CNJ831 The hobby of model railroading is about modeling, not simply collecting high quality models offered by the manufacturers. Just how one can get a thrill, or even any great pleasure and pride of accomplishment, out of just taking something out of its box and plopping it down on the layout, totally escapes me. If the individual simply wants things that look their best on the layout, they need to move on to brass collecting, as the current generation of brass makes even the very best plastic RTR models pale in comparison. CNJ831
The hobby of model railroading is about modeling, not simply collecting high quality models offered by the manufacturers. Just how one can get a thrill, or even any great pleasure and pride of accomplishment, out of just taking something out of its box and plopping it down on the layout, totally escapes me. If the individual simply wants things that look their best on the layout, they need to move on to brass collecting, as the current generation of brass makes even the very best plastic RTR models pale in comparison.
CNJ831
If pride is how you get your jolly's thats fine. And I agree to some extent, that modeling is an important part of the hobby. But if you can't allow people to enjoy the hobby as they please, my british finacee has a cat who's back side you can kiss. Of course you pose two extreme's of which both are rediculous. Yes there are some people who buy only RTR trains and plop them on a layout which is just track nailed down to a piece of plywood. So what if they aren't real modelers? So what if they aren't part of an exclusive club that can take their lovely detailed models to shows and win awards and accolades. I joined a club of modelers in Syracuse who wanted to be in the magazines although I didn't know that was their goal. I built all their corner modules and one of them was mine to scenic. The took it away from me because it didn't reach their standards. Thats about when I decided that wasn't what I was in the hobby for. I'm in it for fun and enjoyment, not to be excluded. My modeling skills may never make me part of the pride and joy camp, but so what?
Without really desiring to completely hi-jacking this thread's intent, I nevertheless would have to say that RTR will only ever become totally dominant for one segment of the hobby. That one will either price itself essentially out of existence over the next 15-20 years, as brass did, or simply come to be regarded as a scaled down version of the high-end tinplate market. As I have pointed out here countless times, beginning about a decade ago the traditional model building hobbyists began to progressively separate themselves from the increasingly RTR faction. One sees this evidenced in the remaining magazines, the e-zines, and in the makeup of many forums and pod casts on-line, where there is less and less overlap evidenced in the differing areas of interests. Rather than dying out, the hobby's craftsman element is likely to continue well into the future because it is based on "doing" fairly inexpensively and through self improvement, rather than being about the increasingly costly collecting of museum pieces.
As I have pointed out here countless times, beginning about a decade ago the traditional model building hobbyists began to progressively separate themselves from the increasingly RTR faction. One sees this evidenced in the remaining magazines, the e-zines, and in the makeup of many forums and pod casts on-line, where there is less and less overlap evidenced in the differing areas of interests. Rather than dying out, the hobby's craftsman element is likely to continue well into the future because it is based on "doing" fairly inexpensively and through self improvement, rather than being about the increasingly costly collecting of museum pieces.
Certainly that is the right of anyone to separate themselves. But the kind of attitude displayed above isn't very inviting. If you want this exclusive club to go on shrinking keep it up. Or, you can encourage people in various or subtle ways to take steps into the world of modeling and going beyond RTR.
Now, RTR is what the market has been demanding or else the hobby would be producing it. The nice thing about much of the RTR stuff in the last 10 years is it is been getting increasingly detailed and has a much higher fidelity to the prototype than ever before. So for those which that is important, it brings the reality of making a model railroad with rolling stock which more closely mimics the real thing a possibilty. The old school modelers were modelers by necessity, both because there was very little on the market and because anything that was, was prohibitively expensive. Now conditions have happened in the past few years which is going to somewhat turn the clock back - the economy has gone south so many of us have fewer hobby dollars (raises hand) and the value of the dollar has gone down while the labor/manufacure costs have gone up. I have a goodly collection which I acquired while conditions were good. Times have changed and how I am collecting only an occasional model due to much lower income and much her costs of models.
So, yes, RTR models from Genesis, Tangent, Exact Rail, Walthers, Atlas are lovely and many are great matches rather than bogus stand-in's. For now RTR rules. It will be interesting to see where things go.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
ef3 yellowjacket I have seen my share of status-seeking, king-making, ad nauseum in my life, and choose to approach this, my way, because it makes me happy. To me, they look pretty darned good, and run well. That is all that counts, being as it is my money and time.
