skiloff wrote: I haven't started scenery yet, but I don't need scenery to run trains. Total cost - $773 if my math is correct. BUT, had I not wanted the Unitrack for the above mentioned reasons, it would easily be $250 less for Atlas flex track and turnouts. So, thats $525 to go Atlas, $775 to go with Unitrack and I have a working 3x9 layout. Is that expensive?
Please don't take offense but if you haven't any scenery started yet, you don't have a "layout" and that is why your cost so far is relatively low. A 4x8 Plywood Pacific can most definitely be put together for under $1,000 but that's far from being a real layout in most any serious hobbyist's book. You are going to find that reasonably completing your 3x9 will likely run you a further several thousand dollars, at least if you want it to look likely anything worth a second glance.
CNJ831
CNJ831 wrote: skiloff wrote: I haven't started scenery yet, but I don't need scenery to run trains. Total cost - $773 if my math is correct. BUT, had I not wanted the Unitrack for the above mentioned reasons, it would easily be $250 less for Atlas flex track and turnouts. So, thats $525 to go Atlas, $775 to go with Unitrack and I have a working 3x9 layout. Is that expensive? Please don't take offense but if you haven't any scenery started yet, you don't have a "layout" . . . CNJ831
Please don't take offense but if you haven't any scenery started yet, you don't have a "layout" . . .
CNJ831 wrote: skiloff wrote: I haven't started scenery yet, but I don't need scenery to run trains. Total cost - $773 if my math is correct. BUT, had I not wanted the Unitrack for the above mentioned reasons, it would easily be $250 less for Atlas flex track and turnouts. So, thats $525 to go Atlas, $775 to go with Unitrack and I have a working 3x9 layout. Is that expensive? Please don't take offense but if you haven't any scenery started yet, you don't have a "layout" and that is why your cost so far is relatively low. A 4x8 Plywood Pacific can most definitely be put together for under $1,000 but that's far from being a real layout in most any serious hobbyist's book. You are going to find that reasonably completing your 3x9 will likely run you a further several thousand dollars, at least if you want it to look likely anything worth a second glance. CNJ831
There are guys with no scenery that have 10 times the layout I have because they can operate it like a real railroad. Jerry Britton's PRR Eastern Region is an example. It's triple-decked in N scale. No scenery, but he can handle a typical 1954 day on the then-busiest railroad in the world. That's a layout in my book, scenery or not.
http://jbritton.pennsyrr.com/
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
CNJ831 wrote:Please don't take offense but if you haven't any scenery started yet, you don't have a "layout" and that is why your cost so far is relatively low. A 4x8 Plywood Pacific can most definitely be put together for under $1,000 but that's far from being a real layout in most any serious hobbyist's book. You are going to find that reasonably completing your 3x9 will likely run you a further several thousand dollars, at least if you want it to look likely anything worth a second glance.
Wow.. an answer that's both elitist _and_ factually incorrect. Nice two-fer.
Even if adding scenery _was_ necessary to make a layout, it could be done for a fraction of the several thousand dollars blithely thrown out here. Paint, plaster, cardboard strips, maybe some styrene or Strathmore for streets. That's a couple hundred bucks (US _or_ Canadian) at most. Lay in some scratchbuilding supplies and you're set for years of fun for not a lot more cash.
Jon
Fellas, let's not get into a contest here trying to decide what is a layout "A Layout"
Sure you spend 800 dollars on the 3x9 but it seems focused and well done in planning. That is what I am talking about when I think about costs other than Locomotives and Rolling stock.
I think by the time you finish the structures you will probably be a few hundered more.
I was taught that scenery is like 5 dollars a shake on some bottles and it's best to improvise and make do where possible.
brothaslide wrote: CNJ831 wrote: skiloff wrote: I haven't started scenery yet, but I don't need scenery to run trains. Total cost - $773 if my math is correct. BUT, had I not wanted the Unitrack for the above mentioned reasons, it would easily be $250 less for Atlas flex track and turnouts. So, thats $525 to go Atlas, $775 to go with Unitrack and I have a working 3x9 layout. Is that expensive? Please don't take offense but if you haven't any scenery started yet, you don't have a "layout" . . . CNJ831 So when do you have a layout? I really enjoy the articles on Eric Broomans Utah Belt and his scenery is not finished yet; does that mean he does not have a layout? If, in your opinion, the Utah Belt is a layout, then what percentage of scenery needs to be completed before you can consider your layout - a layout?
