I was just in the American Flyer interest group on Facebook. One of our regulars posted a message to the effect that he has ended his subscription to CTT because of the relative absence of articles related to American Flyer, or other S-Scale. His posting was greeted with a long list of “AMEN, brother!” type of replies.
So I thought I’d bring that discussion here; what do you think? Is CTT too slavishly devoted to three-rail? After all the magazine describes itself in it’s banner as “O and S gauge for the operator and collector”. Yet the last major Flyer article I remember was from September of last year.
Stebby - I have to agree with you on this and this is not the first time it’s been brought up. I enjoy the interaction that this web site provides and if there aren’t enough threads about American Flyer here, you can only blame the posters, us.
But the magazine is different. I also ended my subscription a while back because, I felt, it lacked not only American Flyer, but Marx and the other “Classic” manufacturers.
I’m sure I would have continued with the magazine if it had more “Classic” articles, but I felt it needed more Pre-War layouts and articles.
Although I’m not the person you mentioned above, I do understand why he cancelled his subscription.
A couple of years ago I decided to drop at least one or two of my magazine subscriptions because i was receiving more than i could easily read in a month. Looking at Classic Toy Trains I found I was not getting my money’s worth out of it since there was not enough S gauge articles. In fact it looked like a Lionel O gauge magazine with only a token short mention of American Flyer or other S gauge. So I no longer subscribe.
Over the past 8 or 10 years I have restarted and stopped by CTT subscription 2 or 3 times for the same reason. When there are articles or stories about S layouts or products they are well done, but they are too few and far between.
Lionel has stepped up their S offerings and MTH is getting into S pretty big. There are several other suppliers out there and it would be great to see tests and articles on more of their products. Hopefully we will have a larger S showing in the magazine based on new products coming out.
As for the forum, as was said previously that is all about us as S collectors and operators. If we don’t contribute we can’t expect others too.
I’m not trying to cause any problems, but since some of you stated you no longer subscribe to CTT, I decided to review the last four issues to see what CTT contained concerning S gauge/scale. CTT has run the following S gauge/scale articles recently. This is in addition to other tidbits or photos of S gauge/scale and pre-war items.
September 2013 contains two S gauge/scale articles:
Achieving realism on a great room-sized S gauge railroad, pp. 60-64
Ride in style (product review), pp. 70-71
July 2013 contains one S gauge/scale article:
Take a good look at American Flyer’s New Haven passenger sets (Focus on Classics), pp. 60-64
May 2013 contains one S gauge/scale article:
Rod Price brings a New Generation into S gauge modeling, pp. 58-63
March 2013 contains one S gauge/scale article:
American Flyer’s no. 772 water tower (Collectible Classics), p. 31
I certainly enjoy all scales/gauges of toy trains, but maybe since I’m not an S gauge/scale collector/operator the previous list is enough to meet my expectations of the magazine. I know this topic has come up before and I’m sure it will again. I believe last time I saw this topic, CTT’s response stated they run more O gauge/scale articles because the amount of hobbyists in that gauge/scale and also they receive more article submissions on that gauge/scale. Brent’s suggestion is correct and CTT has stated that before as well.
Please note I do not work for CTT, just providing my observations.
I subscribe to three other Kalmbach publications, Trains, Classic Trains and Garden Railways, each of which are excellent, however I dropped my subscription to CTT for the same reason and a common comment is that the magazine should be titled Classic Lionel among ex subscribers. In it’s own way it tries to achieve a balance and you cannot please everyone but it seems to be divided between new product which does not fit the classic selling point or Lionel, Lionel, Lionel. I stopped posting here for that reason as it seemed pointless for me personally. However I am sure Lionel fans would comment otherwise. Another issue I had was the lack of reasonable and affordable layout plans, which seems to have improved somewhat. I added up the cost of some of these and they were staggering to my budget. Standard Gauge is a classic but I think all of this simply boils down to getting over the misnaming of the magazine…Its a good magazine for beginners per their repetitive how to articles that are fantastic for newbies but are of not much use to veteran modelers. It strikes me as a generic sort of O scale magazine written demographically, which some like , some do not.
I made a comment that criticized a new Lionel transformer on it’s weak points and it was never published, it was then I realized you can’t fight city hall. The magazine is what it is and it’s very doubtful it will ever change. Each to their own. Many forum members that I used to banter topics around with have moved on. I do stop by from time to time here, but there doesnt seem to much going on but the problem could lie with my own interests if thats a problem, who knows? Its their editorial policy to do as they please but on the other hand, while the last S gauge layout coverage was excellent, one article does not a subscription make. It’s probably just me but the fact that subscribers write a great deal of the magazine always struck me as odd. It certainly is a less expensive option. The content became predictable in t
I am a Flyer “Hi Rail” kind of guy and have been a subscriber from the 1st issue of CTT. I preferred the “classic” articles (covering Ives, Marx, Flyer[Chicago Flyer and Gilbert Flyer], Dorfan) and liked the Standard Gauge as well as the Garden Railroad articles. I was disappointed when the Garden Railroads went to their own magazine and, if I am disappointed as a “Flyer Guy” imagine how the Marx enthusiast must feel. If we are talking about Classic Toy Trains, a few articles about wind up trains should be in order, but they also are absent.
