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

[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..

[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.

[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

[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 !

[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]

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...

 

[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

[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?

[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

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

[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

[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.

[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?

[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]

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

[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]

BRAKIE

John,Excellent question..

 

Thank you! At least *somebody* recognizes my obvious brilliance...  

 

BRAKIE

 As for me..I been in the hobby over 55 years and am yet to scratchbuild my first model.I never built a wood structure kit.. I have built 2 wooden caboose kits eons ago.

You see I am a very happy minimalist modeler that prefers prototype operation with plastic kit structures over building a wood kit or scratchbuilding...Of course I have kitbashed structures.

Isn't this a great hobby?

So,am I a

Scratchbuilder-no.

Craftsman-no.

A RTR''er..Perhaps

Just call me a happy minimalist modeler..

 

I hear the terms bandied about all the time and I know what they mean to me-- and probably even I guess what they mean on average to most people-- but I wondered how many people had ever really thought about it and had a specific definition or could come up with one.

Particularly: What is "scratch-building"?

That one seems the most elusive to pin down since most people who "scratch-build" use an assortment of ready-made products. It seems the level of personal involvement of the modeler is an aspect of the criteria. Perhaps the degree to which the parts needed to be shaped, molded or refined before they could be used is another.

But I am particularly interested in the question in the context of a whole layout builder-- certainly the overall aspect of planning, building (constructing), scenicking, laying track, assembling (acquiring) structures, placing everything "just so", etc, when considered in terms of the overall investment required is far more than the involvement with just any one small piece of it, and thus the "equation" (as it were) seems very similar to the more classical notion of "scratch-building" and yet I don't think people share a consensus opinion of that-- I didn't think they would actually when I asked the question, and the actual answers are seeming to support that belief.

I just find it interesting what we define and accept in one context we feel differently about when applied to a different context.

 

John

 

 

[jwhitten]

Sir Madog

I have yet to see the layout where every single item has been build and not bought R-T-R or assembled.

Should we exclude someone from the hobby, because he does not have the time or the dexterity for scratchbuilding?Spare me the answer!

 

Let me be perfectly clear -- my own viewpoint -- I hope we don't *exclude* anybody from the Model Railroading community if they wish to be included-- regardless of whether they collect trains, scratchbuild models, buy pre-made stuff off-the-shelf, or indeed even *OWN* a train or a book about trains-- or heck, can even SPELL the word T-R-A-I-N. 

I am of the opinion that if you say you're a Model Railroader, fine by me, far be it from me to say otherwise.

And that wasn't really the question I was asking anyway, I just was wondering what people's opinions were about Scratchbuilding versus RTR and Kit-Bashing (I'm including it because someone pointed it out and I would have mentioned it originally had I thought of it). 

I sincerely hope nobody is out there "keeping score" of who's what type of railroader by any sort of criteria other than self-selection.

Its all about the enjoyment of trains and having fun with the hobby.

[jwhitten]

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

My interest in trains is wide, BUT my model railroading GOALS are narrow. I am buiding a large but relatively simple freelanced railroad set in the Mid Atlantic of the USA in 1954. My ATLANTIC CENTRAL interchanges with the B&O, C&O an WM.

Beyond the equipment, structures, track, controls, scenery, etc I need for that, I buy NOTHING. I do not collect model trains. I am on a mission to build this and only this one model theme layout - and then to operate it in both display and prototype operation modes.

I will use any and all products to meet this goal, and will build, modify, customize, them as needed.

 

 

Sheldon,

Well said! I suspect that many, perhaps even most, of us are that type of modeler, or at least aspire to be. That is a good and sensible approach for sure.

[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?

 

[jwhitten]

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?

 

 

Exactly. I think you have hit upon the essence of my question. What if you grew the trees, chopped 'em down and sawed 'em into lumber to build all your structures, your benchwork and trees, scrounged your own lichen, blender-ized your own ground foam, built all your locos out of broomstick handles, bailing wire and string, turned your own wheelsets from steel that you personally made in your backyard forge, but ordered all your track from Atlas-- sectional no less!! Are you a scratch-builder or an RTR'er ???

 

[jwhitten]

dehusman

A RTR modeler is one who buys/acquires models of major components that are preassembled and may be used without major fabrication/assembly and uses them without major modification.

A scratchbuilder is one who builds/fabricates/assembles models of major components from basic materials or generic subassemblies (such as a motor, wheelset or light bulb).

If a modeler takes the basic materials, fabricates parts and assembles them to build a model  he is a scratchbuilder.

If a manufacturer takes the basic materials, fabricates parts and sells them unassembled, its a kit. 

If a modeler takes a kit or kits and builds something sustantially different than what the kit was intended to build, he is a kitbasher.

If a modeler takes a kit or kits and builds something sustantially the same as what the kit was intended to build, he is a kit builder.

If a manufacturer takes the basic materials, fabricates parts and sells them assembled, its RTR. 