There are also additional long term expenses. Mainly all the nice loco’s & rolling stock that catch your eye once you’re bored of what you have, detail items, layout add-ons, additional structures you found will look good on your layout, ripping out and redoing areas because you have a better idea, DCC upgrades, the latest signal system, ..
Well, as you can see it can be an endless and expensive process. But lots of fun!
canazar wrote: IRONROOSTER wrote: Railphotog wrote: ... Do you know the easiest way to commit suicide in the US? Get really sick and don't have an expensive health care plan! Too true. To add insult to injury the bill is 2 1/2 to 5 times higher for those without insurance.Paul Actually, I have found quite oppisite is true. I am self employed and havent had health insurance for almost 9 years. Being slef employed and getting health insurance can be a quite a drag. There have been a few times when something has come up and I needed professional help. Here is a great example, I needed blood work done at a lab.. Sir, that will be 160.00, do you have yoru insurance card?" "Well, how about cash? Any discount?" "Oh yes, that will 95.00 then." I have found smaller practices and even the urgent care centers like cash (Plastic works too) much better than insuarnce. As one doctor explained to me they wait forever for money to roll in from the insuance companies. Plus, the more often than not, can lose some of the money due to charges. (Sometimes taking 3-6 months to get the money) When someone offers good old cash, they are more than happy to take it and usually offer great discounts. That being said, I do plan on getting insuarnce but for only major stuff. High premuim and such. In case somthien catostrophic happens, such as cut off finger at work or a organ fails. Just cheaper to pay anythign under 4000-5000.00 out of pocket. Typical insurance for me would have been around 100 a month, times 8.5 years is 10,200. So far, I am way ahead of the game. Also, as far the original subject, as soon as you think this hooby is getting $$$, take alook at golf clubs. Makes my 180 dollar sound equipped engine look pretty cheap. Plus, it wont be out of date next year either.
IRONROOSTER wrote: Railphotog wrote: ... Do you know the easiest way to commit suicide in the US? Get really sick and don't have an expensive health care plan! Too true. To add insult to injury the bill is 2 1/2 to 5 times higher for those without insurance.Paul
Railphotog wrote: ... Do you know the easiest way to commit suicide in the US? Get really sick and don't have an expensive health care plan!
...
Do you know the easiest way to commit suicide in the US?
Get really sick and don't have an expensive health care plan!
Actually, I have found quite oppisite is true. I am self employed and havent had health insurance for almost 9 years. Being slef employed and getting health insurance can be a quite a drag. There have been a few times when something has come up and I needed professional help. Here is a great example, I needed blood work done at a lab..
Sir, that will be 160.00, do you have yoru insurance card?"
"Well, how about cash? Any discount?"
"Oh yes, that will 95.00 then."
I have found smaller practices and even the urgent care centers like cash (Plastic works too) much better than insuarnce. As one doctor explained to me they wait forever for money to roll in from the insuance companies. Plus, the more often than not, can lose some of the money due to charges. (Sometimes taking 3-6 months to get the money) When someone offers good old cash, they are more than happy to take it and usually offer great discounts.
That being said, I do plan on getting insuarnce but for only major stuff. High premuim and such. In case somthien catostrophic happens, such as cut off finger at work or a organ fails. Just cheaper to pay anythign under 4000-5000.00 out of pocket. Typical insurance for me would have been around 100 a month, times 8.5 years is 10,200. So far, I am way ahead of the game.
Also, as far the original subject, as soon as you think this hooby is getting $$$, take alook at golf clubs. Makes my 180 dollar sound equipped engine look pretty cheap. Plus, it wont be out of date next year either.
I've got $43.82 in my pocket. Cash. Now can we stop nit-picking and whining, PUHLEEEZE! Believe it or not, the more people you bring into the hobby, the lower the prices will get, in the long run.