I have seen my share of status-seeking, king-making, ad nauseum in my life, and choose to approach this, my way, because it makes me happy. To me, they look pretty darned good, and run well. That is all that counts, being as it is my money and time.
Not into "Competitive Model Railroading huh? Me neither!
73
Ray Seneca Lake, Ontario, and Western R.R. (S.L.O.&W.) in HO
We'll get there sooner or later!
Per the question...
I think it is totally contingent upon wherer you ideals are. If this were a life-crucial thing, then many more things would come into play, but since it isn't, there is a lot of room for idealistic thinking.
In my collection, there is hardly anything I haven't "improved" (monkeyed with) on. Virtually everything I have is either kit-built, scratch-built, or kit-bashed. Why? Certainly not to achieve status-I couldn't care less if anyone other than my dog and me ever lays eyes on my collection. It is because that is something I LIKE to do; therefore, I consider it to be an essential part of my hobby. Notice I said MY hobby. Singular!
If one wants to watch his dinero, then if one checks around, one can certainly find some really good deals-you said it right- with regard to kits. No one apparently wants to build anything; therefore, according to the rules of suply and demand, kits would be the better way for you to go. To me, RTR is one of this hobby's self-defeating propositions; but that is only my opinion. The other guy has his and is certainly entitled to it!.
EF-3 Yellowjacket
What works best for me? My entire rolling stock collection is Athearn BBs. Absolutely loved building them, love the way they look, the colors, the vintage boxcar sides like Craft Cheese and Swift Meats and Carnation Milk. The way they roll a mile when you nudge them. I'll keep those black plastic wheels, thank you, and clean often. They're all Kadee'd and shimmed. I even glued the weights inside because on most of them the weight pushes the underframe lower. I don't care if the foot rungs are thicker. The molded details are fine by me too. There is something classically charming and innately practical about a BB. And the prices! From 2001 on I'd go around to all the LHSs and scoop up their old stock for $4-6 a car! Passenger cars $7-10. I built a huge fleet for pennies.
I tried A P2K kit once. Incredible detail, but you needed a microscope and a jeweler's skill to put it together, and forget about handling it, parts snapping off eveywhere.
BB is for me.
Hmmmmm...... Which looks better RTR or Kit/scratch built...... Hmmmmmmm...... Tough to say really.
Here is a photo of two flat cars. One is a Tichy kit I built, the other is a RTR. Can you tell which is which??? Which one would you rather have on your layout? As has been said, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder!" BTW, one is prototypically correct (more or less) right down to the brake work underneath, the other is a complete Fooby!
You be the judge.
GP39,Sorry, but you are dead wrong.
For one thing, if someone only has $10-$15 to spend on this hobby and actually goes to a hobby shop to buy stuff, one had better find something else to do. They'll spend that much just putting gas in their car to drive to the hobby shop. Perhaps stamp collecting would be more their speed.
This hobby has never been an inexpensive one...unless you're scratchbuilding from scrap metal, matchsticks, and recycled plastic. Go here: www.hoseeker.net They have a lot of the old catalogs from Athearn, Walthers, et al. From that website, Athearn's new RDC's came out in 1954. They then cost $14.95 each, and using the USGov't Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Calculator, that's worth $122.39 in 2011 dollars. The cost of the latest run of Proto 1000 RDC's from Walthers? $130.
Also in 1954, an Athearn boxcar kit cost $2.95. In 2011, that's a $24.15 value. Today, the latest run of 40' boxcars from Athearn RTR is $18.98.
So was the hobby "generally inexpensive" during it's "roots" period? Um, no, it wasn't.
Paul A. Cutler III
maxman TA462: People still aren't reading the question. What looks better is the question. Take out all the political crap about what makes a hobbiest vs a collector. The question is what looks better, period. The original poster very clearly said time is not a issue. People need to read the original post again. I can buy an assembled P2K covered hopper and an assembled P2K gondola, or I can buy the kit versions of the same model. Both end up being good looking models for the price. I prefer the kits because I can buy them cheaply since no one seems to want them. However as to which looks better on the railroad, if you apply Maxman's 3-foot rule I would defy anyone to tell the difference, especially in a moving train.
TA462: People still aren't reading the question. What looks better is the question. Take out all the political crap about what makes a hobbiest vs a collector. The question is what looks better, period. The original poster very clearly said time is not a issue. People need to read the original post again.
