts. House wiring is for the most part waaaaaay simpler than DC model railroad wiring. If you don't do home improvement projects, if you don't do wood or metal working, if you don't have kids to help with school projects, then you probably won't use model railroading skills outside the hobby.
As for the continued availability of kits, as long as there is a sufficient market for it, there will be suppliers.
Who defines sufficient? Athearn Blue box is gone. Roundhouse kits are gone. The reason is its easier for the company selling the RTR. It only has to do with what the majority of the modelers will accept. If they think they can reduce costs by a significant amount and people will buy RTR, the kits are history. Its not that they will split the production. They will go 100% to whatever maximizes their profit. Undec models, virtually gone. Dummy units, virtually gone. Minority demand has no place at the table.
If kits disappear, it will be because buyers will have voted with their dollars what they want. Kits do offer some advantages over built-ups but I'm not sure that outweights their downside. If kits do disappear or become very limited, then kitbashing will become a lost art, but I can see that void being filled by expanded availability of modular components.
What company is providing modular components for freight cars (that doesn't require a commercial car as the major part)?
The danger for the model manufacturers is really weaning people off kits. The reason I say that is the advances in resin casting and 3D printing. I used to kitbash cars from MDC kits. So MDC got the sale of a kit and I added other parts. Now if I want more than 3 or 4 of car, I can scratchbuild a master, make an RTV mold and cast my own cars in resin. I don't buy any MDC products. Evergreen plastics, Dow Corning and a couple chemical companies get my money instead of MDC. I get a scratchbuilt car that takes about as much time to assemble as a P2k car kit and amortized over 5-10 cars costs less than a typical RTR model. With advances in rivet application (rivets applied like decals) even steel cars are within reach. I had planned to kitbash Bowser GS gons into a sorta B&O1902 hopper bottom gon, but with the rivet decals I think I can make exactly what I want. By forcing me to learn how to model without mainstream commercial cars, I now can model without ANY mainstream commercial cars if I choose. As the model manufacturers squeeze out the lower sellers and ONLY sell the few, most popular models, more and more people will figure out how to model without them. With the 3D printing, the guy with good CAD design skills can make an "inventory" of designs and then print exactly the car you want, just when you want it. Since a CAD drawing, while expensive to produce, is still way cheaper than tooling. And if they are ever able to laser print lettering directly on the car sides, the conventional model manufacturers are in deep trouble..
CNJ831 selector ccarannaI was always under the impression that RTR equipment was mainly produced for the toy train world. Nothing against Lionel or toy trains, but wasn't HO initially designed to be a separate "craftsman" scale for those that wanted to build things? (sigh) I doubt it. Seriously. What would lead you to think that it was that way? Maybe you are being factious? -Crandell Sorry Crandell, but it is Chuck who is largely correct in this instance. As I have pointed out here a number of times, by the late 1930's HO had essentially set itself appart from the Lionel and Flyer crowd, the basically out-of-the-box/RTR toy train segment of the hobby, regarding itself as a strictly craftsman's hobby. As I've also previously indicated, during the mid 1950's the feeling of separation was so strong that the hobby's major publications formally divorced themselves from the publication of any articles regarding the "toy trains", including Hi-Rail. MR referred to our hobby as "adult scale model railroading" to indicate that it involved skill and craftmanship to participate and not just playing with store bought toy trains. RTR equipment, other than perhaps some locomotives, in those days was commonly called "plastic tin-plate" and looked upon with disdain. Like it or not, that is the true nature of our hobby, although many latter day hobbyists fail to recognize it, or refuse to accept the fact. Anyone doubting this need only consult issues of MR and RMC from decades past. CNJ831
Get over it. Most of us who "built" in the 50's, like myself, are pretty beat up now, bad eyes, bad hands, other ailments. There is no way I want to build kits. However, to be realistic, if we were rugged layout builders like the pioneers, we would have to cut down the trees, and mill them to make our table tops, and to get the wood for wooden kits, we would have to manufacture from raw materials all the things we need to completely scratch build every stinking thing for the railroad, and most of us after 50 years of doing that would be too tired, too worn out, too broke to even think about laying track. Oh, I forgot, make your own nickle silver rail, and on and on and on.
