rogertra wrote: So, we have another garden railway featured in MR. Why? There is a Kalmbach publication strictly for garden railways so why take up space in MR, which already lacks the "meaty" articles of years gone by, when it could have been published in the magazine created just for garden railways? Do they feature non-garden railways in the garden railway magazine.
So, we have another garden railway featured in MR. Why?
There is a Kalmbach publication strictly for garden railways so why take up space in MR, which already lacks the "meaty" articles of years gone by, when it could have been published in the magazine created just for garden railways?
Do they feature non-garden railways in the garden railway magazine.
The aritcles about HO probably are contained in our magazine, but who cares if our scale is in another magazine. I personally enjoy more than one scale and own many models in five different scales. .
Whatever is in MR is up to the editor. If they start articles on knitting and basket weaving, I probably would complain.
Alex
vsmith wrote:........................................ I didnt know Model Railroading was exclusive to HO or N, maybe the mag should be changed to "HO or N Only Model Railroader" ???
marknewton wrote:...I expect *all* of the content to be relevant to me.
Milwhiawatha wrote:I actually agree with rogertra. Ok I am sorry to say this garden railroading has its own magazine why should it eat up valuable Model Railroad space which should only feature HO, N Z, S, and O scale. I say Kalmbach should do scale specific magazines such as HO only or N scale only, etc. I mean if Garden Railroad (G scale) whynot tr others. I myself heave been toying with the notion of making an HO only magazine but lack funds to do so.
I don't understand why Model Railroader should only feature HO, N, Z, S, and O...When those who run G gauge are model railroaders as well. Garden railroading is another sense of model railroading. Same principle, same reasons to model...Just outside. G scale has every right to be included within Model Railroader.
Like some others here. I enjoy the occasional garden layout in Model Railroader. It is a break away from all the HO and N scale layouts featured, and a major change from the repeat layouts that we see.
Scott - Dispatcher, Norfolk Southern
Is it REAL? or Just 1:29 scale?
Long live Outdoor Model Railroading.
Try it, you will like it......
There is nothing wrong with GR in MR. Both deal with the same hobby, only one is a larger scale than the other. Some have both scales.
Myself, I like both 'N' and 'G', but model in 'G' because I do not have room in the house for either. I have plenty of room outside, so I model outside.
Having fun with 'G' scale.
Mark
M. Gilger - President and Chief Engineer MM&G web
Web Site: http://mmg-garden-rr.webs.com/
Can't we all just get along? Seriously, I don't see the problem. Not to sound stupid, but scale is exactly that.... SCALE. I have often taken ideas from O-scale scenes/structures/engines and applied it to my HO stuff.... called extrapolation. I do this at work, since the number of pediatric ICU articles is MUCH less than adult ICU medicine. But you just have to select what you read and how you apply it... just like in model railroading. So anyways, lets not make a mountain out of a molehill, here...
Brian
mgilger wrote: Try it, you will like it...... There is nothing wrong with GR in MR. Both deal with the same hobby, only one is a larger scale than the other. Some have both scales. Myself, I like both 'N' and 'G', but model in 'G' because I do not have room in the house for either. I have plenty of room outside, so I model outside. Having fun with 'G' scale. Mark
You don't understand. The scale Puritans can't stand those of us who appreciate what they consider to be toy trains even if we also appreciate fine scale modeling. IOW, anything other than pure scale is heresy and you will be ex-communicated from the ranks of model railroaders if you own, operate, admit to admiring, or just plain let it slip that you like something that's not absolutely true scale.
I own some 3 rail O gauge. I bought the items as a means of introducing my grandkids to model railroading (that's my story and I'm sticking it to it ), but I find I like running the things just for the pure fun of it. It certainly doesn't hurt that running trains causes the eyes of my two granddaughters (5 and 2) to light up.
I forget who it was who said that a Puritan is someone who is desperately afraid that someone somewhere is actually having fun (at least in an unapproved manner).
For many years, MR had the blurb "Model Railroading Is Fun" on the cover. Maybe they should re-instate it.
Andre
P.S. For the life of me I don't know why, but the first thing that came to mind when I encountered this thread was the character of Antonio Salieri in "Amadeus".
Marty Cozad wrote:I can see Rogers point. And there has been alot of other good points. Maybe the editor of MR has been getting request for a verity of model RRing articals .Personally I don't think most indoor modelers think of GRRers as ,"modelers" I know I never used to. But I look at myself as an outdoor model railroader, I scratchbuild, photograph, design and even once and awhile have fun with trains. Someday I'd love to share some ,,"modeling" tips in MR.. someday it maybe helpful to all scale modelers. Like my model???
marknewton wrote: "So stop acting like 3 year olds and get on with life." Telling people to get a life because you can't sustain your argument is acting like a 3 year-old...
marknewton wrote: But there's the rub - G "scale" isn't a scale at all, is it? And the typical garden layout isn't, and will never be, a model railroad, no matter how much you might like to argue otherwise. Mark.
