0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
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...
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.
I have some old MR issues that feature that WC layout, and that was a nice layout. Nothing wrong with that.
I guess the question regarding the earlier part of your post is whether you felt that the entire David Popp buildout series on his N scale layout was worthwhile? I'm not sure why that has been overlooked. Likewise they did that Salt Lake 4x8 with Kato equipment that certainly underscores how easy it can be to build something in N scale. It kinda represents both ends of the spectrum in a way. David Popp is talking about greatly expanding his layout and that could provide a lot more N scale coverage. Overall though given all the scales they have to cover, I think they generally do a good job. Is it perfect? No way. Could it be better in some ways? Absolutely. I just think they get pulled a lot of different directions and overall (and I think obviously to an extent) they are going to primarily feature HO related content as that is the biggest market.
but they'll need to compete with outlets such as Railwire and N Scale Limited, which offer convenience.
Any time David Popp's work is covered in MR, I run to the newsstand to get a copy. You could say I'm a groupie. He's got all the earmarks of a true a$$hat, from his approach to modeling, layout design, and operations, to the tone and competency of his writing. While he may not be pushing the boundaries of N scale the way Odegard did, he does an outstanding job of representing the possibilities that exist in N....and David, if you happen to be lurking, a$$hat is a compliment!...and we have a lot of Davids here anyway, so no one would notice if you dropped in periodically... Lee
....I never had to regauge a set of wheels.
Author
Topic: Model Railroader and the Modern N Scaler... (Read 10191 times)
