Philosophy Friday -- Scratchbuilt versus RTR... :-)

[jwhitten]

blownout cylinder

OK---glad to see someone opening up a can of worms to see what they look like

I'm a bit of everything myself. I don't think that there is a need to get into a period of existential angst over this split in the first place.

But some, I feel, might.

 

 

 

Nobody should feel angst, at least not in my opinion-- but you pointed out there's a split-- how did you know that if you didn't feel it yourself or else were at least aware of other people's views?

 

[jwhitten]

IVRW

Here is what I have to say on the matter. To get the layout done as fast as possible use RTR. THEN when the layout is "finished" you start gradually replacing all the RTR stuff with scratch built stuff. This way, you can get the layout done quickly and still have plenty to do when its "finished."

 

 

Good answer! 

To tell the truth, that's my philosophy and strategy as well...

 

John

[BobL609]

I am in a total quandry over this debate.  The majority of my rolling stock, motive power and structures were purchased RTR (with the exception of a few AccuRail reefers) which would definately make me a RTR individual.  However I built the room which houses the layout so does that make me a scratchbuilder?  I'm totally confused.

[jwhitten]

tomikawaTT

I don't see any versus.  I see RTR and scratchbuilding as the ends of a spectrum.  (No, NOT the Bachmann variety!)  Here's the entire spectrum, as split out by my flawed prism:

• RTR - out of the box, onto the layout.
• Tweaked RTR - out of the box, to the workbench, wheels, trucks and couplers inspected/corrected/changed if necessary.  No cosmetic changes.
• Cosmetically improved RTR - renumbered, weathered, maybe partially or completely repainted.
• Assembled kit - a broad and blurry line ranging from Athearn BB to craftsperson, "Handful of sticks and a set of plans."
• Superdetailed (can start as kit or RTR) - adding (or removing) bits and pieces to bring the model into line with the prototype's piping, pumps, brake fittings etc...  Should (but doesn't always) include a full cosmetic treatment.
• Kitbashed - cut-and-piece one or several kits to produce:  1.  A more exact representation of a specific prototype, starting with a 'generic' kit or RTR item.  2.  A 'foobie' to more exactly fit a certain ground plan.  3.  A wild feat of imagineering with no acknowledged parents.
• Semi-scratch - using complete mechanisms under heavily-modified or 'scratchbuilt' superstructures, or mingling kit subassemblies with scratch-assembled sections to achieve a desired appearance.
• Scratchbuilt with some commercial content - model assembled with commercial trucks, stamped ends, doors, brake gear, steam loco details (including drivers but not complete frame or mechanism,) commercial window castings...
• Totally Scratchbuilt - from raw materials, including turning wheels, assembling trucks, assembling windows from strip material.  Use of bulk plastic structural shapes is about the limit of pre-formed parts.

 

So, what am I?  It all depends on the situation.  With one disastrous exception I have never been a box-to-layout RTR modeler, but tweaked RTR may well be appropriate for a lot of my freight stock.  I have stopped at least once at every line of the spectrum with the exception of totally scratchbuilt - I have no interest in turning wheels.  It all depends on how badly I want a specific model of a specific prototype (or of something that both the AAR and the JNR would disown on sight.)

And what do I think of others?  I don't sit in judgement, I don't disparage honest effort and I don't try to define who is (or isn't) a 'true model railroader.'  The only question is, "Are you having fun?"

I am.

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - in whatever way is best at the moment)

 

 

That seems like a reasonable list that illustrates the Proto-2000 pretty well (oops, I meant Spectrum! :-)

But what about the *Layout*??? If you take any combination of those pieces and build youself a "unique and personal" layout, where does it fall along your spectrum?

[dehusman]

Driline

dehusman

If a modeler buys a RTR model, then he is a RTR modeler.

 

Hmmm....So if I scratchbuilt all the structures on my layout and fabricated all of my rolling stock and I buy ONE...just ONE RTR model that makes me a RTR modeler? Hmmmmmmm.....

How about those of us who have done all aspects of what you list above?

The question was to define a RTR modeler or a scrattchbuilder.  Since the question was not about a single model but albout the modeler in general, that implies we are talking about the modelers efforts in general.  If you scratchbuilding 99.999999999999999999% of stuff then we aren't talking about the fraction you buy RTR.

The instant question illustrates why these "discussions" are inherently a waste of time.

[andrechapelon]

But what about the *Layout*??? If you take any combination of those pieces and build youself a "unique and personal" layout, where does it fall along your spectrum?

