MY WIFE AND I ARE DEBATING, WHICH IS A BETTER WAY TO MAKE MOUNTAINS, I SAY THE"OLD SCHOOL WAY" WITH CARDBORD STRIPS AND WADS OF NEWSPAPER AND PLASTER CLOTH, SHE SAYS FOAM SHAPED INTO A HILLSIDE OR MOUNTAIN COVERED WITH PLASTER CLOTH, HELP US IN THIS DEBATE SO WE CAN GET STARTED!!!
SINCERLY
TRAINSRME
The better way is the one that gives you the results you want. There is no preffered way to do scenery. Both have advantages and both have drawbacks. Why hot try a small sample of each and compare the results?
I personally prefer using carved foam WITHOUT plaster over the foam.
Plaster is a “wet mess”. It requires a certain amount of time to prep and clean up. You run the risk of getting wet plaster all over the place. Plaster is also brittle and will break if it gets leaned on or hit, meaning you’ll have to repair it. Plaster, screen wire and plaster mountains are also heavy, and it’s difficult to cut in access panels.
Foam is a “dry mess”. Vacuum up the residue, and you’re done. I’ll head down to the basement, glue down a section of foam (and weigh it down), and either go away or carve a previously glued piece. Foam is remarkably strong, and if hit or leaned on will not usually break. It’ll dent, adding more character to your scenery (randomness is good). It’s actually very easy to add access panels and liftouts to foam scenery. Foam is remarkably light given it’s strength. On my last layout, I had a 12 foot long by 4 foot long by two foot deep by six feet tall L shaped mountain that lifted off to access a staging area. It weighed maybe 10 pounds, with trees.
I did a price study of foam versus traditional mountain construction, and found that using just foam is actually cheaper, if you buy everything new at the start.
It depends on whether you prefer to build mountains up or carve them down.
Must have been a very heated debate…
You’re still shouting! [B)]