ModelRailroadForums.com is a free Model Railroad Discussion Forum and photo gallery. We cover all scales and sizes of model railroads. Online since 2002, it's one of the oldest and largest model railroad forums on the web. Whether you're a master model railroader or just getting started, you'll find something of interest here.
My take on this is that history is fixed and time moves forward.
Assume the number of modelers is a relatively fixed percentage of the population, so grows relatively slowly. For the sake of argument lets say in 1950 there are three eras to model (up to WW1, WW1-WW2, after WW2), so the modelers would be spread over 3 eras. Fast forward to 1980, lets say there are now five eras to model (pre-WW1, WW1-WW2, WW2-1965, 1965-1980). The modelers are now spread over 5 eras. Its now 2016, lets say there are 7 eras (pre-WW1, WW1-WW2, WW2-1965, 1965-1980, 1980-2000, 2000-2016). The modelers are now spread over 7 eras. Its not that any era is necessarily less popular, its that there are now more choices by the simple fact that there is more railroading to model.
Its not as much that any era is "less popular", its that its being diluted. Whatever is the "most popular" now will become a smaller part of the modeling scene a time marches on and modelers are spread over 9, 10, a dozen eras.
I remember thinking the same thing back in the 1970's!
Not quite sure that really is valid anymore.
It might influence the region more than the era. I know lots of people who are modeling eras before they were born. I am modeling 1903 and was born in the mid 1950's. Everything I'm modeling I've only seen through black and white photos.
In the vast majority of the US steam operations ceased in the early 1950's. Assume you had to be at least 10 years old to have any comprehension about what was happening and any detailed memories. That means you would have had to have been born before 1945 to have "seen" steam in regular service and remembered it. I am quite sure there are hundreds of people who model steam who were born after 1945 (me being one).
Even with my huge layout space I could barely design a layout to run the locomotives if they could only handle prototypical size degree curves.
I don't want to, and I won't pay $3000 for a plastic or die cast locomotive, which is what they would cost or even more if the manufacturers did what is being suggested.
Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)
My take on this is that history is fixed and time moves forward.
Assume the number of modelers is a relatively fixed percentage of the population, so grows relatively slowly. For the sake of argument lets say in 1950 there are three eras to model (up to WW1, WW1-WW2, after WW2), so the modelers would be spread over 3 eras. Fast forward to 1980, lets say there are now five eras to model (pre-WW1, WW1-WW2, WW2-1965, 1965-1980). The modelers are now spread over 5 eras. Its now 2016, lets say there are 7 eras (pre-WW1, WW1-WW2, WW2-1965, 1965-1980, 1980-2000, 2000-2016). The modelers are now spread over 7 eras. Its not that any era is necessarily less popular, its that there are now more choices by the simple fact that there is more railroading to model.
Its not as much that any era is "less popular", its that its being diluted. Whatever is the "most popular" now will become a smaller part of the modeling scene a time marches on and modelers are spread over 9, 10, a dozen eras.
new guy
Active Member
It's what you saw as a kid that you want to model as an adult. Those who saw mostly Steamers when they were kids are getting more rare. I'm of a mind that a "model" is a representation of "history" so to ME a "model railroad" would naturally be a Steam powered railroad. I can of course admire to the skies and DO, a "model" of a modern "Intermodal" operation, it just does not fit "my" definition of a "model".
It's just my opinion! and I could in NO way cast aspersions upon any of the most EXCELLENT work depicting modern equipment that has been shown on these hallowed pages.
I run all eras and eventually my scenery will reflect that with a "layered" look, old steam equipment will be interspersed with modern facilities. "Time marches on but the old ones die hard" or some such nonsense.
It's just my opinion! and I could in NO way cast aspersions upon any of the most EXCELLENT work depicting modern equipment that has been shown on these hallowed pages.
I run all eras and eventually my scenery will reflect that with a "layered" look, old steam equipment will be interspersed with modern facilities. "Time marches on but the old ones die hard" or some such nonsense.
I remember thinking the same thing back in the 1970's!
I too have noticed a lot of steam engines being produced in the last 5 years; I even broke down and bought an Intermountain Cab Forward as a "one off" because I am an SP fan and thought it was an interesting model vs. the standard steam engines with the cab in the back.
That said, diesels are still being produced at much higher quantity and yes, steam engines cost about 2x as much on the average - it was a "special purchase" my wife allowed. I have wanted to purchase another, the SP MT4 but I've read a number of owners have had mechanical issues and they required a lot of tweaking and replacement of springs. Ug! They are a bit costly so no thanks.
