Model Railroader and the Modern N Scaler...

[MichaelWinicki]

I've been using Atlas Code 55 for three years...

I simply think it's fantastic.  Terrific track to work with.  I haven't come across anything more problematic with it than when I was using Code 80.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

That Code 55 piece did bug me, but only because he never mentioned that the reason stuff doesn't work on it is because it's out of NMRA spec. It seemed like he was blaming the track, not the out-of-spec other products.

[Brakie]

I've been using Atlas Code 55 for three years...

I simply think it's fantastic.  Terrific track to work with.  I haven't come across anything more problematic with it than when I was using Code 80.

To be sure I heard enough pros and cons about C55 that I'm leary of it..

Now take a new  modeler or one that is thinking about coverting to  N Scale and that C55 blast didn't sound good.

[Blazeman]

What hurt N at Kalmbach was the premature death of Gordie Odegaard. No modeler in their right mind can find fault with his work on the Clinchfield. His earlier projects did not have the better products to work with, but when he did the Clinchfield, PECO turnouts were on the scene and Kadee products as well. He was the man who put N on the map in terms of giving a modeler a reason to want to build a layout at home that could represent some heavy duty railroading like only N can do.

Since Gordie, they've farmed out their project work in N which hasn't helped. They have given David Popp quite a bit of space during his time there, and his layout gets lots of exposure in video, books and articles/series. But David's time is limited with his video production work he does there, and being rounded up to work on their staff projects.

[sizemore]

Tim may be on to something, in that we are indeed "deeper in the weeds" than the average model railroader.  But two of the items discussed here are "department" type columns where the presenters are supposed to be well versed in their topics.  This isn't an issue of whether or not we're submitting enough articles.  (The layout article does a pretty good job, and was obviously a reader submission, so they ARE getting stuff, and it's making it through the eye of the needle.)

The issue is that we have two "experts" who are making N scale sound like it's some kind of disease that needs treatment... Not picking nits, per se, but do they know what they're talking about or no?

Lee

It's the blind leading the blind!

The S.

[bbussey]

I'm not going to criticize MR on how they cover N scale because they have been extremely good to ESM over the last few years, and they have orchestrated a number of projects over the decades that rank among the most noteworthy in N scale history.  The Clinchfield project was a huge boost to N scale when it was published in 1978, and coverage of David Popp's New Haven layout in recent years has been a major asset.

That said - from the day that Bob Hundmann told me he was considering launching an N scale specific magazine to expand on the N-Trak Newsletter niche, I've been an advocate.  Because NSM and NSR do not have to spread resources covering all scales, I feel they are better suited to provide the content that N scale advocates want.  And that's not a knock on MR or RMC.  While they have circulation numbers that the N scale magazines drool for, they just don't have the freedom to cover the scale the way we'd like to see.  You won't ever see rolling stock or motive power fleet articles.  You won't see kitbashing articles in detail.  The Reid Brothers' Cumberland Valley feature in NSR was superior to the dozen or so articles in the larger magazines that featured the layout over the years - in content, page layout and total pages.  You simply get a greater diversity in the two N scale magazines, which generally means every issue has at least one feature that appeals to everyone most of the time.
 

[Bob Bufkin]

After reading all this I went a bought a copy.  I can see the frustration some of you have.  My main beef is the SD45 decoder install.  Believe he said it was for his son, which if you read between the lines, means N is for the kids and grown men still do HO or O.  Just my opinion. 

[nscalemike]

I've been using Atlas Code 55 for three years...

I simply think it's fantastic.  Terrific track to work with.  I haven't come across anything more problematic with it than when I was using Code 80.

Very nicely detailed track there, exactly what one can get with Code 55.  I also made the switch to code 55 on my new layout I started in the fall.  I started with Kato unitrack, bullet proof yes, but you cant make it blend in very realistically with surrounding scenery (evident in MR's n scale feature layout if you look at the close up photos page 48 and 52), then to peco code 55, again almost bullet proof and turnouts need no machine, but ties are way oversized, and now finally the atlas.  I will never go back and think this is some of the best stuff out there (but I understand that rolling stock may need some tweaking).

[DKS]

After reading all this I went a bought a copy.  I can see the frustration some of you have.  My main beef is the SD45 decoder install.  Believe he said it was for his son, which if you read between the lines, means N is for the kids and grown men still do HO or O.  Just my opinion. 

