Heck, the original motive power for my road was a Bachmann USRA 0-6-0 I had picked up off of the Internet for $7 or so. It died soon after, leaving with mostly diesels until recently, but has since served as playground equipment and scrap iron until it adopted its final form as Cherokee Valley 2-8-0 No. 34
DoughlessI think they may be the best buy around. I mean the older big blue box version of the sw8/9 made by LifeLike...not so much the new run by Walthers.
I should have said Life Like P2K SW8..
All of my LL P2K was purchase used..
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE My main locomotive will a P2K SW8
My main locomotive will a P2K SW8
Larry,
If anybody is starting out in the hobby and concerned about price, I would suggest they start with one of those locos since I think they may be the best buy around. I mean the older big blue box version of the sw8/9 made by LifeLike...not so much the new run by Walthers.
They are highly detailed, have interiors and directional lighting and run smooth as silk. Adding to Sheldon's comments about DCC, since they do not have a dcc plug and are considered DC only, they can be found at train shows and secondary markets for $35 to $45, brand new in box...since LL made a ton of them. They do not have the LL P2K cracked gear issue since the trucks are a different design.
And they also work well for transistion era layouts, or modern era layouts like your ISL. However, they are a switcher and some may want a bigger loco.
- Douglas
I have never liked DCC, just for the cost factor alone, so I don't blame you. However, the good enough has to have a point. Give me an old fashioned momentum throttle anyday! It is also a fairly excellent way to approach the hobby. If this gives you any idea, the CV roundhouse (local museum) has an American Flyer F-7 and one of those old papersided cars. Why, you might ask, would I keep one of those around? Because the CVRM is a museum of what I appreciate about the hobby and models that I have built and retired as better ones took their place. Why get rid of perfectly good equipment, especially when it also serves as a reminded not to get caught up with the details?
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Seems to me, I posted what I thought were some good thoughts on saving money in that thread, and was scolded for it. What did I say you ask? - I simply suggested that people should seriously consider their modeling goals and possibly forgo DCC and/or sound.......
Seems to me, I posted what I thought were some good thoughts on saving money in that thread, and was scolded for it.
What did I say you ask? - I simply suggested that people should seriously consider their modeling goals and possibly forgo DCC and/or sound.......
Rich
Alton Junction
Jack Derby Partially, though, that's because we have forgotten the "good enough" representations that used to characterize the hobby
Jack Good enough/close enough has been my modeling philosophy for years even though I own around 38/39 of the higher end freight cars toward my needed 60 for my normal ISL car rotation.. I'm in no hurry since I am just buying the cars I need for my industries and I will mention several of these cars was bought use for a fraction of their cost.
My main locomotive will a P2K SW8 lettered for Slate Creek Rail (SCR). Of course my BB SW1500 lettered for Summerset Ry will be used. I added the cab interior and drive from a used Athearn RTR SW1500 purchase for $45.00.
Jack,
I agree as well, and have made similar points earlier in this thread. I like fine detail, but not every item on the layout needs to be a "contest winner". I run everything from current high end RTR to blue box Athearn.
I have a fair amount of old Athearn and Varney metal cars, I think they hold up pretty well in the appearance/detail area.
I do think close enough is good enough in a lot of cases, and have made the argument for things like generic commpressed passenger cars and such. This assumes that the goal is to model the railroad, and give a reasonable overall impression.........not be obsessed with each piece of equipment.
Now I am bound to get in more trouble here, but a recent post above asked about a thread focued on saving money in our modeling, our host commented that we have one, and provided the link - non working as it is......
I bring this up because it fits right in with ther view that everything does not have to be high end, over the top, latest and greatest to have nice layout and enjoy the hobby.
But the truth is this has added measurable cost to the layouts of many modelers. And OK, if those aspects of the "new hobby of model trains" are what do it for you great - but then don't complain about $500 loco prices........
Never complaining about the cost of the hobby, just picked up three more steam locos, new in the box, dollar cost average $146 each. What are they? Spectrum 2-8-8-4, and two Spectrum 4-8-2's.
Sheldon
Thanks rich. I personally think that some days we just need to go into our archives and read those old articles and reviews. That's part of why I built my layout the way I did, is because I was content with "good enough"
Jack Derby While I'm not saying to go back to the crude level of detail and over scale models that characterized most of the lower end in the 1950's through 1970's, I do think that we are getting too caught up in the details rather than the universals. Now then, I think that I have ranted long enough, but I think that some of the older modelers, at least, can understand where I am coming from here.
While I'm not saying to go back to the crude level of detail and over scale models that characterized most of the lower end in the 1950's through 1970's, I do think that we are getting too caught up in the details rather than the universals. Now then, I think that I have ranted long enough, but I think that some of the older modelers, at least, can understand where I am coming from here.
