There was a time up into the mid 1990’s when just about every issue of Model Railroader offered a scale drawing of something for your layout. Whether it was a locomotive or other piece of rolling stock, or a station, industry or other line-side structure, you could always find something that would provide an interesting scratch build project.
For some reason, those articles have fallen by the wayside. This is a shame, because at the same time we’ve lost this resource for recording the equipment and physical plant of the railroads, we’re losing the prototype almost as quickly.
There are those that speculate that this trend has to do with “not biting the hand that feeds” since scratchbuilding, while time consuming, is typically a far more affordable option than buying pre-built structures or kits from the good advertisers who support MR. There are others who theorize that this is due in part to the MR staff’s “youth movement” wherein most of the new editorial staff is in their mid-20’s, and while competent authors and editors, they’re coming up in a time when the emphasis in the hobby has been Ready to Run, and less focused on actual creative challenges like building something from nothing.
This month’s edition offers a good example of this disparity. There’s a two page spread by Dana Kawala on detailing two commercial vehicles for the Troy Branch project layout. Basically, he opens the packages of a commercially available truck and a bulldozer, splashes some paint on them, and glues them to the layout. This is not a project that inspires me to do anything, or challenges me to build my skills, much less build something for my layout.
This is akin to American Woodworker publishing an article about going to Ikea and selecting right Allen wrench…
But I digress… Aren’t there any structures along the prototype Troy Branch? Can’t someone make a phone call and send Dana and Cody
I was very disappointed in the project feature Lee mentions. Of all the aspects involved in constructing a layout, adding two vehicles to a scene is pretty minor. It seemed as if it were an “afterthought.”
Additionally, the engine terminal layout… I was thinking “wow, he did a nice job ballasting!” No, he didn’t. He had that layout custom-built. There’s an increasing trend in MR featuring articles about guys whose paychecks are big enough to purchase entire layouts ready-to-run. If that’s a trend hobby-wide, fine… But let’s spend more time talking to the guys that build 'em and less time talking to the guys that buy 'em. I don’t ever plan to buy a custom layout, even if I had the money… it wouldn’t really be mine. Only if I were to become significantly handicapped would I consider it. I’m sure most model railroaders would rather know more about “how to build” than “what I bought.”
Now, the Virginia and Western layout… That was a nice old-school feature. Well built, well photographed.
But please, MR… If the best project feature you can muster is gluing two vehicles to a layout, don’t bother… Even the newist noob could probably figure that one out.
I miss David Popp’s construction projects for his N scale NHRR. Those seemed well-thought-out and relevant. In fact, I used a number of his techniques on my own layout.
If I may, I’d like to keep the topic related to scratch building articles in particular. I can see where this can quickly devolve into a flame fest pointed at MR editorial policy, but I’d like to keep it focused on what you would find useful about a return to regular features on modeling prototype structures and equipment.
It would also be helpful if you have built models following plans previously published in MR, and sharing photos of them. Plus a little discussion of what challenges you faced and how you met them.
I’d like to show the MR staff that this kind of stuff IS valid, and that they shouldn’t abandon the pursuit of craftsmanship in exchange for quick fixes and “open the package” articles. I really think the lowest common denominator is driving the bus lately, and it is costing the magazine, and the hobby in general, dearly.
You are, of course, correct, Lee. Over the past 15 or so years, MR has changed direction from being regarded as the magazine of typical, advanced model railroaders, to one designed mainly for the increasingly RTR, entry-level, crowd. I also tend to agree with you that much of their copy has become designed for advertiser product-pushing, rather than toward hobbyist self creativity, ingenuity and the building of actual modeling skills. Certainly, some of this does seem to stem from the current editorial staff being progressively less and less composed of seasoned modelers, as you also suggest in your post. Note, too, that the latest editorial staff addition (May MR) seems not to have any mentionable model railroading background at all.