Yikes. If one were to don a tinfoil hat and assume a worst-case scenario, one could imagine that Kalmbach is hatching a plot to destroy N Scale using the ruse of giving it more press.

[Philip H]

Yikes. If one were to don a tinfoil hat and assume a worst-case scenario, one could imagine that Kalmbach is hatching a plot to destroy N Scale using the ruse of giving it more press.

Yeah, and really guys, we spend a LOT of time here bashing inferior products and bemoaning the "ease" that our larger scale brethren have in doing things, often owing to product availability.  Is it really hard to accept that Mr. Kelly, for all his n scale acumen, is any different?Or for that matter, is it really hard to imagine that Mr. Polsgrove had to try it a couple of times to get it right?  And for that we launch the Demerit Gun?

[48Fan]

I have always liked the MR authors like Mr. Kelly and Mr Odegard. Can it be that his article was written months ago and we are just now getting the results of his attempts?
Seems to me I heard somewhere it would take that long to get it to print. We on the forum are always on the cutting edge on new things, arent we? The magazines may just be catching up.

[sirenwerks]

I have always liked the MR authors like Mr. Kelly and Mr Odegard. Can it be that his article was written months ago and we are just now getting the results of his attempts?

LOL! I always have to watch what I say and I often set my writing aside and come back to read it fresh so as not to offend others (too much). So MR had six months too assess and re-assess the tone of the Kelly piece? And they didn't see how offensive it could be? Wow, and I thought I was out of touch.

I don't buy that. Tinfoil hats aside, maybe the HO gauge manufacturers are strong arming out of fear of N scales gaining popularity?

[wm3798]

Oh my.  I don't suspect anyone is being intentional about any of this.  I just think that there's a basic element of "Just Doesn't Get It".  It might have been as simple as someone saying "What do those guys talk about there on the N scale forums?"  Obviously, the topic with the most hits over the past decade would be c55 track...  Write about that, they figured... it's like shooting ducks in a barrel!

Lee

[lashedup]

Every time this topic comes up it makes me laugh a little bit as it somehow devolves into MR having something against N scale. Honestly I think N scale is far, far smaller group of modelers than our immediate sphere of influence here would indicate. For many people in the model railroading hobby it comes at a later point in life and smaller scales like N and Z are not easy on the fingers or the eyes and take some getting used to. The equipment available compared to HO is nowhere near as prolific and given that HO represents the largest bulk of the modelers out there, MR caters to those readers. Sure, more HO related advertisers mean MR will try to work a few more of those products into their layouts and projects. That's made even easier when MR's biggest layout project is an HO layout at their office.

I still believe firmly that MR is still valuable to me as most of their how-to and project pieces transfer to other scales. Add in their demanding standards of modeling and photography and I can find a reason to buy it. The rest of my modeling skills are honed by trying new things and getting feedback in forums like this one.

Now where did I leave my beer...

[sirenwerks]

Sure, more HO related advertisers mean MR will try to work a few more of those products into their layouts and projects. That's made even easier when MR's biggest layout project is an HO layout at their office.

First, let me say that sometimes it's just fun to leave the emoticons off of a message (it's an Aspergers thing) and see where everyone goes. But there's an ounce of truth to what I wrote simply by economy of scale (no pun intended) and product placement. Can you imagine an advertiser saying no to a request for product to be featured on a project layout that receives coverage in every issue of a major trade rag? And to carry that argument further, think of which supplier's in close proximity to Kalmbach, namely WALTHERS, and its wrong-headed take on N scale product development ("We'll make it in N when the HO product sells"). Can you see how things might get askew? I could easily imagine the conversation being had at the outset of such negotiations, wincing as Wally frowned upon N because it just doesn't sell well, not accepting its own heavy hand in the failure.

IMO, the perfect way MR could redeem itself is to embrace N scale in a major way, with all its challenges that reach beyond the 'beginner' concept range, and create a new project layout that highlights how easy it is to overcome most of them. The Clinchfield embraced some of N scale's assets and MR certainly didn't present it as oh-so-difficult then, when product was less available and technologies not so developed. Why not take that up a notch? I'm not talking about something like its Wisconsin Central, which was basically presented as a shrunk down HO layout, but a feature that ran with the long train, big industry, expansive scenery, portability benefits of N. Yes, it should point out the challenges of N (in part as a clear hint to manufacturers of how to proceed) but not with the woeful tone of Kelly's piece.