Steam engines on the average require more tinkering and maintenance than diesels (as would make sense). I recall one modeler who got fed up with the maintenance required to keep his steam engines running and did what happened in real life, switched to diesels. I was born a few years after steam left the standard gauge mainlines so I've only seen it run in excursion trains. Like many, I want to model what I saw in my teens and twenties. That was the "2nd transition era - when changing from 1st generation diesels to second generation diesels.
That said, diesels are still being produced at much higher quantity and yes, steam engines cost about 2x as much on the average - it was a "special purchase" my wife allowed. I have wanted to purchase another, the SP MT4 but I've read a number of owners have had mechanical issues and they required a lot of tweaking and replacement of springs. Ug! They are a bit costly so no thanks.
Steam engines on the average require more tinkering and maintenance than diesels (as would make sense). I recall one modeler who got fed up with the maintenance required to keep his steam engines running and did what happened in real life, switched to diesels. I was born a few years after steam left the standard gauge mainlines so I've only seen it run in excursion trains. Like many, I want to model what I saw in my teens and twenties. That was the "2nd transition era - when changing from 1st generation diesels to second generation diesels.
N
NP2626
Guest
This topic was initiated with the impetus being a conversation starter. My opinion makes absolutely no difference. I see what I see and interpret the way I see it. The fact that others see things differently, should make little difference. Possibly my view is to narrow a look at the topic. Possibly my view is spot on. I would not put to much thought into the topic, as we're all going to do what we like, anyways!
While "Lots of steam have been reproduced in recent years" The FLAWS you pay for is not acceptable. They are still using the old, old Rivorossi method where tboth front and rear engines pivot on curves, assuming the curves were such, and the clearances were such that a correctly articulated loco's front cylinders might clip a tunnel portal or something. BS!! Bowser did a Challenger and Bigboy loco and thy were correctly articulated. WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT??? Photography. The correct articulation didn't have the cab hanging 7 feet to the side of the tender deck. Ridged wheel-base length dictates minimum curvature.. But ALL the current plastic articulated choo-choo's articulate like the 65 year old Rivorossi mech. Oriental Ltd did the N&W/USRA 2-8-8-2 correctly, and they are still high in demand BECAUSE they pull, are correctly articulated and have spring frames.
Selector
Well-Known Member
The importers have to sell a product. This means that it must be appealing. Bachmann, BLI, MTH, Athearn Genesis, Hornby/Rivarossi, Trix, Kato, Blackstone, and soon Rapido, all produce quantities of steam that these days seems to sell well by subscription (meaning strictly limited production), or as in the case of Bachmann, MTH, and Kato, they build 'em and let them sell as and when they do. These importers can't sell locomotives than few people can use, let alone lust after and place an order. Nobody is going to pay $269 for a sound-equipped BLI steamer knowing that they'll have to put it on the mantel to enjoy it below their large flat screen TV. People want to see them run. Given that, even today with larger homes, most of us have to live with curves with radii downward of 24", our importers have to know their prospective clientele. They have to seduce them. One way is to engineer their products to have both a selling price and a selling functionality. With those two factors filled, people feel they can buy them. When you consider that so many brass locomotives, those with prices back in the 80's that were in the $400-500 range, needed a lot of both tweaking and maintenance, and you compare that with what we get for what in deflated dollars would equate to about $120 back then, we're doing very nicely...thanks very much.
Bottom line, these are toys that must sell...or our friends go broke and seek other work. So that they sell, they make engineering compromises, including the foobie articulation. When I compare the toy trains of John Armstrong's day with what I can get for somewhat less in today's dollars, including sound, DCC capability, and much better detailing and tooling...it's a cakewalk.
Are diesels more prevalent and do they outsell steamers by about three to one? U betcha. They must. It's basic economics which, after all, is a social science. It's all that today's interested players see, and except for the odd steam encounter, it's all that moves both them, emotionally, and their various goods that the entire family needs to live.
Bottom line, these are toys that must sell...or our friends go broke and seek other work. So that they sell, they make engineering compromises, including the foobie articulation. When I compare the toy trains of John Armstrong's day with what I can get for somewhat less in today's dollars, including sound, DCC capability, and much better detailing and tooling...it's a cakewalk.
