Posing A Question About THe Hobby

[Lester Perry]

I feel I am a successful model railroader. I have taken part in open house schedule in my area and have had people return year after year to see what I have done. I have received phone calls from people desiring to see my layout because someone told them about it. I am telling you this not to blow my horn but to say I haven't subscribed to MR mag for several years and haven't purchased one over the counter for a long time. It seems such a waste of good money to me. Very rarely does it present anything new in layout design. The new product reviews are lies as they request a product from a manufacturer for review. Now if I were naive I would think they get one off the shelf from LHS. Pack it up untouched and send it to them. In reality they would do what you & I would. Get one from their selected best. Go over it with a fine tooth comb. repair any potential problems. check anything that is a known problem ( These reviews are never 1 or 2 months after the product is introduced but usually a year or more.) The manufacturer has had time to find problems from cutomers. They can repair known trouble before sending it to MRR. You must remember who advertises in these mags. Now want a real review. Come here and ask about it. someone has bought one and can give you an unbiased opinion. I have run on now and forgot why I even wrote this. Maybe you can figure it out.
Les

This guy sounds like a very arrogant person. OH wait this is me. notice I said at the end I forgot why I wrote this. Well the reason was to say this. I used to but kits and loved P2Kkits for the detail. I would never buy a RTR car. As some of you may have figured out I model the C&O. When I first started in this hobby seriously If you wanted C&O you had to paint it your self, there was very little available to buy. I have some Geeps I am very proud of. Now I am not able to do this so I am glad I can get RTR if I desire. I would have trouble with Athearn BB box car now. So I may detest MRR I love RTR. Now maybe it makes some sence. If not feel free to delete this and the other rambling madness. I am not the A hole this sounds like, maybe I should just shut up and quietly bow out
Les

[Ralph]

Ok guys I have a question for all of you.

What gives any of you the right to tell somebody else how to enjoy their hobby? I mean afterall it's their hobby it is not YOURS.You have your own.

Welll, yeah Catt...right. No one should say that the way another person enjoys the hobby is the "wrong way". This thread was originally about whether a model magazine should present a professionally built layout in its pages because there are some questions as to whether its just a glorified ad. I still think that's a legitimate question. I guess if I felt strongly about it I could write to the magazine as MM plans to do.

As for discussions of what makes a person a "model railroader" they never get resolved and tend to end up being circular arguments like we have here.

Ralph

[Charlie B]

This guy sounds like a very arrogant person. OH wait this is me. Les[/quote]

Les, you just keep on ramblin. It takes a very special person to critique himself, especially when we know your circumstances.
I have been reading and enjoying your posts and remarkable recovery for 2 years now, and although I don't comment frequently, I do follow what you post. You have one great layout.
My backup engineer is also a longtime C&O modeler, to the point he built a 40 foot diameter dome house so he would not have corners on his layout. I hope you two someday can meet.
Charlie

[sgtcarl1]

Okay. Time for me to "chime in." So, if you don't like to read articles about a "contractor" built layout, fine. Just don't read them. Suppose I wanted a model railroad to enjoy. And suppose I wasn't physically able to build it, myself. Hypothetically speaking, some things aren't do-able to someone in a wheelchair. So suppose I hired someone to build the layout for me. But I ran the trains when it was completed. By some of the members of this illustrious forum I'm not actually a model railroader. I'm just a "wanna be." And because my hands aren't steady enough to build a kit, and have it look decent, does that mean I can't have any buildings on my layout, because I didn't build them myself? How many of you self righteous modelers manufacture your own track???
Really! I'm just a little miffed, no, make that peeved, about some attitudes that are displayed here on. I may just go elsewhere.

[MountainMan]

Okay. Time for me to "chime in." So, if you don't like to read articles about a "contractor" built layout, fine. Just don't read them. Suppose I wanted a model railroad to enjoy. And suppose I wasn't physically able to build it, myself. Hypothetically speaking, some things aren't do-able to someone in a wheelchair. So suppose I hired someone to build the layout for me. But I ran the trains when it was completed. By some of the members of this illustrious forum I'm not actually a model railroader. I'm just a "wanna be." And because my hands aren't steady enough to build a kit, and have it look decent, does that mean I can't have any buildings on my layout, because I didn't build them myself? How many of you self righteous modelers manufacture your own track???
Really! I'm just a little miffed, no, make that peeved, about some attitudes that are displayed here on. I may just go elsewhere.

You seem to be addressing an entirely different issue - being physically handicapped. I'm married to a handicapped woman, so you might want to be very careful about transferring your "miffed" attitudes onto me.