I wouldn’t expect too many major format changes in the near future, as MR seems to be very much set on following its present course, in spite of the fact that they are loosing seasoned hobbyists/readership at a steady rate of 4,000 to 7,000 per year. Incidentally, who else has noticed that lately RMC has consistantly exceeded MR in both page count and useful content? The former is a pinacle RMC had never even approached in all its past history! Signs of a changing-of-the-order to come, perhaps?
I’d love to see Kalmbach publish a book with nothing but plans from the old Model Railroader’s. I remember seeing these articles in the 70’s & 80’s and at that time I was to young and didn’t have the proper equipment/materials. Now 20 - 30 years later I have most of tools & skills that I would enjoy tackling a few projects.
I would say probably the biggest obstacle to a new hobbyist wanting to scratchbuild is probably his limited toolbox and parts box. MR has done features from time to time about what should be in a modeler’s toolbox, but how about an article (or even a feature) about building up the scratchbuilder’s toolbox? I think a new modeler would get a whole lot more bang for his buck buying some decent tools from MicroMark than some fancy new loco that might not even match his modeling goals.
New hobbyists need to be assured that they, too, can kitbash and scratchbuild if only they take the time to develop the skills.
MR has stepped into the role as a “gateway” magazine for the hobby. That’s fine. In many respects, they’ve always played that role. Years ago, there were also more articles on more advanced stuff. But, MR used to make a point of emphasizing that the “advanced stuff” was within everyone’s reach.
Again, I wish we could do a better job as a hobby (here’s where MR can assert great influence) encouraging new hobbyists from the get-go that if something they want can’t be had off-the-shelf, that they can build it themselves. You don’t have to be in the hobby for 25 years to do that. I scratchbuilt my first wood structure (from an article in RMC, BTW) when I was 13.
I would hardly consider myself one of the “good” modellers yet, however I am learning and I am tackling some of the bigger kits without ruining them. I started with a couple of Athearn and Roundhouse kits, which looking back was more a mistake than anything else - should have gone with the LHS’ reccomendation and gotten one of the more complex kits (the brand name fails me at the moment); but the price was right on the Athearn/Roundhouse cars and I wasn’t sure about being able to complete a more complicated kit at the time. And now I’ve built Red Caboose and Tichy kits. and have a Bowser K-11 somewhere (UPS won’t tell me where it is, though I have a feeling it should have been delivered yesterday).
Anyway, on to the topic at hand – I remember reading some of the '93 or '94 issues of MRR, where they did a 5 or 6 part series on scratchbuilding a steam loco. I remember the first time reading through said series (being all of about 8 – serious) thinking that I couldn’t wait to have the stuff to do what the author was demonstrating for the article.
Even being one of the younger guys who this publication is “geared towards” as you guys are implying, I find that some things (like the afore-mentioned job site article) are too “easy” as well. Perhaps if it had been a “take the cars out of the box, make a mould, and cast 7 more” type article, things would be a little more on the right track (pun intended) with where MRR should be…
OTOH, maybe it’s our fault for having such a “simple” magazine now – the authors don’t seem to change month to month, or feature a “new” guy every so often like used to be in MRR…
The value I extract from articles like Dana’s and Cody’s is one of technique. They become building blocks for the evolution of my skill sets.
Currently, I look to RMC for articles on scratch building. Additionally, there are other sources, like the Railroad Lines forum, that have entire sub-categories dedicated to scratch builders and their projects.
These advanced methods are far beyond my skill and patience levels right now, but I definitely see some scratch building in my future - and I’m not a young man.
I do read every project thread on this forum and with all the skilled modelers here, there just aren’t detailed scratch building projects submitted.
I guess what I’m saying is that I look to multiple sources to learn more about this hobby and from those sources I adopt the methods and lessons that work for me.
