Note: groups.io will be down for maintenance on Wednesday, October 5th, starting at 9AM Pacific Time (4PM Wednesday October 5, 2022 UTC), for approximately one hour.
In a message dated 3/27/2006 5:32:50 PM Central Standard Time,
Our best course of action here is to vigorously support those like
Kadee, Branchline, and Proto 2000 who make a strong and ongoing effort
to do things right and to spread the word as widely as well among
other, perhaps less well informed, model railroaders about what's
accurate and what isn't.
I agree completely, we need to support these guys. I disagree that all who
buy inaccurate schemes are bozos. First, it is not always a fanciful or
colorful scheme that is incorrect, it could be a very drab BCR car with white
lettering, but it could be a person's favorite railroad. Sure, a person can inform
themselves about the accuracy of a certain car, but oftentimes there isn't the
burning desire to have all things exceptionally accurate. Although the
person's choice is inaccurate, it does not fall into the bozo category. That, to
me, would be more of the "Coca-Cola" or "John Deere" train crowd. On the other
hand, if I had a 10-year old that preferred a Boraxo covered hopper over a
plain jane MoPac boxcar red car, I think I wouldn't discourage him from that
purchase and insist that he buy the bland boxcar because it might be "right." I
guess what I am getting at is that there is a spectrum of modelers and a
spectrum of cars that appeal to them. I don't think it makes them bozos.
On a different topic. You do a lot of articles for RMJ on prototype cars
associated with new models coming out. However, one thing I rarely see in these
articles is how well the new model fits the prototypes you show in the photos.
Isn't there some way to do this? The recent article on Athearn's mill gon
is a case in point. Does the model fit these photos or not? I know some are
obvious, but others are not, and the photos as published are not always useful,
because of their size, to determine accuracy. In this article in particular,
little is said of the model itself, and there is only one photo. It would
definitely help if we could see detail photos of the model along with the
prototype and have your expertise brought to bear on the accuracy of the model. I
am not complaining, I think these prototype/model articles in in RMJ are the
only reason I still subscribe. I'm just suggesting that there is another level
to which we can aspire.