What difference does it make and why should it matter?

According to the song..

CHORUS

lot-dah-dah-dah (lot-dah-dah-dah)
lot-in-dah-dah-dah

'n' it's all right now, learned my lesson well
You see, ya can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself

http://www.lyricsdepot.com/ricky-nelson/garden-party.html

Andre

[blownout cylinder]

jwhitten

Nobody should feel angst, at least not in my opinion-- but you pointed out there's a split-- how did you know that if you didn't feel it yourself or else were at least aware of other people's views?

There is! That is why we can get into these things in the first place

I think that's where hair splitting comes from

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

andrechapelon

According to the song..

CHORUS

lot-dah-dah-dah (lot-dah-dah-dah)
lot-in-dah-dah-dah

'n' it's all right now, learned my lesson well
You see, ya can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself

I still have that record!, yes record, like in vinyl, and about 1800 other albums from that era.

Sheldon

[blownout cylinder]

jwhitten

Driline

 Here's my definition of RTR. Complete train layout bought and purchased in a briefcase. Simply plug and play.

Do I want one? Oh He** yes 

 

 

That's cool. Wonder how much something like that costs !??!

IIRC there were some in Z scale that cost around $400 a few years ago. But I can't remember who put them out---

Driline: If you got the Z scale one would you need bifocals?

[UP 4-12-2]

After assembling a cut of Intermountain PFE reefers and 40' box cars years ago, that cured me forever from building kits.  The hassle and frustration involved in building the Intermountain freight car kits allowed me to see that the Chinese produced product appears on average more neatly assembled than what I am able to do.  Plus, I did not derive ANY enjoyment from building those last freight car kits--only frustration.

I enjoy taking a fine model out of the box, putting it on the layout, and running it--so I'm now firmly in the RTR category.

I used all Kato sectional track and turnouts on the layout.  However, the scenery is where my time and effort is going--when money allows and I'm not running trains.

I plan to use factory assembled buildings where possible (only need a few since modeling rugged desert and mountain terrain).

John

[jwhitten]

BobL609

I am in a total quandry over this debate.  The majority of my rolling stock, motive power and structures were purchased RTR (with the exception of a few AccuRail reefers) which would definately make me a RTR individual.  However I built the room which houses the layout so does that make me a scratchbuilder?  I'm totally confused.

 

 

Uh, I think that makes you a General Contractor...

 

[jwhitten]

andrechapelon

But what about the *Layout*??? If you take any combination of those pieces and build youself a "unique and personal" layout, where does it fall along your spectrum?

What difference does it make and why should it matter?

 

 

It doesn't matter a whit-- its just something to discuss on a Friday afternoon.

[jwhitten]

blownout cylinder

jwhitten

Driline

 Here's my definition of RTR. Complete train layout bought and purchased in a briefcase. Simply plug and play.

Do I want one? Oh He** yes 

 

 

That's cool. Wonder how much something like that costs !??!

IIRC there were some in Z scale that cost around $400 a few years ago. But I can't remember who put them out---

Driline: If you got the Z scale one would you need bifocals?

 

 

Bifocals heck! If I got one of those I'd need an Electron Microscope !

[selector]

UP 4-12-2

After assembling a cut of Intermountain PFE reefers and 40' box cars years ago, that cured me forever from building kits.  The hassle and frustration involved in building the Intermountain freight car kits allowed me to see that the Chinese produced product appears on average more neatly assembled than what I am able to do.  Plus, I did not derive ANY enjoyment from building those last freight car kits--only frustration...

This has been my experience largely.  Not always, but mostly, and the finer the kit, the less I enjoyed the experience or found I was happy with the results.  So, this takes time and commitment to become proficient, something I have no real interest to do. 

Each of us has to define our 'good enough' so that we leave the bench or the layout having enjoyed the time.  Not to say we should avoid all troubles or unfun moments, no, but they should be controlled to be few as a general rule.

The hobbby has so much to offer such a wide variety of ways to enjoy the hobby.  I don't make it a pursuit to compare my way of enjoying it to the way others describe their approach.  Instead, I am grateful for the variety because it makes any one new interest possible on the backs of those who have gone before me.

We should each judge our capabilities and need for growth wisely.  In my case, scratching out a turnout or two, and fashioning something resembling a functional bent frame trestle were lots to keep me challenged while I was also building spline roadbed for the first time.  By that time, I knew building model kits of any kind was just going to be a chore.  No, thanks.