That said, maybe a new sub-category - Scratch Building - wouldn’t be a bad idea for this forum…
Well if you gents dont like MRR well stop buying it and get the outher publication that out there. Also why dont you guys start a Roundrobin club in your area. Then you could go to each others layouts work on them and get ideas to work on your layout. Kevin
I save my back issues of MR partly because of the drawings and accompaning articles. I have all but 6 issues back to 1950 and some before that.
But apparently the interest in this kind of information is very low. I suspect that most model railroaders are not interested in scratch/parts building or even kit building. The explosion in the past few years of ready-to-run indicates that most people in the hobby don’t have the time, desire, etc. for scratch/parts building or even kit building, but do want a model railroad.
It may be that there never was a high interest in the model building part of the hobby. Most hobbbyists did it because there was no practical affordable alternative. Now, with cheap labor in China, good quality RTR is about the same price as good quality kits, so there’s no need to build. And HO has such wide selection that many roads can be modeled easily without having to build anything. The last holdout, structures, is starting to give way to RTR as well.
In my case, I enjoy model building but have deferred it in order to build the layout. I have started the benchwork for the first part, 11’x23’, and will extend it if I don’t retire and move first. In the meantime I am accumulating parts and kits. Looking back, I see that the times when I did the most model building are those when I did not have a layout. But until I get the layout up and running, I will use as much RTR as possible. After that I will do more model building, but that may not happen until retirement in a couple of years.
I agree. What I really miss are the prototype plans and photos - and not just the structures. The locomotives and the cars with short blurbs about the changes they went through over the years were/are 50% of the magazine’s value to me. The structure articles were particularly good because they often had plans and photos showing the track layout in the area (LDEs anyone?) along with the structure plan. The series on railroads you could model was one of my favorites. Since the plans are no longer a part of Model Railroader, I don’t worry about keeping up my subscription as much as I used to. Now if the subscription lapses, and I miss a few issues (the current case), it’s not the big deal it once was. I look over the issue in the LHS, and buy it or not.
OTOH, I have never missed an issue of NG&SLG in recent years.
wm3798 - I certainly would love to see your detailed model of the WESTERN MARYLAND’S Cumberland station, and a step-by-step description of how you constructed it, in the pages of MR. Perhaps an email to the powers that be, might land you a spot…nothing gets a project finished like a deadline…[8D]
Give Neil B. a little more time, folks, he’s a very hands-on editor, and will bring you a balanced magazine.
My father started getting MR in the 1950s… It’s been a part of our family ever since. I started really reading MR in the 80s, but of course I read every back issue my father had as well.
I think for many of us that grew up with MR, recent trends are unsettling… I think it’s quite reasonable for us loyal MR readers to express concern. If MR doesn’t address those concerns, then fine, we’ll stop buying. But MR has always been part of my life and it’s hard to let go just like that.
I have saved my MR magazines going back to the 50’s and I am sure glad I have. Although I enjoy reading and looking at the pictures now, there is almost nothing I can use in the recent years that will help me to scratch build, kit bash, or do research in my areas of interest.
What I have done is create a separate stack of past issues that I know I can rely on for future projects I am planning or refreshing my memory on a construction technique. This stack mostly consists of issues from the 50’s and 60’s. I do not have time to give lots of examples but I just finished converting a Tyco 4-8-0 into an SP TW-2 Mastodon and, along with several other old issues, used an MR article in the August 1958 issue to help me to detail the Stephenson slide rods and brackets and the December 1960 issue to help me scratch build the whale back tender.
Don’t get me wrong though, I will always be a subscriber to MR and look forward to the next issue. It has been ingrained in my genes.
The way the economy is going and prices are increasing, there are going to be a lot of young model railroaders who will not be able to afford the hobby if they have to buy everything. One way to keep them in the hobby is for MR and others to put more focus on scratch building articles using commonly available materials. RMC seems to have a prototype drawing or two in each issue. I guess that’s why they call it Railroad Model CRAFTSMAN. I have scratch built quite a few buildings and bridges from the plans and drawings from MR. Most were built of wood, but one or two were built of plastic sheets and shapes. This has increased my skills to the point where I have tackled at least one structure from hand drawings I made myself, and a couple of bridges. I will admit that a MRR gets completed faster with all the kits that are available now, and the personal satisfaction seems to be in completing the RR rather than building and detailing a bridge or wood building that no one else has. Being of retirement age, I have a collection of MR that goes back to the 1960’s, and those scratch building articles are great, and great inspiration as well. I really miss those regular articles and drawings.