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

 

 

So do you think then that someone who takes components, whether "scratch-built", kit-built, or RTR and then further manipulates them to build a "unique and personal" layout with them would be a "kit-basher" ? Could they ever be considered a "scratchbuilder"?

[jwhitten]

dknelson

I guess it is worth adding that I have seen scratchbuilt cars and structures that were frankly awful looking -- is it the endeavor to be praised just because of what it is, or are we talking about results? 

 

That's another good point. I suppose it partly depends on whether or not the scratchbuilder in question is your blood relative or simply a model being judged at arms length.

 John

[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 !??!

[grizlump9]

 i think most people do what it takes to get the model they want.  if the particular piece of equipment is available then they just buy it RTR or in kit form.

 now that i am retired and have a lot more time to spend at the work bench, i do tend to build and modify things more than i used to.  i am constantly turning out small structures from styrene and strip wood as well as satisfying my fetish for transfer cabooses.  yes, i do cheat on the cabs and start with a flat car just like a bunch of the real railroads did.

 years ago, i did scratch build a few gondola's but the p2k cars make my efforts look shabby in comparison so i doubt if i will ever build another one from scratch.  i just buy the p2k's.

 it seems some of this RTR (ready to repair) stuff takes about as much time and effort as scratch building since i have to undo before i can redo.

 as one grows older and has more time to spend on this hobby his skills develop so scratch building and kit bashing become more attractive.  another factor involved is that as the layout begins to get more and more crowded with equipment then the need to get something rolling is not so great and the occasional addition of a car or two is all it takes to keep me happy.

 funny how things change.  years ago the rtr and kit stuff made my feeble efforts look like crap and now the stuff i take my time to build has this same effect on the athearn cars on the layout.

grizlump

[Milepost 266.2]

RTR is simply another tool available to the modeler, no different than commercial track and switches.  A model railroad can have wonderful prototypical operation with carefully laid, properly wired, and ballasted code 100 flextrack, and by doing the research and making intelligent choices, a modeler can populate his layout with attractive and detailed rolling stock. 

 I think the blowback about RTR equipment has little to do with modeling and a lot to do with price.   The days of the $2.99 boxcar are over and they ain't coming back. It's the world's greatest hobby, not the world's cheapest hobby.

[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

 

[jrbernier]

 John,

  I use both 'RTR' and scratch-build/kitbash items for my model railroad.  I have scratch-built a lot of structures.  I do use commercial scribed siding and windows/doors for the most part.  I have never 'scratch-built' an engine, but have painted/detailed a lot of engines over the years.  All of the track on my current layout is standard 'flex' track and commercial turnouts - I have better things to do that hand spike(a previous layout was all hand spiked with code 70 rail).  My point is what are your priorities?

  I am the contest chairman for a NMRA Region, and using commercial parts is not cheating.  You may lose 'scratch-building' points, but a poorly scratch-built set of doors/windows will lose 'construction' points.  The modeler has to balance the gain in scratch-building points vs how good of a craftsman they are.  From the personal viewpoint, if the part or material is commercially available - I use it.  Maybe when I retire in two years, I will want to 'scratch' as much as possible.  It is all personal choice.....

Jim Bernier

[TMarsh]

I classify myself as a Model Railroader. Not a Railroad Modeler, a Model Railroader. I, as Driline has said, have done all and find uses for all. No, I don't claim to be good, I'm just a beginner of sorts, but I don't plan on buying exclusively kits, nor do I intend on scratchbuilding every structure. I enjoy kits, and of course my world includes structures that are not available as kits so scratchbuilding becomes necessary and that's OK because I enjoy and actually get more satisfaction from the completed project. Not that I don't get satisfaction from a completed kit.

I do have a question, and that is why all the concern over what makes you a what? Not just to the OP, but this subject has been brought up many many times. Labeling always causes these conversation to deteriorate. Some get offended as to what others are being called as it seems to invade their territory and they get offended as you are taking something hard earned away from them or cheapening an award they recieved. IMHO, the titles someone wears is purely relative to ones own perspective. The argument is and always will be "where to draw the line." There are those who say that to be a Scratchbuilder you must use all raw materials such as toothpicks or coffee stirs, flat pieces of balsa or styrene and keep your fingers off the premade store bought windows, doors, details etc. "That's a form of kitbashing. Scratchbuilding is everything from scratch". All the way to, "my railroad as a whole is scratchbuilt because my premade structures are no different than your premade bought windows. 

I personally admire every attemp everyone does at creating their little world. I enjoy looking at the layouts that consist of many or all prefab structures, as well as those that are kit built structures. My jaw drops at some scratchbuilt empires and I'll admit, when someone says it's scratch built and it looks perfect, I'm in awe. One thing I don't feel is that anyone should be labeled a Scratchbuilder or a Kitbuilder or whatever. You're never going to get all to see it the same way no matter what. Seems only to cause problems.

Just my and I don't expect all to agree nor do I suggest my opinion is correct.

[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)