The world has changed, products have changed, time to spend on hobbies has changed, and thanks to our stinking economy, no one can even afford to buy the raw materials. At age 73, I am perfectly happy to add new RTR cars to the railroad, and spend my time available on scenery and operations and such.
That is also true of about all the modelers I know. If you want to buy some balsa and craft your own freight cars, that is fine, power to you. But don't belittle the rest of us old cusses who are just plain tired and want to enjoy what we have created. The hobby has persisted not because of you or of me, but because it still attracts new people who are lured by the new products and the availability of "stuff" to "get er moving".
Bob living in 2009.
Bob
I'm a pretty passive forum lurk, however I will offer my opinion here.
I won't extol the virtues of ready to roll items, and I feel like kits have their time and place, just like RTR. In the last year or two I delved seriously into model railroading. For all intensive purposes this was my first big attempt at modeling trains. I had built something like 35-40 blue box freight and passenger car kits and a mix of Stewart and Athearn locomotive kits. Prior to these train models I had also actively played tabletop miniature war games, where I had the pleasure of building, painting, and decaling each individual unit. I also built numerous 1/35 armor models (pzkpfw IV, jgpz IV, hanomags, T-34-85, light tank M3A3, etc...)
Clearly I enjoy building models, however my most laborious endeavors such as my armor models all produced unique display pieces I could admire. I greatly enjoy building model train kits for rolling stock, locomotives, and buildings. However I feel that it reaches a point of being tedious when I want to put some new boxcars on my layout and I need to build 8 or so kits that are all relatively identical. I would much rather round out my fleet with RTR cars so I can direct my modeling efforts elsewhere. Do I plan on building more kits in the future? Yes, but for now I have had my fill of building kits.
Y'know--
As I'm reading these 'screeds' about getting old and crochety with limbs and eyeballs falling out'n peoples heads, and faces falling off skulls, and with thumbs attached to hands backwards, and all this other fine stuff, I started to think about Eric--this 11 year old boy with CP--and his building of kits/detailing. He does these for the challenge of the thing. Not that he ends up with the master crafters work in front of him. Much of his work has some type of construction issue but still---they are HIS doing and his alone. He has pride in what HE has done. Maybe that is what we need to think about here.
Myself---I have the shaky hands, the eyes do not see well---what with floaters and other issues with mine eyes that surround the diabetic I'm not going to go quietly and give up the kit building just because I've got some kind of infirmity. There is some kind of pride in saying look what I built. Even if the dang thing is a PITA, I still will finish it and will say----I BUILT THIS!!! So there---HAAAAARRUUUUUMMPH!!!
It is that one needs to gain just a bit of perspective here---are we building these things for some sort of contest? Last time I checked there wasn't one mentioned---I know a few people are working towards there Merit points but I'm not seeing them giving up if something goes PHOOOF!! on them.
Maybe rant a little ---but hey---
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
For those who really want to test their "skills" and separate themselves from the RTR crowd there is always proto 87. Real scale rail and real scale flange height. Sounds like loads of fun to me. LOL.
How about some compromise? Built up as one feels is required, whatever floats your boat for the rest. Having devoted hundreds, no make that thousands of hours to manfacture specific S steam and rolling stock for my own use. You can bet I got excited when availibilty of a RTR generic wooden reefer was confirmed, as soon as one could say "goodby Visa" 75 were mine for the asking. Enjoy the hobby as you see fit.
Dave
West Coast S How about some compromise? Built up as one feels is required, whatever floats your boat for the rest. Having devoted hundreds, no make that thousands of hours to manfacture specific S steam and rolling stock for my own use. You can bet I got excited when availibilty of a RTR generic wooden reefer was confirmed, as soon as one could say "goodby Visa" 75 were mine for the asking. Enjoy the hobby as you see fit. Dave
That works just fine for me!! I'm not saying either/or---there is a lot of room for this so one does not have to panic----
Was that a smoky VISA fire or a 4 alarmer?