Unfortunately, this is a sign of out times. I’m a retired carpenter/contractor, and used to watch every episode of This Old House when it was first on TV. They used to take a run-down “everyman’s” house & rehab it. Today they do multi-million dollar projects that most of us can only dream about!
My first “models” were putting the Plasticville buildings together for my Lionels. Next was making “factories” out of small cardboard boxes & some paint - then came plastic & wood models. My first job was for the local toy store - I was making a lot of models and the owner asked me if I could show him a finished one. I wound up making “display” models for the store at the rate of one free model for every 3 or 4 I made for them + some free glue & paint!! Even “easy” kits were work in the early '50’s - I remember a wood DC3 that the wings had no leading or trailing edges - you had to do a LOT of sanding!! (There were no Toys R Us then - every town had their own mom & pop toy/hobby store!)
When I discovered HO - an uncle made his own engine, cars, & track! - I started with Athern, Roundhouse, Revell, and other simple kits. Even these simple kits gave you a sense of satisfaction & pride in doing something yourself. My first “harder” kits included an Ulrich tractor/trailer out of metal (I came across it recently in reorganizing my “stuff”) which took many hours of fileing, glueing, and painting - they don’t look as good as the Wiking, Ricko, Athern, Atlas, or even Wmart rtr, but I MADE THEM!!
I’ve been buying a lot of the rtr stuff myself lately, mainly because there is less & less kit items in my LHS, and the rtr is so
Any of you guys remembeer Trains magazine? It was meant for the novice and had tons of plans and building articles. I specially liked the ones by E.L.Moore.One of the reasons I’ve kept all my MRs over the years was the the building articles and plans never seemed to get obsolete. Yeah we’ve got new glues and materials(styrene,gator board,foam etc) but the methods and plans are still there.
Now that was almost 50 yrs ago for me. TV was just becoming available in my area,rural MT, and even Arthur C. Clarke hadn’t envisioned video games, the internet, 3D modeling and all that stuff. Plus modelrailroading was a hobby where you built your own equipment, not like baseball or football where you could BUY everything.
So now whats happening? Does the Mr.staff have a demographic that shows that buying into the hobby is more popular than building? And is that the reason for the current trend?
Lee,I really don’t know where to start except looking at the changed in the hobby over the past few years.While there are still thousands of craftsmen(scratchbuilders) I fully believe it will be one of the casualties* of our hobbies advancement into the open the box RTR and the increasing prebuilt structures market…After all how many of us builds locomotive kits? Very few I’ll wager.
Now with the current RTR market MR had to change its pace and stay with the flow.Now we need to know how to weather those great looking RTR engines,cars and ready to place structures and vehicles.In other words we spend more time fine tuning our layouts instead of spending hours/days/weeks scratch building a structure.
But,one the other hand more modelers are entering the “prototype correct” modeling style where generic buildings will no longer suffice for a (let’s say) C&O station.However specialty companies are filling this void with kits…
*While I don’t think scratch building will completely fade into the sunset,I suspect there will be fewer scratchbuilders in the years to come…
Lee, first let me congratulate you on an excellently authored piece. Secondly, the answer is quite simple…it is called " instant gratification". I do not mean this to be taken as derogatory. Except for maybe those who are retired, and have the ability and time, ( and maybe lack of $$ ) scratchbuilding is not going to ever return to it’s roost.
Scratchbuilding takes time, ability, and patience. Be honest with ourselves, how many of us will take the time? 5%?, 15%? ,