I'm in the market for about 130 feet of flextrack and a few turnouts. Cork, scenicing materials, etc. I guess if I spend all my money at once, I can always mortage my future to pay for it. Or I can be patient, upgrade my ancient rolling stock and tinker with the track plan. Or just hang out in the swimming pool, play some pool, play with the babies, or even, spend time with the wife!
alco_fan wrote: CNJ831 wrote:Please don't take offense but if you haven't any scenery started yet, you don't have a "layout" and that is why your cost so far is relatively low. A 4x8 Plywood Pacific can most definitely be put together for under $1,000 but that's far from being a real layout in most any serious hobbyist's book. You are going to find that reasonably completing your 3x9 will likely run you a further several thousand dollars, at least if you want it to look likely anything worth a second glance. Wow.. an answer that's both elitist _and_ factually incorrect. Nice two-fer. Even if adding scenery _was_ necessary to make a layout, it could be done for a fraction of the several thousand dollars blithely thrown out here. Paint, plaster, cardboard strips, maybe some styrene or Strathmore for streets. That's a couple hundred bucks (US _or_ Canadian) at most. Lay in some scratchbuilding supplies and you're set for years of fun for not a lot more cash. Jon
Jon - Sorry but, even though the newbies and wantabee hobbyists would like it to be otherwise, a bare sheet of plywood or a set of raw boards around the wall with track on them (that typically never progresses beyond that stage) is nothing more than a train set to anyone who's done any serious modeling. Do you consider junvenile fingerpainting to be an example of fine arts? The difference in the level of execution is about the same as between a bare plywood train set and a completed quality layout. Believe me, the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better off you'll be in this hobby. Since the 1950's, MR has published time and again that THE objective of this hobby is to build a finished and operating (in the sense that it runs, not operations) layout...nothing more, nothing less...read the MR editorials of years gone by.
In addition, try fully scenicking your layout, if of any real size, for a couple of hundred bucks and the results will be just as laughable as that $500, throw-back to the 1950's, "layout" that was in MR a couple of years ago. I've built a number of finished layouts over the years and no matter how conservative I was, the final bill was always in the multiple thousands. Are you another guy whose never seen the $50-$100 per square foot rule that's appeared repeatedly in all the hobby publications for decades? Amazing that so many with experience could be so wrong for so long, huh?
Incidentally, the word elitist, when used on this forum, more often than not refers to someone who actually knows about hands-on modeling and model railroading, as compare to the no-can-do dabblers.
CNJ
I often agree with your posts, but not this time. By the measures you cite, I guess I'm not a real MR, although I've been enjoying the hobby off and on since 1968, and have been an MR suscriber since 1962. I've handlaid my track on a 4x8 and a 4x6, I've also built 5 Lionel layouts in that timeframe, and constructed basic scenery on the 4x6. My goal is to "complete" my next layout the day before I die or become too feeble to do any more. Not counting some trainsets that were garage sale gifts from my wives, 4 of my 6 HO and 2 of my 3 HOn3 locomotives were/are being assembled from kits. All my rolling stock with one exception was/is being assembled from kits, and all my structures were/are. My expenditures for model railroading was $25/month in the '70s, $25/month from 1988 to 2005 (most of which went to 3 rail O) and $50/month in the past year. My final layout, when and if I ever get the space and time, will consist of a 5x8 and 3-4 8ft shelves. The first step will be a 2x8 ft HOn3 shelf layout.
A "Plywood Central" is a fine starting point, and as posted, out can reach an attractive and fun stage in the owner's eyes for less than $1,000. Of course Model Railroader and the other hobby media want to see great numbers of large, completed layouts. Those are the layouts and the owners (who do spend over $1000 per year) that support the hobby businesses. The large layouts also feed the RTR movement because the owners don't have time to build everything from kits, just as I will never have time build a large layout because I do so much model building. I don't provide enough $$ to the hobby to support the fine selection and quality that is available today. And I'm really grateful to those of you who do because I benefit from the increased selection.