People still aren't reading the question. What looks better is the question. Take out all the political crap about what makes a hobbiest vs a collector. The question is what looks better, period. The original poster very clearly said time is not a issue. People need to read the original post again.
I can buy an assembled P2K covered hopper and an assembled P2K gondola, or I can buy the kit versions of the same model. Both end up being good looking models for the price. I prefer the kits because I can buy them cheaply since no one seems to want them.
However as to which looks better on the railroad, if you apply Maxman's 3-foot rule I would defy anyone to tell the difference, especially in a moving train.
It all depends on what you want.
If, like me, all you really want is moving markers in a game called 'prototypical operation,' anything that stays on the rails, couples when it's pushed against a standing car and uncouples where I want it to (and nowhere else) is better than anything that fails any of the listed requirements. Source, level of detail, overall appearance (as long as it's not totally gross) and price are largely irrelevant.
Since I am not a photographer, I don't really care that my models lack museum-quality detailing. If everything meets the 100 (scale) meter rule (about four feet) I'm satisfied. A lot of my models are sparsely detailed RTR. A few are highly detailed brass, built from kits. More than a few are kitbashes of no acknowledged ancestry. As far as I, personally, am concerned, all are equally, "Good."
If this makes me a heretic, so be it.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - but not a fanatic about it)
I miss having the choice; of an under $10 kit, compared to the rtr versions, at 2 or 3 times the price.
Sure, there is the secondary market for kits.
I do believe, the trend towards the higher priced rtr form, is not a good thing for the hobby. Don't you wonder, if your local hobby shops have lost some impulse buyer traffic. Those customers may only have about 10 or 15 dollars for trains that week. If the rtr starts at over the $15, do they even go to look anymore?
I see where the hobby and the manufacturers always want more of everything. They forget the roots of model railroading. It was generally inexpensive and the modeler had the choice to upgrade quality and costs when he could. Athearn has made a huge mistake, by stopping the blue box option.
Non Profit Train Video Review Information.
William
TA462 People still aren't reading the question. What looks better is the question. Take out all the political crap about what makes a hobbiest vs a collector. The question is what looks better, period. The original poster very clearly said time is not a issue. People need to read the original post again.
Give it up, dude, they're on a roll, just like John Belushi in "Animal House".
It's like asking which came first, the chicken or the egg. Sooner or later (but more likely sooner). the argument will devolve into one about who's the real egg connoisseur, the one who keeps chickens and gets his eggs directly from them, or the guy who buys his eggs at the supermarket.
Eventually, the guy who claims to know everything about the history of poultry comes along and we already know where that road leads. Arguments about free range chickens vs. the alternative, whether or not being a vegan is superior to being an ovolactovegetarian.
Andre
TA462 jfallon: I don't even consider Athearn's as RTR, they have to be taken completely apart and reassembled like a kit to run without derailments. John No they don't!!! You obviously don't have very much experience with them to make a very uneducated comment like that, lolol.
jfallon: I don't even consider Athearn's as RTR, they have to be taken completely apart and reassembled like a kit to run without derailments. John
I don't even consider Athearn's as RTR, they have to be taken completely apart and reassembled like a kit to run without derailments.
John
No they don't!!! You obviously don't have very much experience with them to make a very uneducated comment like that, lolol.
I agree..All I ever do to my Athearn RTR is add KD couplers..
BTW.99.9% of my RTR Athearn cars come spot on at coupler height. whereas the older BB kits I had to tweak to get the correct coupler height.
I still maintain that 99.9% of today's RTR cars are indeed superior in looks to the older cars regardless of brand...
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
I'm very proud of everyone here. 2 pages on the topic and the term "real modeler" hasn't come up.
Springfield PA
Athearn RTR cars (and a few others like Accurail) are mostly blue box style kits that have already been assembled, so which one looks "better" is pretty much a wash, but many manufacturers make highly detailed kits which most modelers can't match without expensive tools, loads of detail parts, and a lot of practice and patience. It's a safe bet that a $40+ RTR car will look better than almost any kit.
Railphotog So is your "hobby" buying models or assembling/making/working on models? Anyone with money can be a model railroad buyer, a model railroad hobbyist participates in the creation of his models and scenes.
So is your "hobby" buying models or assembling/making/working on models? Anyone with money can be a model railroad buyer, a model railroad hobbyist participates in the creation of his models and scenes.