You might also want to actually read the initial entry that started this discussion, the specific subject of which is whether or not a contractor-built layout should be a feature layout in a magazine allegedly aimed at hobbyists.

[RobertInOntario]

I can't speak about the layout mentioned in MR, but I do know that there is at least one (I suspect there are actually several!) company in the UK that builds layouts for MRR customers. These professionally-build layouts will cost you a good $1,000 to $1,200, IIRC.

I guess it's OK if you have the money. If I had the money, I might consider hiring someone to do the benchwork and possibly the wiring for me -- but I'd happily tackle the scenery as I enjoy that. But this is only if I had the money. A good part of this hobby is learning and doing these things yourself. If you hire someone else to do this for you, what fun is there in that?

As pointed out here, I agree there are good reasons & circumstances for hiring someone to build a layout for you. But if you're able-bodied and have a reasonable amount of free time, I think it's best to try to tackle these things on your own. I'm not a handyman at all -- I struggle with all sorts of basic things!

I'd much sooner put money into this hobby gradually as I learn & do things myself. It's even fun running trains on a basic layout board while you gradually add in the scenery.

Rob

[RobertInOntario]

I just wanted to add one other comment, as I don't want any of my rambling thoughts to come out the wrong way.

I don't think it's "wrong" to spend $1,200 to hire someone to build a layout. People spend that kind of money easily on all sorts of leisure items. And I've probably spent at least $1,000 on my layouts over the past 4-5 years. I just couldn't justify outlaying that amount of money on my hobby -- all at once -- when I already have all sorts of family expenses.

I also think it's OK for MR to run a story on this layout. There are other interesting modeling issues, i.e. how the layout is operated, its time period, what stock is run on it, etc.

Rob

[Brakie]

Ok guys I have a question for all of you.

What gives any of you the right to tell somebody else how to enjoy their hobby? I mean afterall it's their hobby it is not YOURS.You have your own.

Gee whiz furball I am a big fan of RTR in HO and N..Heck if I could afford it I would have Lance Mindheim to build me a N Scale copy of CSX's Miami East Rail District..

I wouldn't hang my head either..

I am not a real model railroader after 57 years so,what the hey?

[Sumpter250]

I am not a real model railroader after 57 years so,what the hey?

I went back to the two lists of "Real model railroaders............"
I guess I'm not a real model railroader either.

[Selector]

...

You might also want to actually read the initial entry that started this discussion, the specific subject of which is whether or not a contractor-built layout should be a feature layout in a magazine allegedly aimed at hobbyists.

Once again, you limit the ability of members here to participate. You have used the term "hobbyists" as your generalized ideal that includes only people who build things, and excludes all those who must hire someone else to either assemble RTR items or actually construct a functional layout for them.

Your apparent definition of "hobbyists" seems to be exclusive to those who merely want to play trains, and getting them to the point of playing is irrelevant. It's not for you, that is clear, but to make what I feel are false distinctions, as I pointed out in my last post to you, is merely divisive. I have seen it before, and had hoped not to see it here.

[eightyeightfan1]

I'm not a true model railroader, but I play one in real life.

Is there really a correct definition of a "real model railroader"...I don't think so.
Being a model railroader is more a state of mind. Is the guy that pulls out his Lionel every year and sets it up around his Christams tree a "real mdoel railroader". He make think so. But the guy with just a 4' x 8' oval on a piece of plywood thinks he's more a model railroader than him. As well as the guy that has his basement full of trains thinks he's more a model railroader than the 4 x 8 guy. And don't even get me started on rivet counetrs!

Its all a matter of perspective. Its doesen't matter whether I have just a 4 x 8, or a basement full. It doesen't matter if I like building kits, or buying RTR, or "Plop in Place" structures. It doesen't matter, if I run a a Heinz vinegar car behind an SD90MAC, or a string of double stacks behind a Pacific. Its how I percieve the hobby, and how I enjoy it.

So what if I have deep pockets and have a professional build a layout for me, does that make me a "real model railroader"....Maybe...What if I run my trains protypically with waybills, time tables, and CTC machine. Wouldn't that considered being a model railroader?

The original concept of this thead has deteriated to a "bashing war". The article may have seemed like a advertisement for the company that built the layout...True...How many other articles had Model Railroader published did the same thing. Why aren't they mentioned here? I did mention one, but it seemed to have been missed. I also included some of the reasons why the guy had it professionally built....Its back on the first page.....Check it out.

So...Lets forget the "Real model railroader" bashing of this thread and get beack to the original concept.
Or just let sleeping dogs lie...........

