I read some of the comments on the content of the June MR with quite a bit of interest. For me, it was basically a throw-away issue.
I do agree that there is a lot of advertisng and I know it pays the bills. However, I also agree with the comments about the pictures and unused space getting a lot bigger and the “meat” getting smaller.
I don’t have a huge problem with the content, with one exception. I don’t model the steam era, so the pieces on steam don’t interest me. But, there are many modelers who do, and I’m sure they’ll be interested in those articles. The one that did bother me was the one on tools. It seems at least once or more a year, they print a large article on tools. Again, I’m trying to appreciate that someone who’s starting out in the hobby would find that kind of information very helpful. But, Kalmbach has a great selection of books for ther beginner that go into even more detail and I’d really prefer it if they’d stop running these in the regular issues. If they feel they have to do once a year, then run it around the holidays when a lot of modelers are getting started. I’d much rather look at stories that show what modelers are doing out there. Some of them are a real inspiration to all of us to get going on our own layouts.
While I’m at it, there is something I really miss in MR these days. They used to include drawings and pictures of at least one protoype car each month. Then there was the series of beautiful renderings they did on various passenger trains and early locomotives. Even though that’s not me era, I was so impressed with them I bought them all when they came out. There were a lot of trains that never got done when they just dropped them.
I got a subscription to MR this year, the first time in years. My reasoning was that the break-even point for the cost of buying them off the shelf was about 6-7 issues. So, as long as I can count at least a half dozen that I really enjoy, I figure it’s worth it. Too many issues like June’s tho
Well there you go, I thought the June issue was one of the more interesting ones in a while.
For me, I’m in it for the long haul. I look at how the magazine does over at least 2 years and how I liked it. If it’s basically been useful over that period of time then it’s worthwhile.
How are the editors to judge? First, you go with what’s consistently popular, so you will do the bigger roads like the SP, UP, BN, and ATSF, for instance. If someone likes some smaller road, then he will complain that MR’s going to the dogs since there’s not much of interest to him or her in each issue.
Then there’s the era question. Modeling the 1950s is the most popular. I model the 1980s, somewhat of a niche era. So I cut MR some slack. I’d rather have them publish what’s smart so they stay in business, than have them cater to my personal tastes all the time and go belly up in 2 years cuz my area of interest is such a niche area.
Yes, the past issue was a little sparse and the tools article seems to be overdone too much. But - it could be worse. Like “that other modelrailroading magazine” that sits on the shelf next to MR. Although this month’s edition of that other magazine was a little more interesting than the June MR since they prototyped a really nice backwoods junction, it is basically 1 big sales flyer with articles cropped to fit and pictures squeezed in between the ads.
I mainly model diesel myself and moreso the “present” than the transition era … but hey, I have steam and diesel and electric running on my freelanced layout so I like 'em all.
Well, I’ve not yet seen an article on the era I model and I don’t really excpect to. I am relatively new, and so enjoy the how to’s since I have not read most of them before.
Now here’s the weird thing. In MRR, the ads are rather mundain, but with RMC I spend a lot of time looking at the ads becasue they have such interesting products. I’ve gotten a lot of good ideas from those ads.
To anyone saying there is not enough content in the mags, write an article. Remember, most everything they publish is submitted by us. So if there is not very much there, we need to write more articles.
When it comes to home maintenance, there are some guys who go out and buy a lot of tools then start looking around for projects to use them on. But most of the folks I know (including myself) get started on their projects first, then go out and purchase the tools they need as it becomes obvious that they need them for that project.
I would prefer that MR focus their content on the projects themselves, then let us go out and buy the tools as we need them to work on similar projects. The Bob Smaus article was a good example of this thinking - his project was the main focus of the article, but the sidebar highlighted some of the tools that might help me build similar model structures.
I am not an MR basher as I might qualify some who post on this forum from time to time. MR’s content has changed even over the 10 years I have been subscribing. It is about 10 pages shorter on average now that it was then. I really don’t tink Advertising has increased. I have pick up issues dating back 20 years and found the same % of adds in those issues. I am sure the changes have been in attempt to keep with the market, remain profitable, and stay conpetitive in business. Some of the changes in the past 10 years I like, some I do not. But ultimately I enjoy MR month to month. If I did not I wouldn’t subscribe (illustrated by the fact that I have subscribed to and dropped 3 other model railroading mag’s over the some 10 year period). Ultimately when I share my thoughts here I want to let MR know what I like and don’t for thir informational purposes, not just to ba***he mag. Just my [2c].