I must agree with Railphotog. A trend has developed (thanks Tony K. and the MR mafioso) that says accuracy and pin point detail is the only acceptable standard. I enjoy the process along with the result of my modeling efforts.My goal is enjoyment and a sense of accomplishment from my hobby. If there is a degree of acurate reality mores the better.If the result is more toward the fantastic,so be it.
I have a model railroad because I like to run it, not just look at it. The extremely well detailed RTR models are not neccesarily good runners, plus they can be fragile. The few RTR cars I use are all Atlas or Proto 1000's, which run fine out of the box. I don't even consider Athearn's as RTR, they have to be taken completely apart and reassembled like a kit to run without derailments.
If everybody is thinking alike, then nobody is really thinking.
http://photobucket.com/tandarailroad/
I'm an electrical and mechanical type so when it comes to structures I build some kits but prefer RTR for larger stuff. Woodland Scenics has been putting some good stuff out lately. Here's a couple I have:
good post Dave, fwiw, beauty is in the eye.....
For locomotives, I prefer RTR. IMO, its tough to beat the painting and detail work of an RTR locomotive these days. Back in the day when Irv Athearn's products were state of the art, you could probably get better results by stripping, detailing, and repainting yourself
For rolling stock, I prefer Athearn, Accurail, or old MDC shake the box kits or Atlas Trainman RTR products. For whatever reason, fine details on rolling stock don't interest me that much, so if it has a crisp paint job, that's good enough.
I don't think that I would ever buy an RTR assembled structure. IMO, structures often need to be customized to fit a certain space or detailed for a particular type of business within them. The pre-painted and detailed RTR assembled products are very attractive, but I would find myself removing some details and adding others, making the purchase kind of a waste.
I don't even understand some of these pre-assembled structure products. I've seen Woodland Scenic pre-assembled structures that are of the small downtown general merchant type. You know, the kind that looks like an individual building sliced from a Walthers Merchant Row kit. In real life, those types of buildings are generally found attached together, like the merchants row kit has them, rather than individual buildings. The Woodland Scenics building has all four sides painted and detailed, making attaching them together wall to wall impossible, unless you want to un-detail one or two sides, making the $45 price a waste of money.
- Douglas
B&O SteamDemon Ok, which do you think looks better on the layout, the RTR's you can buy that have lots of details, or the kits you can buy and build and use on the layout? Assembly time is not an issue with this question, it's about visual and overall appearance on the layout. This applies to all aspects i.e. engines, freight cars, and passenger cars.
Ok, which do you think looks better on the layout, the RTR's you can buy that have lots of details, or the kits you can buy and build and use on the layout? Assembly time is not an issue with this question, it's about visual and overall appearance on the layout. This applies to all aspects i.e. engines, freight cars, and passenger cars.
I don't know why I post on this perennial subject, but here goes.
1. The expensive RTR stuff looks very good indeed. My very best efforts kit building can equal but not exceed the very nice stuff out there now.
2. I enjoy kit building, that's the fun part of the hobby for me. Others enjoy operations, electronics, scenery, hand laid track, photography, etc. So I will buy kits whether it makes sense to do so or not.
3. The industry would rather sell RTR than kits. They can price RTR higher than they can kits, and assembling the RTR overseas ain't all that expensive. They make more money selling a $30 RTR freight car than they do selling a $10 kit.
4. Viewed at layout distances (say two feet) most delicate superdetail is invisible. What counts is the paint job, the weathering, running characteristics (wobbles, leans, derailments, and unplanned uncouplings ruin the effect) and concealment of shiny plastic parts with an appropriate coat of paint.
5. It's a hobby. Enjoy it any way you can.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
blownout cylinder I suppose that, given the issue of there being loads more 'unskilled' MR's out there, as some would have it, then it would only be a matter of time for RTR to completely replace kitform as the way to go ... And, as some have put ...many kits 'as built' are not as neat, nor as realistic, in appearance as RTR could be..as say, a kitbuilt in the hands of a 'skilled' kitbuilder... Now, how are you going to encourage modelling as such...given that the kits could be, eventually, replaced entirely by RTR? Not that that will happen but...hypothetical here...hypothetical....
I suppose that, given the issue of there being loads more 'unskilled' MR's out there, as some would have it, then it would only be a matter of time for RTR to completely replace kitform as the way to go ...
And, as some have put ...many kits 'as built' are not as neat, nor as realistic, in appearance as RTR could be..as say, a kitbuilt in the hands of a 'skilled' kitbuilder...
