I guess its time to add my 2 cents worth.
I will start off by saying that I too have been disappointed, disallusioned
NOT! in the "dumbed" down content of MR compared to years past. Yes in the past we had the Dollar car projects, many layout/building plans and many articles on turning different Athearns into this and that diesel powered creature, many articles on kitbashing and even loco scratchbuilding articles.
But I differ from many on the MR forums and some here as well.
Leave the magazine alone, and stop Monday morning quarterbacking their decisions. They must be doing something right or they would not have a circulation of around 170,000. Granted its down from its heyday in the 80's/90's but show me a railroading magazine, any railroading magazine, that hasn't lost circulation since then. I know of at least two mags that currently are in danger of shutting down from a circulation drop. These mags carried the kind of articles that many complain MR doesn't.
The entire basis of the hobby has changed to a RTR format. Back in the fifties thru the seventies, if you wanted RTR, then the only choice was a set and most of that stuff wasn't any good. The only "good" sets were from Mantua, Penn Line, Bachmann, and Varney, and all of these sets (and most of the makers) were gone by the late sixties. All of these had very good motors, all wheel drive, (except the Mantua diesels, but it was a very good drive for its day, smooth and quiet). Pancake motors hadn't been invented yet. Most of these sets were anything but cheap as you could buy the same engines and cars as kits and they were, as kits, cheaper than the sets. RTR was considered a lame way to be a model railroader. To have quality rolling stock you either at least build the new BB type kits, or learned how to build and detail "craftsman" kits. No one worried about car numbers, color, accuracy or prototype correctness unless you were building for a NMRA contest. Then at the minimum, you'd start with a difficult craftsman kit and replace everything with scratched details or you'd build completly from scratch.
RTR now has a level of detail and quality that is unsupassed compared to what was the norm for RTR in years past. Are you aware that you can now buy a RTR that has more and better details on it, generally for less money, than you used to be able to buy in the most detailed craftsman loco or car kit on the market? As the market has changed so did the mag. I love to build, in fact I only own one car and one loco that is unaltered RTR. Does this make my way the ONLY, the BEST? No, not no way, not no how. Should the mag return to this "builders" format? Again, NNW,NNH. RTR, currently, appears to be the future of the hobby. We have had more new locos and loco types, as well as car and car types released in the past ten years than in the prior forty! Not counting the resin kits, many of these models are more detailed than the old kits. Plus I don't think that you'd see and continue to see this number of new releases if the hobby was "shrinking".
The mag has to change to reflect what is now this "mainstream" view and not toward the minority. That is, the most people the mag has gotten geared to are relatively new modelers, and an article with an in depth discussion of DCC like was being complained about over at the MR Forums, I believe would have scared off more people than it would have helped! So if the mag has less of a "how to" and more of a "see this" format, then if YOU don't like it, drop the subscription, stop buying the mag and find another. The Model Railroader HAS to stay a general, basic, and not an advanced, model railroading mag. (IMHO it always was the BASIC mag, even its most "intense" articles weren't as "intense" as the equivalent RMC articles). It was always the one mag that got you started in the hobby, geared more toward the individual as more of a "well rounded" inspirational source rather than a "well rounded" how to source.
Sorry about the length of the rant. I even took out three other paragraphs. I hope some of you understood what I tried to say. Sometimes I type like I talk (totally disjointed and uncomprehensible
), when I get worked up about a subject, but this has been sticking in my craw for a while. Yes MR was a different mag than in the past, but that doesn't mean its a lesser one. If you've outgrown the mag, stop B***HING about it not growing with you and move on to other pastures. Remember, (besides the fact its just a mag, not THE bible about the hobby,) you once was like the new reader, the new model railroader, needing that level of information, and esp. inspiration, without being overwhelmed. There are plenty of alternatives out there for the more advanced modelers.