-Crandell

[jecorbett]

Scratchbuilding, kitbuilding, kitbashing, and RTR are all valid choices for acquiring the various components that go into layout building. We all make these choices based upon our time, budget, and skill level. Almost all the structures on my layout are either kit built or ready built. Same with my rolling stock. All my locos are RTR. A few are undecorated that will require nothing more than decals added. I've never scratchbuilt a structure in my life. That doesn't mean I never will. I've just never had the need to do so. The kit built and ready built stuff looks just fine to me, and probably much better than anything I could scratchbuild. Every year we get more and more ready built stuff that looks good right out of the box. To me, all of the above choices are simply a means to an end. I don't consider myself a model builder. I consider myself a layout builder. The kit built and ready built components on my layout might look exactly like those on thousands of other layouts but the way I arrange them and integrate them with my railroad is going to be unique. My layout is going to be one-of-a-kind.

[jecorbett]

I thought I'd add one more perspective to this discussion. I've always thought of John Allen as the ultimate scratchbuilder. His Gorre and Daphetid was showplace for some of the most outstanding scratchbuilt structures of his time. At the time he was modeling, RTR was practically non-existent and the choices in kit built structures was much more limited than today. He scratchbuilt because that was the only way to get the structures he wanted for his layout. Last year, I acquired a DVD of the only know color film footage of the G&D. I was mildly surprised to see that even John Allen used some very common plastic kit built structures that are available even today. These rarely, if ever ended up in publiished photos of the layout because his scratchbuilt structures were so magnificent. Apparently, even John Allen realized that time is not an unlimited commodity and that to fill his layout space, he would need to use some kit built structures to do that. I have no doubt in my mind that if he were modeling to day, he would take advantage of some of the great looking prebuilt structures that are no available..

[jwhitten]

jrbernier

It is all personal choice.....

Jim Bernier

 

 

Sure it is. My question is not about "Who's a what" but rather how people define the terms-- what constitutes what.

[jwhitten]

Geared Steam

blownout cylinder

OK---glad to see someone opening up a can of worms to see what they look like

I'm a bit of everything myself. I don't think that there is a need to get into a period of existential angst over this split in the first place.

But some, I feel, might.

 

I have to agree with Barry, I'm not sure what value this thread will serve, but I'll bite.

Personally, when I view another persons layout, I try to understand his vision and what he is wanting to portray, be it a little branchline in the desert with 0-4-0's or the BNSF mainline through Glacier. I never look at the layout to "measure up" the creator, that's never been my interest in the hobby, and I  don't care to categorize people to begin with. Most of us are talented in some areas and not so much in others areas, or we aren't interested in a certain aspect of the hobby. We go the easy route so we can spend time doing what we enjoy doing.

My Humble Opinion

 

 

It is not my intent and was not in the beginning to label anybody as a this or a that. I simply want to know / understand how people define the TERMS themselves and compare those.

[jwhitten]

davidmbedard

Labels, labels, labels.  There is not another topic that will garner more arguments than labels.

Even if we label ourselves oneway, others will look at us differently.

The question is why use labels and why are they so important?  Why is it when we introduce ourselves, some people prefer to be called Dr.  rather than Mr?  Do labels give us our identity or do we use it as a way to differentiate?   To make us special?  So we can be grouped in the subset of our society called Dr.?  Are they there to tell others about our achievements?  Do I introduce myself as Dave the scratchbuilder or Dave the Modelrailroader? 

In our hobby (and notice the word "our), we are all labeled, like it or not.  These labels come quickly as someone talks to us or sees our work...it is called a judgement.

Now, in terms of the OPs' question, scratchbuilder vs RTR'er.........why make such labels in this hobby?  They sound absolute and exclusive.

Personally, I enjoy some RTR stuff, and I also Scratchbuild from time to time.  Each has it's place, and each it's reward.

Now, if I change out the couplers on an RTR unit, wouldnt that make it not so RTR?  

OTOH, if I use commercially available drivers for my Scratchbuilt steamer, does that make it a kit bash instead?  

I will submit to you that RTR and Scratchbuilt book-end a whole slew of labels what are a part of our hobby.  And I submit the list as is follows (and should be used to describe the MODEL, not the MODELER).

RTR out of the box.

Added/changed Couplers to RTR

Added/changed Couplers/Trucks to RTR

Assembled Kit

Assembled Kit with other MFG detail pieces/trucks added/changed

Kit bashed model with 2 or more MFG kits involved

Scratchbuilt model with other MRG parts added.