Are diesels more prevalent and do they outsell steamers by about three to one? U betcha. They must. It's basic economics which, after all, is a social science. It's all that today's interested players see, and except for the odd steam encounter, it's all that moves both them, emotionally, and their various goods that the entire family needs to live.
montanan
Whiskey Merchant
Well put Y3a. You make a good point about the articulated locomotives. I have a brass Z-5 Yellowstone (2-8-8-4) that I picked up over 20 years ago and it is properly articulated with the rear engine fixed and only the front engine pivoting. I can easily run it on my layout which has a minimum radius of 32" but most of the rest are well over 40". I also have an old Riverossi Challenger which came decorated for the UP with smoke deflectors. The smoke deflectors were removed along with the second smoke stack and some details were added to make it a 5100 class NP locomotive. I did pin the rear engine so it would not pivot. I had an opportunity to have had the opportunity to have ridden of the real locomotives when I was a kid. Guess that's why I got them. Unfortunately, they see very limited running time on my layout as it was built for switching and my turntables are only 90 footers.
One problem with model articulated locomotives is that there are a lot of modelers that just do not have the room on their layout ro have a broad radius and manufacturers are allowing both engines to pivot so that they can get around smaller radius curves. I will agree with you that it does look a bit funny to see the cab hanging way out on curves.
One problem with model articulated locomotives is that there are a lot of modelers that just do not have the room on their layout ro have a broad radius and manufacturers are allowing both engines to pivot so that they can get around smaller radius curves. I will agree with you that it does look a bit funny to see the cab hanging way out on curves.
What I have said in too many words: The engineering of todays articulated locomotives is lame, done by 4th rate folks. DEMAND A BETTER QUALITY!!! DEMAND they look better and for Gods sake DO THE RESEARCH!! The Historical societies will gladly help! you are paying WAAAY TOO MUCH for the inaccurate, and poorly thought out models you get from Chinese manufacturing. Don't let that bar drop too low. DCC needs to fix a few things too. What ever happened to building cars one at a time and building your own structures? People are too lazy/stupid/unskilled/scared to actually make model railroading the really fun hobby it could be.
Gee. now 11 years in the hobby, won several photo contests that were apparently quite convincing, but I guess I was never having enough fun.Not quite sure that really is valid anymore.
It might influence the region more than the era. I know lots of people who are modeling eras before they were born. I am modeling 1903 and was born in the mid 1950's. Everything I'm modeling I've only seen through black and white photos.
In the vast majority of the US steam operations ceased in the early 1950's. Assume you had to be at least 10 years old to have any comprehension about what was happening and any detailed memories. That means you would have had to have been born before 1945 to have "seen" steam in regular service and remembered it. I am quite sure there are hundreds of people who model steam who were born after 1945 (me being one).
trailrider
Well-Known Member
While not a full-sized articulated, Mantua/MRC does have essentially a logging articulated, with or without a tender. The rear engine is fixed to the boiler, and the front engine pivots under the boiler front end. Although the models are simple rather than compound (large, low-pressure front cylinders), they could be a fair representative of a GN/C.B.&Q. T-1 although they don't have the Belpaire firebox. (You could add the squared-off surface.) True, these aren't Big Boys, Challengers, etc., but the "Q" didn't use a bunch of articulateds, anyway.
Iron Horseman
Well-Known Member
Well, I remember back a few years when a manufacture did not do that. They made the rear drivers fixed and as such required a much larger 18" radius curve. The outcry from the folks on the forum that I was on at that time (one of the biggest) was outrageous. People were threatening to boycott if they didn't make the locomotives negotiate the smaller curves.
Even with my huge layout space I could barely design a layout to run the locomotives if they could only handle prototypical size degree curves.
Iron Horseman
Well-Known Member
It isn't they don't do, or won't do the research. I happen to know some of the researchers at Intermountain. It is a supply and demand situation. There has to be a potential market for x number units of units before something can be produced profitably. That is why we see the two ends of the spectrum with USRA on one end and all the oddball locomotives (Big Boy, Cab Forward, Pennsy Turbine, Erie Triplex) at the other get produced.
I don't want to, and I won't pay $3000 for a plastic or die cast locomotive, which is what they would cost or even more if the manufacturers did what is being suggested.
Selector
Well-Known Member
Exactly, Iron Horseman. Before anything, including the offended sensibilities of any one of us, it's a business. They have to exchange a product for cash. Not enough of us want Swiss watch mechanisms designed to last long enough to be handed down to great grandchildren. Nor do enough of us want truly prototypical scale models that we can't watch trundling down our 10' ovals with 24" curves. For those who demand something close to perfection, there's a market for them. It's called brass.
N
NP2626
Guest
Your kidding me? You mean a business needs to be profitable in order to stay in business and that all decisions on what to produce must be tempered by the aspirations that it not only be salable; but, make at least some profit for the company? Who said we couldn't get ed-u-macated right here on the Model Railroad Forums?
S'true, 'tis'strue but.
Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)