Sorry chaps, I long ago accepted that I had neither the skill or the patience to cut, shut. paint or otherwise mess about with what, to me, was a perfectly satisfactory item 'out of the box.' To those who must and enjoy so doing - my total admiration of your achievements.
I am quite happy playing trains with what I consider to be perfectly reasonable and accurate representations 'as they come' and shall remain so!
Good luck to you all - I am now retiring from this thread.
Roger.
And that is absolutely fine, Roger. This hobby is all about finding your 'level', something we all have and at which we derive the most satisfaction from. A level which delivers the results we want to achieve. But it's always been that way.
I'm content with where I am.......or too lazy to alter my approach. Probably the latter.
My modelling is RTR based. I'm lucky in that what I'm interested in is well served by recent releases. But I would never exhibit anything which is out of the box. I have to put my stamp on it. I'm able to renumber/recrest if so inclined to give me a specific loco if not ready available rtr then weather items as required.
These models are far superior to anything I could produce from a kit. I know this.
My stock retains the tension lock couplings both at home and when used at exhibitions. They are easy to use and to my eyes relatively unobtrusive or at least, no worse than Dinghams, Spratt and Winkle and the like. A huge pet hate of mine is the wire across the buffer heads.......What !! And you tell me my T/L couplings are obtrusive..!
At exhibitions, visitors can see this is ready to run stock, complete with tension locks and link it (?!) to what they have at home.
But, however nice my stock/layouts may appear to others ( and I'm grateful for the lovely comments made regarding my modest efforts in this thread) my modelling is not MRJ material. Is this because of the prevailing attitudes towards rtr stock especially those examples using these couplings ?
As has been said, other magazines may be/are happy with this and my layouts have all featured in BRM and Model Rail. Perhaps this is my 'level' but who has decided this and should I be content with it ?
Do I therefore bite the bullet and change to three links/screw couplings, as this is the only option I see ? Most of the screw couplings I have seen are rather larger than life anyway. I don't want to change but would this acquiescence then make my efforts more likely to grace the hallowed pages of MRJ ? And if I do this, what of the PECO code 75 streamline track I use or the complete lack of point actuating mechanisms.......Again, both are something I don't want to move away from, well not quite true but I'll certainly not be building my own track.
Don't get me wrong. This is not a rant. Far from it.
But even the "average modeller" , to quote a phrase, has access these days to RTR models whose level of detail and quality of finish surpasses certainly some of the models seen in the pages of early MRJs.There are problems though and I seem to have had my share of rubbish running RTR locos as of late. So, it's not all good in RTR world and I have seen just how a well made, suitably motored and geared replacement chassis can run but this is a completely different debate.
MRJ needs to broaden it's horizons and I do believe that this can be done without compromising it's place at the high table of the model railway world.
Crucially, it needs to attract and hold onto the younger modellers and they are about, despite the contraction of the hobby. I think this is entirely possible but the content has to appeal. Younger modellers must be able to identify with the content.
I started buying MRJ when I was 20. It was both illuminating and inspiring. I'm now 58 and I can't help but wonder how many 20yr olds are buying it now and are they as illuminated and inspired as I was.
Rob.
