Decades: A Look Back at MR in January 1995

Model Railroader
January 1995
214 pages
Editor: Andy Sperando
Managing Editor: Jim Kelly

January 1995 brings us over 200 pages of MR goodness. Andy Sperandeo is Editor. It started off with quite few letters to the Railway Post Office, but what caught my attention the most was the announcement of the passing of Jim Findley in October 1994. His Tioga Pass layout stuck with me as it was on the August 1982 cover. It has a large feel but was only 9 x 11 (which you would never believe based on the photos). Mr. Findley wrote many articles on scratchbuilding structures. As I am a structures kind of guy, his name was always one I remembered. He was friends with John Allen and built structures for the Gorre & Daphetid. You could see the influence of that on his own modeling.

In Workshop, there was a discussion about steam switcher wheel arrangements (and the reason for their wheel arrangement). Here is where I learned, forgot, and then recalled with this re-read of the issue that the Illinois Central converted some of their Mikados to yard service by removing the lead truck to make a 0-8-2. I have no idea how I could forget that. How many references to an 0-8-2 have you heard? For me, not many at all. Maybe this time it will stick…especially since the IC is one of my primary interests…or maybe I’m not that interested (or some would say interesting, but that is another story) since I forget details about the IC such as an 0-8-2.

Workshop has a discussion about the negatives of truck-mounted couplers. This came up in the January 1985 issue and January 1975 issue if I recall. The darn things just won’t go away.

Lee Vande Visse discusses changing scales in At the Throttle. His theory is that if you are experiencing dissatisfaction with model railroading, it could be that your current scale may not be the best fit. He mentions that one of the hang-ups with changing scales is what to do with all of your current stuff. He concluded that “the worry isn’t what you’d do with stuff, but the guilty feeling of knowing how much it all cost. However, if the ultimate cost is disenchantment with a hobby you’d otherwise enjoy, your stuff could just be too expensive to keep.” It’s food for thought.

The feature articles take off with a tale of two Wisconsin & Michigan layouts built by two different modelers. On a chance discussion at a hobby shop, two modelers connected over their modeling of an abandoned railroad, the W&M, that both gave an alternate history to by proposing a “what-if” the railroad was never abandoned. One layout was a 23 x 30 HO scale layout set in the 1990s while the other was a 25 x 30 HO scale layout set in the late 1960s. Both are very well done. Alas, only one could appear on the cover. I’m sure that resulted in some sort of good-natured, friendly competition bragging rights scenario. A long-term friendship built on the foundation of model railroading: that’s more valuable than their layouts combined. In the end, model railroading has a way of bringing people together.

Lee Vande Visse appears again with an absolutely gorgeous, scratchbuilt O scale Big Four station that is in Berea, OH. He describes making the sandstone walls of the station by making plaster blanks and carving the blocks. Doing all of that carving of the blocks sounds rough, but he noted that once he got going it wasn’t bad and he could actually do that while watching TV. You may not want to model this station, but it is a great article on casting plaster walls and carving the blocks by hand. Did I say it was a gorgeous model? I did. Well, it’s so nice it’s worth saying twice.

Moving on, the next feature are the winning models from the NMRA national convention that was in Portland, OR the previous August. The models were exquisite and you can spend a while just soaking in all of the details from the photos. There was some great modeling going on.

Next up is a fold out feature on the UP Challenger 3985 and her sisters. What a great story to have a centerfold. You get the history. You get the photos. You get color scale drawings on a centerfold. Beautiful.

We now move on to another layout design. This one is an HO scale freelance layout inspired by the harbor at Tacoma, WA in 1968. The layout is designed so that the operators enter the layout by the path a ship would take and they would be surrounded by docks and wharves. It is roughly 8 x 16 and has hidden staging underneath. It has the wharves and docks, bridges, factories, a small business district, a yard, and roundhouse. The trackplan does not allow for continuous running but rather operations would involve some mainline trains coming and going from staging, locals shuttling cars between the yard and harbor, passenger trains, and even log trains. It is a well thought out design.

A new feature, Basic Model Railroading appears, and the first subject is understanding scale and gauge. This goes back to my observations in the January 1985 issue regarding writing content to challenge all levels of modelers and not to spoon feed overly simplistic basics. I would rather see a definitive updated beginners book produced by MR and then allow the pages of MR the magazine to challenge and inspire advancement beyond the basics At the same time keeping in mind the balance between building the foundation but challenge the reader to grow while keeping relevant content for the experienced modeler. It is a tough balance to meet and you will never please everyone. The fact that these beginner columns have come and gone multiple times suggest that there has to be a better way to communicate the raw basics.