My real point is that a newcomer doesn't have to spend thousands per year to have fun at the hobby. If you are willing to accept learning new skills and building for yourself as part of the journey, than you can opt out of the RTR movement with its attendant price tag. But no matter which group you fall into, you are still a model railroader - and model railroading should be fun!
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
I currently have a 12' x 20' modular plywood pacific. It allows me to run trains while I construct my planned layout which will fill a 30' x 60' basement.
As I construct my layout I will invite friends over for construction and operating sessions. I will use the operating sessions to determine if I have enough industries, passing siding, staging tracks.... It may be a while before I have any scenery, but I have an operating layout.
JIM
Jim, Modeling the Kansas City Southern Lines in HO scale.
simon1966 wrote:First of all, this is really not a kids hobby.
First of all, this is really not a kids hobby.
We can reduce this to a lone functioning locomotive on a piece of EZ-Track clipped to a 9v battery. I would not call it a layout, nor would I say it is a model in any way. The loco, itself, is an elaborate toy, and not suitable, for the most part, for children under the age of, say, 8 years of age.
Add another piece of track, and you still have essentially the same thing. But, as you add complexity and the variety of model structures, scenery, and other rolling items, you begin to enter the wide range of appearance and function that the majority of us would agree is a layout.
A plywood pacific is a beginning. It is a childhood, of sorts, that may extend for some time until the subject is prepared, and capable of, growth as he/she defines it. To the extent that one other person is at some point willing to call it a layout, it is! It may be with the addition of a single "fir tree", all six inches of it.
The majority of us agree that, effectively and philosophically, a layout is never really finished. So, if you accept that sentiment, none of us has a layout. We are all building an idea, and some of us are further along than others. I only have about 40 trees to place on my layout, which is currently unable to accept the trees due to its stage of construction. Notice, however, that I called it a layout, and you were willing to accept that label without question.
Please, God, let there be more plywood pacifics in this hobby. We could sure use the critical mass, the zeal, the interest, the few dollars that come here and there, and the changes and experience that will help the hobby to stay vital.
All that for
I've always lived in the east coast states. For me it's always been the Plywood Atlantic.
CNJ831,Wake up and smell the coffee..ALL we are doing is PLAYING with TOY TRAINS period..If you think you're not then you are sadly mistaken.
A layout can be without scenery..Look at the layout by David Barrow.Notice he is using cardboard mock ups for industrial buildings on plywood..According to YOU he isn't a "REAL" model railroader because he doesn't have scenery??
That my friend is a very wide judgmental brush you are painting with.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE wrote: CNJ831,Wake up and smell the coffee..ALL we are doing is PLAYING with TOY TRAINS period..If you think you're not then you are sadly mistaken. A layout can be without scenery..Look at the layout by David Barrow.Notice he is using cardboard mock ups for industrial buildings on plywood..According to YOU he isn't a "REAL" model railroader because he doesn't have scenery?? That my friend is a very wide judgmental brush you are painting with.
See my post on the modeler's license thread. Thank you.
Ed
HEdward wrote: I've always lived in the east coast states. For me it's always been the Plywood Atlantic.
Or the Plywood Gulf. Erk!
No wait.. Plywood Delta?... you get the idea.
Safety Valve wrote: HEdward wrote: I've always lived in the east coast states. For me it's always been the Plywood Atlantic. Or the Plywood Gulf. Erk! No wait.. Plywood Delta?... you get the idea.
Plywood Central for you sir?
HEdward wrote: BRAKIE wrote: CNJ831,Wake up and smell the coffee..ALL we are doing is PLAYING with TOY TRAINS period..If you think you're not then you are sadly mistaken. A layout can be without scenery..Look at the layout by David Barrow.Notice he is using cardboard mock ups for industrial buildings on plywood..According to YOU he isn't a "REAL" model railroader because he doesn't have scenery?? That my friend is a very wide judgmental brush you are painting with. See my post on the modeler's license thread. Thank you. Ed
Ed,Nice reply in the mention thread....
I'll add just one final response to my critics from the viewpoint of "elitist", as has been pronounced upon me, and then walk away from this thread and let the newbie and hobby-fringe "experts" prevail in their opinions.