I agree on the used equipment front.... I don't think I own a single HO scale piece of equipment made after 1995 or so. I think that that was probably because I acquired most of it while hunting for tinplate, but it runs fairly well with a little work. Plus, in terms of the cost, here's how it sits with the models: we are clamor ing for more and more detail for our equipment, yet with the extra labor that goes into designing that new motor to fit under that tiny, fine scale hood, that goes into attatching all the small detail parts at the factory, all the avoiding of "good enough", we can't expect the same prices for better work. Partially, though, that's because we have forgotten the "good enough" representations that used to characterize the hobby. I mean, sure, the older modelers scratch built some amazing pieces to make up for that lack of detail (Jan 1950 MR Showstopper, case in point), but most of their equipment just represented the prototype and suggested the detail, so as to fill space for operation. So if we are going work with a "good enough" standard for our scenery, we should remember to apply that standard to ALL aspects of the hobby, not just one. While I'm not saying to go back to the crude level of detail and over scale models that characterized most of the lower end in the 1950's through 1970's, I do think that we are getting too caught up in the details rather than the universals. Now then, I think that I have ranted long enough, but I think that some of the older modelers, at least, can understand where I am coming from here.
Try this, Catt:
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/88/t/239243.aspx
Or this:
Or you may have to cut-and-paste it into your browser. Something's a little flaky with links right now, which may be why Steve's link wasn't working, too.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
Steven, have you got a functioning link for that trad?
Catt I think an ever better thread would be solely designated for how we do things ourselves to save a few bucks here and there.
I think an ever better thread would be solely designated for how we do things ourselves to save a few bucks here and there.
--Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editorsotte@kalmbach.com
Personally I hope this thread lasts forever,that way we all have one place (and one place only) to P&M about how expencive the hobby is getting.
riogrande5761High quality never was cheap, and low and moderate quality stuff from "the good old days" is still out there and lots of it!
Think so? I know three train show dealers that wished there was more out there.
Even back in the 70/80/90s models wasn't cheap. Some locomotives would cost three hours pay at full MSRP instead of half your paycheck like today.
Anyway..
Let's looked at it realistically. A top tier locomotive with DCC/Sound cost as much as a PS4 or XBOX-1 at full MSRP and yet gamers complain more about the features missing between the two systems when the systems is compared side by side then the price.
We are getting museum quality cars and locomotives for our money-if we choose that route or we can buy the better older models like Atlas,P2K and some older Kato..Trainman,Athearn(RTR) and Walthers can supply reasonably priced nice looking freight cars at street.
Just don't expect buy these (so called) second tier models at yesteryears BB prices.
richhotrain Steven Otte I created this thread partly in hopes that those who felt like complaining about how much things cost these days would see that it's all been said before, and refrain. Seeing as how most of the 13 pages of this thread are actually the same people making the same points over and over, that's not working so well actually... At least, here, it's contained. Steven, I am beginning to think that it may be time to lock this thread. Rich
Steven Otte I created this thread partly in hopes that those who felt like complaining about how much things cost these days would see that it's all been said before, and refrain. Seeing as how most of the 13 pages of this thread are actually the same people making the same points over and over, that's not working so well actually... At least, here, it's contained.
I created this thread partly in hopes that those who felt like complaining about how much things cost these days would see that it's all been said before, and refrain.
Seeing as how most of the 13 pages of this thread are actually the same people making the same points over and over, that's not working so well actually...
At least, here, it's contained.
Steven, I am beginning to think that it may be time to lock this thread.
But then someone will hijack another thread and start all over again.
Might as well leave it all here.
Enjoy
Paul
mlehman richhotrain For me, it is track, particularly specialty track. Example: Walthers Shinohara Code 83 DCC Double Crossover - MSRP - $99.99 Insane, even at discount prices. Dead OK, but what do you get for your money? 4 turnouts, plus a crossing, all of it preassembled. List on the turnouts is now $29.99. A roughly comparable crossing (30 degrees) is $26.99. Total of all is $146.95 MSRP. So you're getting the assembled package for roughly 50% off. Feel better?
richhotrain For me, it is track, particularly specialty track. Example: Walthers Shinohara Code 83 DCC Double Crossover - MSRP - $99.99 Insane, even at discount prices. Dead
OK, but what do you get for your money?
4 turnouts, plus a crossing, all of it preassembled.
List on the turnouts is now $29.99. A roughly comparable crossing (30 degrees) is $26.99. Total of all is $146.95 MSRP. So you're getting the assembled package for roughly 50% off.
Feel better?