Scratchbuilt model with MFG couplers/trucks added

Scratchbuilt model with MFG couplers added

Scratchbuilt model with NO MFG parts involved.

 

Feel free to discuss my list.  I dont care for labels, but this list shows how one label will run into another.

David B

 

 

 

Please go back and re-read my original question -- it was not about who's a what, it was about the terms themselves-- how people define them, where the boundaries are, etc.

[jwhitten]

selector

Not always, but mostly, and the finer the kit, the less I enjoyed the experience or found I was happy with the results. 

 

That's an interesting thought-- I can understand your viewpoint. Sometimes there is some fun in "getting there" and sometimes there can be too much "getting there" that gets in the way of the fun. 

 

[Robby P.]

 I guess I will chime in.

 I buy RTR cars, engines, etc......  I'm not much of a "scratch builder" at all!!!  I would like to be able to build my own buildings.  I don't think I would go as far as building my own cars, or even more........turnouts or track laying. 

 If I build a building for my layout, its not the best in the world, but I'm happy with it.  Nothing like some modles I've seen, believe me.

 I guess what I'm saying is......

 I would like to build something (building , etc..), but I don't think I can, well at least half decent looking.  So I will spend the extra and get it ready to go.  

[Scarpia]

jwhitten

Scarpia

The one trend that I've observed in my short time is that the best work in modeling seems to be done by the folks who are enjoying themselves first and foremost.  If by enjoying themselves that means buying RTR and/or scratchbuilding or kitbashing to create a model they want, than that's alright.

 

Of course and absolutely.

But aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

 

 

I'm afraid I don't follow you here, and I'll put it down to a definite lack of sophistication on my part.

[blownout cylinder]

davidmbedard

 

 Please go back and re-read my original question -- it was not about who's a what, it was about the terms themselves-- how people define them, where the boundaries are, etc.

 

Did I read this wrong?

Who's the scratchbuilder and who's the RTR'er ???  And how blurred are the boundaries?

It sure looks like labels to me.......?

David B

That was, more or less, what was at base in my can of worms comment.

That can be an issue.

Maybe rephrasing the question like this---

" what do these terms-scratchbuilding, RTR-ing and kitbashing/building mean to you?"

----might have helped

I think this is a matter of who is doing the reading as much as the writing. But it is in that writing that one draws out those inferences. To me those terms are not as sharply "labelistc"---sheeesh, that word looks odd----as they might appear to someone else. I can see, though, that it can become a problem.

[andrechapelon]

Sure it is. My question is not about "Who's a what" but rather how people define the terms-- what constitutes what.

This thread is starting to sound like an Abbott and Costello routine.

No, no, no. Who's on first, what's on second and I don't know's on third.

IOW, if you know who's who and what's what you can close the book on the whole thing because that's that.

Don't ask Why since he's way out in left field.

Andre

 

Andre

[Bill H.]

jwhitten

Here's a question which I'm sure is guaranteed to generate some interesting discussion....

 

Yes, to say the least.

From Wiki: (I'm pretty much in agreement)

Scratch building is the process of building a scale model "from scratch", ie. from raw materials, rather than building it from a commercial kit, kitbashing or buying it pre-assembled.

Scratch building is easiest if original plans of the subject exist; however, many models have been built from photographs by measuring a known object in the photograph and extrapolating the rest of the dimensions. The necessary parts are then fashioned out of a suitable material, such as wood, plastic, plaster, clay, metal, polymer clay, or even paper, and then assembled. Some purists consider a model not to be truly scratchbuilt unless all of the parts were made from raw materials. However most modellers would consider a model including commercial detail parts as scratchbuilt.

The reasons hobbyists scratchbuild may vary. Often a desired model is unavailable in kit form in the desired scale, or entirely non-existent. Sometimes the hobbyist may be dissatisfied with the accuracy or detail of kits that are available. Other times a hobbyist will opt to scratchbuild simply for the challenge. Less frequently a hobbyist will scratchbuild out of economy, as sometimes the raw materials cost less than a packaged commercial kit.

 

[tomikawaTT]

What about the layout?