[sgtcarl1]

Mt. man:
I am deeply concerned that I may have upset you. My wife is also handicasped. She is at 80% disabled, by the VA. I'm handicapped, too. (And not just mentally.) I am considered "permanently disabled" because there is little hope for my condition ever improving. I was merely trying to point out that because some of us model ralroaders are physically handicapped, and unable to perform certain tasks ourselves, we shouldn't be excluded from the category of "model railroaders;" a point I think you would agree with. Again, I am saddened by the thought that I may have upset you. I consider you as one of the best modelers on this forum, and always enjoy your posts. My heartfelt apologies.

[Russ Bellinis]

I think this thread has wandered off topic so far that it may not be really recoverable. I realize that MtMan was making reference to a specific article in Model Railroader. From that comment, this has gone off topic to the point that modeler's with disabilities a jumping in and taking offense. I think the problem is that a post has gone from a specific criticism of a specific case of a specific article in a specific issue of Model Railroader. It may not help that many who are responding have not even read that issue of Model Railroader, but it has gone to generalities, and now people are taking offense, finding exceptions, and questioning whether they are even model railroaders based on who knows what. Is there any socially redeeming value left in this thread?

[Selector]

Russ, the last words in the opening statement were, "...maybe I'm too much of a purist." The inference, whether intended or not, is clear...unless one builds (an arbitrary, subjective, and as yet undefined) percentage of all that comes together to yield a functioning layout, the efforts of anyone not complying will fall short. They do not possess the "requisite" extent of "purity". It smacks purely of elitism. Elitism by definition means a setting apart. Setting apart, by definition, is exclusive. QED.

Words are important, and should not be bandied about carelessly when that is all any of us has by which to judge their intent and meaning. Those of us who have commented, as the invitation requested, have stated that we don't find fault with the article necessarily, pointing out that just because something is availed by paying someone else to provide it does not, and ought not, preclude anyone from participation in a hobby with many guises. Model Railroader Magazine presented yet another commercially produced layout. As far as I can tell, the heavy majority of all their layout articles feature commercial products, some more, some less. I won't dispute that it will not be more than interesting to the majority of readers, but people should still have an appreciation for what these outfits can do. Their product, after all, is made by mere mortals like the two of us. Whether a person gets paid to erect a layout or does it for their own pleasure or satisfaction is no different between the two "camps", really...none of us has a gun to our heads. Similarly, last I checked, there is no guideline from a source I would recognize as my judge saying that a person must build an entire layout, including rolling objects, from raw materials. There are gradients in several factors that come together in any human undertaking.

I have not set out to be contrary or obstructive, but the tenor of these types of judgemental, opinionated, threads is invariably divisive. It seems to get people to walk to either side of a line. The line, as I suggested a minute ago, is entirely arbitrary to my way of thinking. The line says those who have paid to have a layout should not be featured in a hobby magazine. Nonsense! Otherwise, who would pay for the subscriptions that would necessarily climb to $750 per year if nothing commercially produced could be featured? That would include advertising.

Once again, I reluctantly get dragged into these, truly knowing better, but still doing it of my own free will...which this hobby offers all of us as meets our needs and interests.

It was said a few posts back...if that type of article offends any one reader, they can take it up with the Corporation, send a letter, or just decline to read it. But the author of an opening remark about discomfort, and then seeking feedback, should be able to withstand contrary opinion, including observations that are relevant to the nature of the discussion. In that respect, I don't see how it has gone off topic at all.

Respectfully,

-Crandell

[Squidbait]

What gives any of you the right to tell somebody else how to enjoy their hobby? I mean afterall it's their hobby it is not YOURS.You have your own.

Nobody's telling anyone how to enjoy their hobby. They're simply expressing an opinion about how they do it. As noted by others, if it floats their boat, then fine. But it may not cut it for others.

What we have the right to do is point our fingers and laugh our butts off at things we find funny, find fault with anything that doesn't meet our standards of what is and isn't model railroading, and criticize any obvious character flaws presented for public approval.

We also have the right to applaud and praise work we find exceptional, worthy or just downright nice.

The initial complaint was about a 5 page photo-spread article in MR, about a custom-built layout for some guy. There was no description of how the layout was built, the equipment used on it, or how it ran. It was a "look at the pretty toys we built" article. Very close to a paid ad, IMHO. I really didn't care about the owner's life story, but if that's all they could find to talk about to pad the article, then it's pretty lame.

If MR wanted to be "truer" to model railroading, they would have presented it as a short "look at this custom-built layout" or a spread in Trackside Photos, rather than pump it up into an article about the winter layout belonging to someone who didn't have the time, energy or talent to build a model railroad.

MR has a long history of infomercial articles... my bugaboo has been any of the DCC "DIY" articles that you can only "do" by buying CVP products.