If you go back and look at the articles and advertising of the 50's it's clear that scale model railroading as opposed to toy train collecting was occurring in HO, S, and O. What really got HO going was that it was the smallest scale generally available at the end of WWII when we entered a period of prosperity for the middle class. Athearn and MDC/Roundhouse having lots of goodies in the scale helped also. This gave HO a momentum that has continued to this day.
As for RTR, kits, scratchbuilding, etc. - This is a hobby, do what's fun for you and buy the rest. Life is too short to waste on things you don't like.
Enjoy
Paul
I"m going to have to agree with Bob on this one CNJ831,
I've heard plenty of people extol the virtues of being a "true" model railroader and those folks who rely on RTR stuff these days aren't entitled to call themselves by that moniker. They seem to have this elitist view of the hobby and as my finacee would say to that attitude: bollocks! I am not going to cut down a pine tree to make a box car - I love Bob's colorful examples! =D
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
IRONROOSTER If you go back and look at the articles and advertising of the 50's it's clear that scale model railroading as opposed to toy train collecting was occurring in HO, S, and O. What really got HO going was that it was the smallest scale generally available at the end of WWII when we entered a period of prosperity for the middle class. Athearn and MDC/Roundhouse having lots of goodies in the scale helped also. This gave HO a momentum that has continued to this day. Paul
Actualy, HO was asserting its virtues as an "ideal" scale well before the end of WWII. By 1940 it already had accounted for just short of 50% of all hobbyists and by war's end the figure had attained 60% of the market. By just the first years of the 1950's HO had reached the market share it holds today.
Just before the onset of the war, the diversity of available products in HO had already far outstripped that for O-scale, while at the same time prices were but a small fraction of those for its bigger brother. Even before wartime had curtailed production it was obvious to the manufacturers that O would have little future beyond children's toys after the war and companies like Varney were already considering selling off their entire O-scale line of products. While prosperity indeed marked the early post-war period, it was the explosively expanding HO marketplace, together with its large number of new, quality, manufacturers, that quickly gave HO a 4:1 or even 5:1 dominance over any of its competitor scales.
riogrande5761I've heard plenty of people extol the virtues of being a "true" model railroader and those folks who rely on RTR stuff these days aren't entitled to call themselves by that moniker.
YOIKS!! Maybe the problem is that some people do think that distinctions actually might mean something----but to then turn it into a hierarchical battle wherein one is better than the other is alittle much me thinks This kind of "mushiness" wherein there is no difference ignores those differences and tries to turn this complex hobby into an undifferentiated soup. Can we not have acceptance of those differences and think OTHER than "I must win/you must lose"?
riogrande5761They seem to have this elitist view of the hobby
If you perceive there to be this 'elitist' view than no amount of arguing otherwise will make it go away. This 'elitist' thing I'll dare say could be also seen as a defense mechanism brought on by certain events of the last little while----kits are disappearing(which does make for longer acquisition times and, in some cases---higher costs---remember collector markets do play a role here), there are certain mfg's dealing almost solely with certain sizes of locomotives--while ignoring some market niches that are now seeing not so much, who knows what all else---there are other aspects as well----
Myself---I do not see these distinctions as 'elitist' because I 'perceive' these distinctions as ONLY distinctions----nothing else-----and as such some may be more purist in thinking-----I think 'purist' as opposed to the inflammatory---'elitist'
user="blownout cylinder" YOIKS!! Maybe the problem is that some people do think that distinctions actually might mean something----but to then turn it into a hierarchical battle wherein one is better than the other is alittle much me thinks This kind of "mushiness" wherein there is no difference ignores those differences and tries to turn this complex hobby into an undifferentiated soup. Can we not have acceptance of those differences and think OTHER than "I must win/you must lose"?
I"m not really sure. All I know is I like trains, I want to build a model railroad and I do it for fun and enjoyment. It isn't a competition with me, nor a way to get awards and earn recognition. Nor a way to develope a sense of accomplishment or build self esteem.