Well, what about it.  If you want another spectrum:

• Turnkey purchase - just add trains, plug in and play.  This can be anything from the neighbor's 4x8, abandoned when he went to around-the-walls, or a multi-million dollar custom built, accurate to the last peeling poster and discarded newspaper, in what used to be the drawing room of your 37-room hovel.
• Kit purchase, a' la Woodland Scenics, specific track plan with complete materials stock and assembly instructions.  Just put it together.
• Pre-planned, out of one of those ### track plans for (fillintheblank.)  No thought required, just work.
• Modified pre-plan, in an attempt to graft on features of the XY&Z or increase operating interest.
• Generic plan-your-own.  Start with a general idea, prototype or geographic area and bend and loop the schematic to try to get all the sphagetti into a bowl of finite size.
• Specific plan-your-own.  Either a believeable freelance railroad placed on enough square (whatevers) to be comfortable, a specific prototype route reproduced as nearly as selective compression and reality will allow, or some combination of the above.

 

And what about the people who do one, several or all of the above?  Last time I looked they were model railroaders.

Chuck (Who has been several of the above, modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

[Doughless]

jwhitten

 Is a scratchbuilder someone who meticulously constructs a model using unfabricated source materials?

Its about how the major parts of the final product are fabricated and assembled.  If the walls and roof of the building or boxcar is part of a kit, and assembled in the way they were designed to, then it is not scratchbuilt.  If you use the major parts of a kit to construct your own creation, hacking up walls, or adding your own fabricated walls in places, then something should be considered scratchbuilt.

[twhite]

John: 

I'll try and answer your question from a purely personal standpoint, having been in this hobby for a large number of years. 

For me, frankly, the definitions get blurred depending on the project at hand.  I suppose the definition that matches my own modeling would be "Kit-Basher".   I've never built a locomotive from 'scratch', but I've 'rebuilt' a number of steamers (yes, even--GASP!--brass ones ) to at least represent the kind of prototype that I've needed and have not been commercially available.  

Several projects (especially 'foresting' my layout) require me to use materials in combinations that perhaps the materials weren't originally designed for.  Does that make me a 'Scratch-Builder' or a 'Kit Basher"?  I really don't know.   Are home-made evergreen trees 'Scratch-built' or 'Kit-Bashed' ?  Darned if I know, LOL! 

I've 'adjusted' and 'adapted' several bridge kits for my MR.  Yes, those are 'Kit-Bashed'.  Also, most of my structures.  The scenery is 'scratch-built'.  Wait a minute, the scenery is composed of commercially available plaster cloth, foam, rock castings, hydrocal, Sculptamold---

A lot of my rolling stock is RTR.  Except for wheels and couplers.  So they're not 'really' RTR, according to some criteria.  Some of them are kits, everything from 'shake the box' to Craftsman wood, resin and metal.  And even the Craftsman kits usually either have added trucks and couplers, or couplers changed out. 

So what I'm trying to say, at least from my own personal viewpoint and experience in the hobby, is that the various 'approaches' (and I hesitate to call them "Labels")--RTR, Kit-bashing, Scratch-Building--often get blurred into one another, depending on the project at hand. 

Hope I haven't confused the issue further. 

Tom  

[TMarsh]

Wow. On the fourth page and I'll have to say there is at LEAST some part of something everyone says that I agree with.

For what it's worth, a more direct answer of my opinion is, that the line between the types of model building, not the modeler type or label, is very opinionated based on what the individual modeler defines as a dividing point. I don't believe it will ever be cut and dried like what is 2 plus 2 or even what is the difference between a Union Laboror or an Operator. There is a difference, but at what point does it change is the sticking point. Even if the NMRA comes up with a strict definition I don't believe it will be readily accepted by every single one of us.

twhite

So what I'm trying to say, at least from my own personal viewpoint and experience in the hobby, is that the various 'approaches' (and I hesitate to call them "Labels")--RTR, Kit-bashing, Scratch-Building--often get blurred into one another, depending on the project at hand. 

 

Or, might I suggest, the opinion or feelings, of the modeler.

EDIT: OK 5th page.

[IRONROOSTER]

I reject both labels. In the past I have scratchbuilt including building the windows, craftsman kit built, shake the box kit built, screwdriver kit built, plunked RTR out of the box on the layout.  I expect I'll do all of it again in the future, but none of those define my approach to the hobby.

I am a builder and operator of layouts.  I use and do whatever it takes to satisfy my own desires.  Having just bought my retirement house I will be building the "big one" in 1200 sq ft or so.  I don't expect to ever be finished, but I do expect to run trains within 2 years (I'm not retired yet so it'll take a while + the basement isn't finished yet).

What makes this hobby so great is all the different ways you can do things.

Enjoy

Paul