As a long term HO fine scale modeler, and therefore a stickler for details, I must point out that G isn’t a scale or a gauge, it is a loosely defined term for large scale model railroads. The track is generally #1 gauge, but several scales are used. By definition a Model is "A)to shape or fashion in a plastic material. B) to produce a representation or simulation of C)miniature representation of something." quoted from merriam webster collegiate dictionary 10th ed. A railroad is.... if I need to explain what a railroad is on here to you, quit reading. So your point is wrong, no argument required, look it up in Websters. Now if you were trying to say that some, G modelers don't fit your standard of scale modeling, you may have a point from your point of view. I will make a counter point: I dare you to respond to! Take a picture of your layout and post it against Marty Cozads (if you say he is the exception I will get many other photos of many other outdoor railroads for you) and request which photo looks like a photo of a real railroad. I doubt you would win. But please try me, I would love the contest.
......
marknewton wrote: When I'm paying the full price for the magazine, I expect *all* of the content to be relevant to me. ...... Cheers, Mark.
IF ALL that is in MR is relevant to you, except for the garden railroad stuff, you must have a very interesting layout which involves many scales, eras, operation styles, conflicting operating systems, and is a model of the entire railroad system of North America. If you have all that, we all -in each and every railroad magazine Kalambach makes! -need to see that layout! No mater what scale/gauge/location you model.
Just in case you have not got it thru your thick head yet, I model in 2 scales. I am a member of both the local HO & G clubs. I am a stickler in every gauge I model. No mater how you respond to me about "something wrong with G", I can do the same about any other gauge, as I know faults about all.
Finally,
I assume you use prototypically correct radius, exactly how many scale miles is your railyard long, or how many scale miles do you have between towns? This problem is with all gauges/scales. If you don't have all this correct, you are making a scale error! If you DO have all this correct, I believe you would be the first RR modeler in history to do so, once again worthy of every mag. Some model railroads have more errors than others, but who are you to judge?
Fifty years ago the editors of MR wisely bannished 0-gauge tinplate/hi-rail from the pages of the magazine, clearly asserting in an editorial that in their view this was just playing with toy trains and not serious model railroading. Mis-named "G scale", which is not a scale at all but a hodge-podge of toys, highly caricaturish items, and (only recently) some semi-scale/scale equipment (but often which scale?), typically employed as an outdoor garden display, would surely have also been left out in the cold by the far wiser former editors of MR, had it existed back then.
I, for one, feel I am paying good money for my annual subscription to MR, long having considered it as a serious modeling magazine. At the same time, I've noted that the worthwhile scale modeling content there-in has been steadily decreasing for some years, such that one is now lucky to find 2 or 3 even mildly instructive articles among all the fluff, per issue. As a serious model railroader I do not wish to pay for, nor see, valuable space usurped by articles that have no honest relevance to scale modeling in a magazine that is 1/2 the size (page count) it was 15 years ago. If one has an interest in tinplate or garden railroading, both these areas have magazines devoted totally to them and that is where the material should stay. I've been on the edge of dropping my subscription to MR the last year or two, as 50,000+ former readers have done already, because of its increasing failure to carry serious modeling content. Throw in a couple more non-relevant or garden railroading pieces and I'm gone too.
CNJ831
The reason the content of MR has dropped off could be that less is being submitted for print by us.
Like any other magazine devoted to a particular hobby, they require us to submit articles for print, or the magazine goes wanting. Maybe MR would stick to printing articles on N & HO if they had enough material being submitted. I don’t think any of us are in the position of knowing what criteria they use.
MR is much like some other hobbies, in that less and less of the younger generation is coming up the ranks. They are all stuck in front of the tube playing the video games, etc. Take a hard look the next time you go to a train show. Less and less young folks are coming up the ranks. So with the older generation gradually dieing off and less younger generation to take our place, the amount of people subscribing to the magazine will of course drop off.
Then there is the price of the subscription. Who of us 10 years ago would have believed the price we would be paying for a subscription today? I would like to subscribe to more magazines than what I do, but it gets cost prohibitive, so I end up picking up an issue every once in a while at the news stand for the ones I do not subscribe to. I do subscribe to a half dozen, 2 being train related. Model Railroader and Garden Railroading being those two.
So it comes down to this. If it takes MR printing Garden Railroad articles, then more power to them if it keeps them in business. If more of us start submitting articles directed towards HO and N, then all the better. I for one hope the GR articles continue.
http://community.webshots.com/user/mvgilger
Regards,