When talking to other MRR´s, I have to admit that I sometimes, rather rarely though, complain about the cost of the hobby. I am not complaining so much about the prices of locos and rolling stock, as I hardly buy any new stuff, but I do complain about the prices for accessories, lumber (!), Styrofoam and - glue! For whatever reason, I always fail to stock the glue I need for a project, so I just run to our local home improvement shop and, boy - do the charge you! Today, I paif $ 8 for a tiny bottle of super glue!
Whenever I talk to my wife about model railroading, it is one of the cheapest hobby, yet the dearest to me!
I'll do my best not to repeat myself...
There is a pardoxically ironic aspect to those who constantly complain the hobby is too expensive, at least doing it online. I suppose it would make very little difference if I did it in person to the few friends who might tolerate such a fixation on a topic. But creating what seems like of crowd of people yelling "It's too expensive" could very well result in exactly that happening.
How?
Well, if the first thing (or 2nd, 3rd or 4th, for that matter) people stumble across in searching for wisdom about this cool hobby they've heard of is that "it's too expensive," then they are that much more unlikely to participate. Fewer people = more expensive hobby.
In effect, the constant fertilizing action of such complaints may deliver exactly what they ostensibly seem to oppose, a "too expensive" hobby.
Yet another reason to keep it contained. Let those who must shoot themselves and the rest of us in the foot have their say, but let's try to avoid our hobby seeming unnecessarily unwelcoming to those considering joining us.
Containment is a good thing. At least this is where those of us who have heard this topic beaten to death adnauseum over the last 5 or 6 years can still choose to tolerate it when people inevitably return from a long absence away from the hobby only to come in and blow a gasket all over again.
Then we all can come down on them like a ton of bricks and tell them don't worry, there is tons of cheap stuff out there for the taking if you don't like the price of a BMW or Mercedes model. High quality never was cheap, and low and moderate quality stuff from "the good old days" is still out there and lots of it!
I wonder why I haven't simply put my answer into a boiler plate to copy and past - would make it so much easier! *wink*
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Sir Madog Steven Otte At least, here, it's contained. ... and can thus be deleted with only a mouse click, if the need be
Steven Otte At least, here, it's contained.
... and can thus be deleted with only a mouse click, if the need be
A click of futility..A new "Hobby is so blasted expensive" topic will rear its head in 30 days.
Steven,Be happy,very,very happy this isn't one of the many gaming forums where WW3 of words and wit could start any second over nothing.
What gets me is the cost of structures and scenic materials. I have yet to do much work on those fronts for exactly that reason
Steven OtteAt least, here, it's contained.
richhotrainFor me, it is track, particularly specialty track. Example: Walthers Shinohara Code 83 DCC Double Crossover - MSRP - $99.99 Insane, even at discount prices. Dead
Oddly its the cost of structures that gets my nanny goat. $34.98 for Walthers background buildings? Thank goodness for street prices.
I will add you get extra wall sections so,if one is keen on scratch building he could easily get another smaller background building-doors would need to be purchase as would bracing for the walls.A roof would need to be made from wide balsa wood or wide flat ABS plastic strips.
When you think of the hobby being expensive, what is the first item that comes to mind?
Locos, rolling stock, electronics, track?
For me, it is track, particularly specialty track.
Example: Walthers Shinohara Code 83 DCC Double Crossover - MSRP - $99.99
Insane, even at discount prices.
I agree the topic is a valid one for discussion.
Having to wade through it to get to actual modeling everyday was getting old. When the Price Whining Complaint Dept. becomes the main topic of every discussion, it doesn't tell us much about the hobby. After all, it's a hobby about building stuff, not buying it. Or we might as well depend on Consumer Reports for our model RR news and info.
In other words, it's OK as a thread to let off steam, but it gets poisonous, toxic, whatever when repeatedly filling the forum. I don't see what difference having 20 such threads up here at once would have -- yes, that sounds like an exxageration, but not by much -- over having one thread cover the same basic info.
mlehman Rich wrote: I blame Mel for reviving this thread on Monday that had laid dormant for almost 6 months. Nah, Mel started his own thread, he didn't post it here. Steve edited it in, as IIRC several other of the contributions. That's why I made the comment about this being the other side of the "too expensive" coin, as I was actually expecting Steve to do that. It may seem repetitive, but people still want to talk about it in some form or fashion and I think it's fair enough to let them have a slot.
Rich wrote:
I blame Mel for reviving this thread on Monday that had laid dormant for almost 6 months.
Nah, Mel started his own thread, he didn't post it here. Steve edited it in, as IIRC several other of the contributions. That's why I made the comment about this being the other side of the "too expensive" coin, as I was actually expecting Steve to do that.
It may seem repetitive, but people still want to talk about it in some form or fashion and I think it's fair enough to let them have a slot.
Truth be told, I think the topic is valid, and I am disappointed that it can only be raised by continual revival of this particular thread.