Now, how are you going to encourage modelling as such...given that the kits could be, eventually, replaced entirely by RTR?
Not that that will happen but...hypothetical here...hypothetical....
Without really desiring to completely hi-jacking this thread's intent, I nevertheless would have to say that RTR will only ever become totally dominant for one segment of the hobby. That one will either price itself essentially out of existence over the next 15-20 years, as brass did, or simply come to be regarded as a scaled down version of the high-end tinplate market.
This depends on what cars you're talking about. there isn't much difference in an Intermountain 1939 ARA rtr boxcar or kit. Nothing compares to a rtr, Kadee PS car(any of them), but having built many Intermountain, Branchline, Red Caboose and P2k cars, there's nothing to compare them to. I also add details to kits, like Kadee roof walks to Intermountain kits and Intermountain roof walks to some Athearn kits. Atlas rtr are nice, but need cut levers and scale couplers, so I can't say what's best.
All of my locos are P2K, and I've had to add details and paint them to make them road specific, so until some makes one rtr for my road I can't compare.
Hi again,
I've nothing against those that buy vs those that build. To each their own, and the common bond we have of our love of railroading is what holds us together.
However, I do have a story I'd like to share..........
About 6-7 years ago I put together 13 of the Athearn ATSF standard passenger car kits, added KDs, American Limited diagphrams (spell?), Intermountain wheelsets, appropriate decals, tinted windows, nd some were airbrushed. The end result, especially pulled by a BLI Northern, is pretty special to me.
Not too long ago I picked up a number of Walthers RTR full size ATSF passenger cars, as well as some Spectrum RTR full sized cars. These cars are all scale length, have interiors and more detail, and yet I rarely ever run them.
Suprisingly, I always seem to gravitate to the trainset I built, rather than the one I bought, even though the RTR set certainly is more prototypical. Go figure......................
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
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/
As blownout cylinder mentioned, here we go once again. The original question wasn't "who is a real model railroader", but "which do you think looks better on the layout, the RTR's you can buy that have lots of details, or the kits you can buy and build and use on the layout?"
If it makes you feel superior to say you don't have money but you have a detailed layout, by all means. My goal, assuming I manage to have a place to build a layout again, is to model the Rio Grande with fairly accurate rolling stock for the period and good looking scenery. If including a lot of RTR stuff in that helps me achieve that goal, I don't care if people look down their nose at me because I'm not a "true" modeler. I'm not in this hobby to satisfy the high brows, but because I like trains and its fun.
Back to the original topic and question. The answer is as brakie pointed out, alot of RTR stuff looks superior. That isn't to say a skilled person can't make a freight car look great and many kits have nice detail but the newest products on the market are exploiting more state of the art tooling and tend to be superior in detail.
Hi!
Well, for freight rolling stock I greatly prefer kits, but for passenger I prefer RTR (which ALWAYS need adjustments, etc.). For Locos, RTR is definitely the way to go for me.
Structures are a subjective situation. All of mine are kits or kitbashed - most with weathering. That being said, the owner of one of the LHS said that the new "rtr" structures are models of what kit builders should look to achieve. I agree with that statement - to a point - but don't want to buy one.
Said another way, if I can build it and have it look halfway decent, that's the way I will go. That pride (if justified of course) of saying "I built it" means a lot to more than a few of us MRs...........................
I see it is time for one of these threads again...
I much prefer building the kits to my own specs...and if that means that I buy the "not as well detailed" kits then so much the worse for it......I mean, why should it be any skin off anybody else's nose what I should/shouldn't prefer RTR over kit/scratchbuilt in the first place?
I can see that this could become one of an issue of 'convenience' over 'labour'...
Actually today's RTR cars are superior to any kit car and compliments today's super detailed locomotives and in that light I perfer RTR..I have also noted these newer RTR models compliment a detailed layout that many modelers strive for.
Bob Boudreau
CANADA
Visit my model railroad photography website: http://sites.google.com/site/railphotog/
I also would have to agree that your choice of words might be better as one is the same as the other really. For instance, for years Intermountain offered only kits, then they quit offering their kits and only offer them as RTR, same thing for Proto although the time line was much shorter. Now it looks as though the same thing will happen to Branchline but basically they are both identical.
I feel that "which do you prefer" would be more accurate than "which is better".
Mark
NMRC