Yes, I do perceive that attitude from some in the forums from time to time both here and Atlas. As for making it go away, it depends on whether someone is willing to re-evaluate their attitude about the hobby or not. Many people are stuck in their ways. You may be right about defense mechanism, I can see that. They see their nitch as being endangered with kits going away. But if folks are that hard core about scratch and kit building, there are plenty of raw materials out there and a greater sense of acomplishment for those folks at journey's end.
I do feel Pastor Bob has a common no-nonsense view of this topic and he illustratet his points in a way I agree with.
blownout cylinder West Coast S How about some compromise? Built up as one feels is required, whatever floats your boat for the rest. Having devoted hundreds, no make that thousands of hours to manfacture specific S steam and rolling stock for my own use. You can bet I got excited when availibilty of a RTR generic wooden reefer was confirmed, as soon as one could say "goodby Visa" 75 were mine for the asking. Enjoy the hobby as you see fit. Dave That works just fine for me!! I'm not saying either/or---there is a lot of room for this so one does not have to panic---- Was that a smoky VISA fire or a 4 alarmer?
Quite the Visa fire indeed, think I earned enough points to join Branson's crew on their next space flight! All is now right with the world and contentment reigns supreme, now that I have a 153 car PFE reefer fleet.
riogrande5761 I"m going to have to agree with Bob on this one CNJ831, I've heard plenty of people extol the virtues of being a "true" model railroader and those folks who rely on RTR stuff these days aren't entitled to call themselves by that moniker. They seem to have this elitist view of the hobby and as my finacee would say to that attitude: bollocks! I am not going to cut down a pine tree to make a box car - I love Bob's colorful examples! =D
Quite honestly, if the craftman aspects are totally removed from our hobby (as seems to increasingly be occurring) and replaced completely by a RTR approach, then you have an entirely different hobby. The only facet which both will have in common would be the running of miniature trains. In fact, an HO hobby centered completely around RTR would have a direct line of descent from kids' Lionel/Flyer toy train interests of the 1950's, or perhaps adult Hi-Rail of the era, not the long established HO craftsman's hobby.
Let me offer an analogy here. If someone does fine arts painting as a hobby and does it well, he can rightly consider himself an artist. His creative and artistic talents are in the same sense as those of the model railroad craftsman as both are talented creators of a unique end product. Now let's say another guy with no particular abilities visits his local art gallery and purchases a painting to add to his collection. He takes it home and hangs it on his wall. Is it proper that he now consider himself an artist?
That's essentially the sort of situation evolving in our hobby today. There is no elitism involved in pointing it out either, it's simply a matter of recognizing the distinct differences that separate the nature of the two pursuits and the titles afforded them. As I've said, both MR and RMC recognized the distinction long ago.
CNJ831Let me offer an analogy here. If someone does fine arts painting as a hobby and does it well, he can rightly consider himself an artist. His creative and artistic talents are in the same sense as those of the model railroad craftsman, both are talented creators of a unique end product. Now let's say another guy with no particular abilities visits his local art gallery and purchases a painting to add to his collection. He takes it home and hangs it on his wall. Is it proper that he now consider himself an artist?
This type of debate is going on in hot roddiing of all things. The idea some have is that you can buy a turn-key street rod from an auction like the ones that Russo and Steele have and then suggest that you 'built' this car---via buying it. This would be a way of vicariously 'living' through someone else's busted knuckles----
Strange but there we are-----vicarious experiences now----
TA462I tell most people that I built my Trans Am but in reality all I did was build the rear end, the motor and the assemble all the finished (by someone else) pieces.
You still did the dang thing! Even if it was still done by others the thing had to be put--assembled by you! LOL!!
There is a fellow down my street--has a 1956 Chev 210 with a blown 455 cid in it---paid almost $86,000 for the car at a RM auction just recently. Went around to a lot of cruise nights and bragged about how he built the whole car up from 'scratch'---the only problem was---none of the description actually fit what he was driving----