Time to revisit an article that I actually have on my to-do list. I’m glad I came back across this one. The article is about kitbashing a Lehigh Valley cement gondola in HO scale from an Athearn gondola with canisters. You can still find these at train shows and online and the author, Jim Hetzog, did a fine job upgrading this blue box kit into something to show off. You can even go further with detailing, such as replacing the stirrups and adding cut levers to take it even further (Mr. Hertzog did replace the grabs in this article but that was it for the finer detailing). I have a coupe of these in my stash waiting for this treatment. I really should work on this project now that I found the article again.

The following article has been relegated to some good pointers category as it involves in improving the weight of a brass steam locomotive with carefully placed lead. With the problems of working with lead, the article still has relevant information regarding how to determine how much weight to add and where to add so that the loco stays in balance.

The next layout feature was a short article on Freeman Gosden, Jr. building an 9 x 16 N scale Cajon Pass layout based on a John Armstrong track plan from 1956. There were only 4 photos and what was there was nice. This would have been a good candidate to provide an overall shot of the entire layout (if it would have been possible.)

Tony Koester discusses weight in his Trains of Thought column. His conclusion is that the locomotives’ pulling power shouldn’t greatly exceed what’s needed to do the work. His thoughts included using combinations of powered and dummy units to provide just enough power to move the train and then if it stalled you would send in the helpers.

In Paint Shop, Mont Switzer tells us how to paint a brass Southern GP49 in the black/gold/light gray tuxedo scheme. This is a good one for me if I ever need to paint this scheme. This scheme and the Santa Fe red warbonnet are my top two favorite schemes. Please don’t make me rank them one and two. I’ll just take the easy way out and call it a tie. Paint Shop continues with good prototype information regarding the Florida East Cost schemes and other prototype information. The column wraps up with reminding us to paint exhaust stains on our bridges. Stains on bridges are not just for steam locos. Diesels do a good job of letting you know they’ve been there. It is a small detail but one that makes a scene just look right.

In Bull Session, Keith Thomson writes on sources of modeling information. Boy has this one changed since it was written. It was 1995. There is no mention of online or internet or YouTube. For you younger folks, there was a time that we didn’t have the internet or smartphones or iPads. It made it more important that we find good, reliable sources of information and also be able to remember/recall that information. I’m going to blame smartphones for my inability to remember anything since I don’t have to any more. No matter where I am I can just look it up online. Not being able to remember things has nothing to do with me getting older. That’s my story. Those dang-blasted, confounded smartphones. Now, what was I talking about? Oh yeah, Mr. Thompson wraps up his list of sources of information with “Friends.” He makes the statement that “you’ll find model railroaders are a friendly lot and love to meet new people interested in model trains.” All I’m gonna say is that statement isn’t entirely true as some of y’all are kinda cranky sometimes (me included).

Overall I found this to be a really enjoyable issue to revisit. And maybe it will be the inspiration to get those cement gondolas put back on the front burner.

5 Likes

That was the first issue of MR I ever read. I actually still have it. I miss those days, the magazines just had a lot more information in them and articles for more skill levels.

Wow, a 2-8-2 conversion to 0-8-2? Did the article state what the reason was for the conversion? What does removing the leading truck do?

I remember the letters from Jim in the late 1960’s MR. First one I saw was in the June 1967 issue. MR has varied in size over the years.

It didn’t specifically state the exact reason they were made into an 0-8-2 other than, generally speaking, the pilot truck was necessary to guide the rigid drivers into curves at road speed but were not necessary for the slower movements in the yard. It also stated that steam locos with all-driver wheel arrangements had greater traction, so maybe that was it. The trailing trucks were necessary to carry the weight of the firebox so it makes sense why they couldn’t drop those. I suppose since the pilot trucks were not necessary for slow speeds, they were looking at traction, maybe one less thing to maintain, and, just guessing, possibly decrease the chance of dealing with the pilot truck derailing on yard tracks which wouldn’t be at the same standards of mainline track that they were designed for. I don’t recall ever seeing a picture of the IC 0-8-2 but I’m sure that it would have been interesting to see that big 'ol steamer without that pilot truck.

Jeff

1 Like

@CoopsTrains I have heard about the traction on the driving wheels being higher without the leading /trailing trucks, so that explanation makes sense to me.