I have a different outlook than most on all hobby mags I subscribe to. I know that my interests will be directed in different directions as I go through different stages of the hobby. I’ll skim over the mag, reading what I find relevent to my current situation and make a mental note on everything else. If I get to a point in a couple of months where an article I “skipped over” would be more interesting then I find the issue it’s in on the shelf & read it. Nothing like an instant reference library at your finger tips when you need it. mike
I enjoyed the issue. The tools article wasn’t as useful for me, but then MR has to cover the beginner to the grizzled oldtimers. I do think it could have been shorter and still covered the subject. Then maybe a drawing could have been included. Still the best on the market.
Enjoy
Paul
I can see the point behind having the article on tools. I mean let’s face it not everyone in the hobby has a decade or more’s worth of experience under their belt and MR is trying to give to them too. I would like to see more coverage on modern era stuff myself though. As for advertisements that’s why MR can afford keep the magazine so cheap. Most of a magazine’s money comes from advertising.
June wasn’t the best issue in MR history, nor was it the worst. IMO, it was somewhere near dead center, maybe slightly on the plus side.
I’ve been buying or subscribing MR for consistently for about 15 years now. There are regulars that got the axe that I miss (paint shop being one). My subscription runs out at the end of the year, and I’m still on the fence as to whether or not I will renew or just give each month a look at the LHS to see if it is worth it.
As far as the advertising, I find some of that very interesting. There have been some creative and useful products introduced that are only mentioned in the ads from the guy producing a couple of items in his spare time.
I read the June issue on the plane to North Dakota and a second time on the plane back from North Dakota. My reaction is similar to many–it didn’t take me long to get through it. On the other hand, a second reading brought out nuances that were quite helpful and missed in the first reading.
I’ll stick with MR. It does a fine job. Yes, frankly, I wi***here was more “meat.” But it is still a very fine magazine.
I usually skim through and then read the articles that interest me. Many times I feel that the articles are way ahead of me or very basic. I guess I’m in that ackward stage. I have found it interesting to read the letters to the editor referring to an article two or three issues before. Then I go back and see something I missed.
I didn’t find much in the June issue. I guess I’ll have to wait until August to find something in it.
MR - and the other publications for that matter - don’t publi***heir articles - they publish your articles - and that, by the way, also includes scale drawings of whatever. I enjoy some issues more than others; and sometimes MR’s (and the other publications) editorial content causes me to almost pop my bladder - but I’ve got all issues consecutive back to 1959 (and a lot before that) and I’ll keep getting it - and probably if I expire towards the end of - or the beginning of - the month the last thing I’ll do before assuming the horizontal position is check the mail box for the next issue of MR, or MRC, or whatever.
I agree with the original poster. The Model Railroader has been giving us mainly steam era pictures and stories. I am personallly tired of them. I do not model steam and it is shown so much I do not even enjoy seeing them. About once a year we get a good modern Diesel Layout on the fron page and a good story. Where are the great modern Norfolk Southern layouts and Conrail, BNSF? MR is giving us all the Steam crap. Give it a rest MR!!!
I just got my June issue today and it isn’t any different content-wise as the last yr or so has been. People complain that there is more ads and less content etc but I think the mix is the same as its been. I’m not measuring columns to see how many inches of each there are or anything like that but the mix seems the same to me.
I think its another case of “the sky is falling” ,which seems to be a popular thing to claim around here.
I am basicly steam & transition era. But no matter the era, I read all the articles thro.It is going to have info I didn’t know about that will apply to any era. MR is the best I have seen.
I subscribe to MRR and MRC this same complaint comes up in car magazines also about the articles being to “simple” for the more experienced enthusiast or there is too much of brand X (or the wrong era, Steam engines instead of diesel)getting more coverage than my “so superior” brand (era,rail road,etc). Despite my continuing commitment to ignorance I usually go back and read everything eventually and often learn something despite myself and my biases. You might as well read the whole magazine and you aren’t going to get the full price of it unless you read it all.
You need to ease up on the so called “Steam crap” MR has been positively salviating over the Tower 55 Big Desiels lately.
I dont buy a whole alot of tools. If a project needed a tool to “Fit” properly I would go and find it or buy one then.
I loved the warehouse article the best.
The one about the steam service facilities were indepth and informative but they left out how long it will take to turn that helper and get it ready for the next shove.
But hey, it’s all good. Has been for 30 years and counting.