Not a gripe but a suggestion…
I just recevied my anniversary issue, I subscribe to all MR’s magazines
inclucing CTT, GR and non MR such as OGR and RMC, My only complaint
or should I say “WISH” is that Model Railroader would get rid of the the staples and go the perfect bound way!
I opened to check out the cool color spread inside and the staples as usual loosened and out it came. Since I save magazines I wish MR would go perfect bound. Does anyone else have ideas?
Still the one and only “best” model train magazine in the world!
Last time I checked, the annual issues are bound this way.
The monthly issues are stapled to cut costs,in my opinion.
Yes, they get in the way sometimes, but I do not feel it is a big
problem myself.
I’m about to contradict what I said in the other thread…
MR would make me a lot happier if they’d go back to mailing their magazines inside plastic covers as they used to. I have had many damaged issues since they changed. I know the cost is higher, but, frankly, it can’t be much more than pennies per issue, and anyway I surely don’t recall a drop in the price when they implemented their new policy.
Yes! the Great Model Railroads and MR planning ( annuals are perfect bound)
my gripe is- time for MR to go that way too- get rid of the staples, charge me another 25 cents I would pay for it…
I agree with the ACL fan about the plastic packing also as I receive my
MR in the mailbox and (sometimes yes sometimes they come in torn abit
or damaged from being beaten thru the postal system.
How about plastic covers and Perfect bound ( but after tonites issue failing into
my lap as I eagerly paged through the issue I would settle for a perfect bound
no staples to start with…
I totally agree with the plastic going away.
I WAS QUITE PISSED when my issue came
without the first time. My mail carrier folds
EVERYTHING ands the pages are creased
when I read them. The postal system is not
careful at all. I will really complain if my magazine
comes in pieces.
Yes “pain” however I have made calls to MR’s customer service dept
and they usuall ship one out to me asap if my magazine is in poor condition
upon arrival- Kudos to them for professional response to damaged magazines!
I will second you on the suggestion for MR to be “perfect bound”.
MR is getting to have so many pages now days that I’ve often wondered why the binding is still staples. GMR and MRP annuals don’t have as many pages and they are “perfect bound”. National Geographic (not a Kalmbach perodical) is also bound this way. The new binding would not only greatly improve the appearance of the publication, but would also keep the pages together as I read and re-read through them year after year after year. I have some old issues in which the pages are comming out because of the staples wearing through the paper.
I haven’t received the January '04 issue yet, but from the previous posts, it sounds like it may be an exceptionally thick issue – like the 50th anniversary issue when compared to the issues that came before it.
I also miss the plastic and, previous to that, the paper envelope that the magazines were mailed in.
I guess the next questions we subscribers should be asking Kalmbach is: Can the same equipment being used on MRP and GMR also be used for MR? If not, what new equipment will Kalmbach need to purchase to bind MR with the better binding. Can it be used to bind Kalmbach’s other perodicals and books as well to make the return on investment in the equipment worth the cost to purchase the new equipment (and also spread the cost over a larger number of subscribers so all benefit in a better product).
I rembember when Classic Trains Came out. It was also “perfect bound” as well. However that was not as popular with the consuming public becasue the magazine could not be laid flat in photo copiers. So they went to the Staple bound with it.
I have noticed that quite often when MR has published a set of plans that took up more than one page they will often publish it on the Centerfold.
This is just some observations I have made. I could really care less. As the plans can be put in a fold out of exceeding one page.
My vote is for perfect bound as I re-read MR also too. I reread it more often than
make photocopies ( thats just me).
The staples popped out the centerfold of the 70 th anniversary the other nite
just thought the the Perfect bound idea time has come…
I prefer the current binding with staples as I can read the magazine without the pages coming out. I find that over time the glue comes unglued and then the pages fall out. with no easy way to put them back in. My copy of the Creative Layout Design by John Armstrong is pretty much a loose leaf collection of pages after 25 years.
Enjoy
Paul
Thanks for your input. You make a good point against the glued binding idea. Its good to be able to read about both the pros and cons of an idea. I still like the “perfect binding” idea, but you made me realize that neither binding will really hold up to the abuse of modelers reading and re-reading the issue over many years.
I wonder if there is a binding that will?
Well here is a vote to keep MR bound the way it is now. It enables scale plans or photos to be printed out over a center spread. So far I have had few problems with staples coming loose – the only exception being the annual index which I pull out and keep separate.
Dave Nelson
Here’s an idea (off the top of my head, WAY too early in the morning).
What if the book was bound like note pads used to be - with the glue strip on one side, but you could “peel” the pages out, and the whole magazine was 3-ring punched?
Then, if you wanted to keep it bound, you could, but you could also disassemble it, and put it in a 3-ring binder. It could also be possible, if done that way, to group articles together by topic, although unless you kept careful track, it would be easy to misplace articles.
I realize there are logistical problems with this, but it was just an idea…
I hate perfect bound magazines. You can’t leave them open on a table while you do something else because they shut themselves or you have to break the binding.
and all the photos that are over two pages are spoiled because you can’t open the mag wide enough to see the bit in the middle.
Glad to see that it isn’t just my copy of Creative Layout Design that has turned itself into a kit! Other books from the same general era such as Bruce Chubb’s book on operation have stood up fine with the perfect binding, though.
Stapled: This my preference so that I can fold the mag backwards in half if needed while reading it in close confines. Also the “lay flat” thing, as already stated, makes it easy to use on the workbench while applying a technique shown in an article. Besides, being stapled makes it easier to remove those irritating cardstock ads which act as bookmarks while fipping through the pages. The first thing I do is remove them!!
Printing cost note:
Stapled binding is printed on large sheet paper (some printers use 11x17 others use 22x34), folded, stapled, then cut to size. Stapling cuts cost significatly when compared to perfect binding which is run on individual sheets (which cost more), bound (with a higher cost binding process) then cut.
Plastic Sleeve: Yes, it does cost to encase each magazine in a plastic sleeve. However, it seem to me that the cost to replace “received damaged” issues would cost more. After all, a staff is needed to process the requests, the cost of a second printed copy, the cost of the paper envelope they send it in, then they pay 1st Class postage to get it to you. The replacement magazine, without a plastic sleeve, seems as though it would cost more than the original with a plastic sleeve.
MR – Rain and snow damage season is here! Plastic or Papermâché ?