On the other hand, the Layout Visit articles are much more instructive than they were in the first issues and the quality of writing is much better.
Although the articles about Flyer are not as frequent as I might like, they are well written. Many of the Flyer related articles in the early issues had severe errors of fact, but this has not been the case in many years.
As a S gauge Hi Rail kind of guy, I read Model Railroader, Model Railroad Craftsman and Classic Toy Trains and I take and adapt ideas from the HO guys, the Lionel guys and even the N scale guys.
If you don’t like the current editorial policy of CTT, wait about 2 years and it will change again.
I just want to chime in and mention that being able to have discussions like this is what makes America great.
That being said, my Christmas layouts will be in either the December or January issue (not sure which) and I use O, S and Standard Gauge. That article wouldn’t be happening without the response to the postings I’ve made right here on this forum. Based on my experiences I have to believe that they DO listen.
I imagine that the reason they cater to the Lionel crowd is that they are in the majority. Personally I have never had an S gauge of any kind but I can understand the reason readers who like S gauge are complaining. Posts like this will probably help but I think the majority will still rule.
Roger Carp is always looking for S-Gauge layouts to feature. If you want to see more S gauge, Standard Gauge, Marx etc., you need to let him know about such layouts. CTT can’t produce train layouts out of thin air.
Wallyworld’s statement :
“It’s probably just me but the fact that subscribers write a great deal of the magazine always struck me as odd. It certainly is a less expensive option.”
is not factual. Actually, almost all of the layout articles in CTT are written by the staff. Most of the “How-to” articles are written by the staff and a few long time contributors. Now, Model Railroader is a different story. Many of the layouts featured in its pages are often photographed and written by their subscribers.
It is also not a less expensive option. The staff is on salary. They get paid regardless of who writes the article. Any submission still passes through an editor’s hands for editing and then goes to the art department for layout… Any published articles submitted by subscribers or other non-staff contributors are paid for by CTT. Far from being less expensive, this actually costs more.
If you want S ga articles some one has to submit them. I’m sure if they had good material it would be published. Tell those S gaugers to get busy and send in some articles.
A suggestion then. Other than layouts, why not do a couple of articles on cleaning and refurbishing old Flyer equipment? Like the article on refurbishing a Lionel GG1 the magazine did a couple of issues back, or the “Steam tune-up” article from September 2012, again featuring all Lionel.
Since us Flyer guys pretty much have to depend on eBay and toy train swap meets to build our rosters, and do a lot of our own maintenance, those kinds of articles would be very welcome. If you want something icon to a Flyer collector, try any PA-1 set, or how about a 4-8-4?
Those are the kind of articles that could easily be submitted by American Flyer collectors and operators like yourself. I’m sure you would have many maintenance tips you could share. Why not call Carl Swanson ? The fact is, unless someone on the staff has an American Flyer collection, it’s unlikely that an article about a PA-1 set or a 4-8-4 would be forthcoming unless it comes from the outside.
How about you make your next CTT magazine project layout in S-scale? This would give your people the opportunity to check out the new S scale Fastrak offerings from Lionel. Or you could build it with MTH/S-Trax. Or a mixture of both. The S-Trax is my favorite because, unlike Lionel’s current offering, you get three different curve radii to play with in the design. You could employ some of the small, relativity inexpensive, laser-cut structure kits that are available in S-Scale from various manufacturers. Like the one below:
I think your suggestion is a good one. Although I have written many articles for CTT, including the Sandy Harbor project layout, I’m not a staff person. Project layouts by authors, like myself, are the rare exception. However, I would strongly suggest giving Carl a call and speaking with him directly about it. Personal communication makes a bigger impression–if you get my drift.
As far as me penning an article of interest to American Flyer collectors and operators, I’ve been toying with the idea. Recently, an old buddy of mine gave me his boyhood post war American Flyer trains. They appear to be in excellent condition and, frankly, I want to play with them. That got me thinking about writing an article. I’ll be giving Carl a call to toss around some ideas. Stay tuned–who knows where that will lead.
I would love to be able to have an S scale layout and trains and discuss them but the fact of the matter is S scale is way over priced compared to O scale or even HO scale. It is out here in California where you get robbed without a gun on a daily basis for just about anything. We do have one retailer who has great prices when he has some S gauge but it’s too far in between to make it a viable scale. Maybe someone in this thread can tell why S scale is so much more expensive to they build the partsd with platinum? If a manufacturer could made the cost somewhere between O and HO you would have a lot more S scalers than we do now. I think the scale is perfect especially if you are limited on room. I know this is probably way off base but I dream of having a S scale setup.