After decades in the hobby, in recent years I've become increasingly aware of the low grade efforts of its newer members. Model railroading today seems to be the only "modeling" hobby where crude, slipshod, woefully insufficient and incomplete work is hailed by its participants as something of a standard and that such a stage of development need not be improved upon or taken any further toward completion.
Be advised the same average level of effort/craftsmanship demonstrated in model ship building, aircraft, militaria, etc. would either be simply dismissed by other hobbyists or be laughed right out the door! What in the world is the matter with so many model railroaders that they will not commit themselves to doing the best job they can and bringing their "layout" closer to completion than just track on plywood? Juveniles lay track on bare plywood and call it a layout...one would hope for something far better from supposedly talented adults.
Now don't get me wrong here, I am all for encouraging folks new to the hobby in developing their talents and in their understanding of things related to model railroading. But this does not include applauding those who do a half-a** job not even worthy of a 10 year old, stop at the bare plywood stage, and then claim they are a "model railroader" with a layout to prove it. Laying track on a board and then halting your efforts does not earn you the title of "model railroader" in my book, or in that of any serious hobbyist I know.
Now you can have at my statements as you please and I appologize to the originator of this thread for the tangent it has taken because of some of my earlier posts.
Sadly, it seems almost impossible to have a real debate on this forum without folks starting to throw rocks. Snide comments and provocative labels don't help the discussion at all, but they do seem to be the inevitable end to any discussion where people have closely-held and diverse viewpoints.
Oh, well, another good topic bites the dust...
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
CNJ831,I understand your views.However..Let's us NOT forget that every modeler may not have the skills needed and may never learn the skills due to various reasons.
Now,if the model is below par,I try to look at the modelers skills,age and limitions before commenting..IF the fore mention is unknown like on a forum then I do not make a comment good or bad unless it looks good..
Now..Know and understand I can find fault with anybodies models including yours.I will find some items overlooked or are dead wrong as far as safety,operation etc.Am I a "expert" or "elitists?? No!!! I just been around railroads and the hobby long enough to see these "glitches" that many over look or are ignorant of..Do I include these "glitches" in my modeling..NO! I do know they are there but,I ignore them simply because this is a hobby-a past time where one is free to model the way that pleases them and NOT others.And that my friend is the MOST IMPORTANT PART..After all if you can't please yourself with your chosen modeling style then who can you please?
CNJ831 wrote:Juveniles lay track on bare plywood and call it a layout...one would hope for something far better from supposedly talented adults.
Joe Fugate Modeling the 1980s SP Siskiyou Line in southern Oregon
BRAKIE wrote: HEdward wrote: BRAKIE wrote: CNJ831,Wake up and smell the coffee..ALL we are doing is PLAYING with TOY TRAINS period..If you think you're not then you are sadly mistaken. A layout can be without scenery..Look at the layout by David Barrow.Notice he is using cardboard mock ups for industrial buildings on plywood..According to YOU he isn't a "REAL" model railroader because he doesn't have scenery?? That my friend is a very wide judgmental brush you are painting with. See my post on the modeler's license thread. Thank you. Ed Ed,Nice reply in the mention thread....
Thanks, sometmes I get it right. Today is tease Phil day. Poor guy has been naughty. Naughty Phil, naughty!
Hi to all,
I have to agree that this thread has gotten far off the beaten path and is now becoming extremely boring to say the least, however I think the term "model railroading" is taken by some members within this forum (who claim they are experts) that you must have museum appearance layouts with high level weathered buildings, plants, vehicles, figures, ballast on tracks and the artistic level of an accomplished MMR to qualify for a model railroader! I just have to disagree as I think that is a very poor excuse on their part because 1 locomotive on 1 section of track is model railroading since the loco and tracks are miniature models of the real thing! I think the best way is not to discourage individuals, but rather encourage them regardless of their talent. I once knew someone who bought only micro-metakit (ho) model steam locomotives starting at $1,700 a piece and his idea was to lay bare track on a desktop in his office. He was proud to be a part of "model railroading" community.
Thanks and God Bless !!