First, I want to thank all of the S manufacturers who supported the
RMC "Special Pullout" and preface my comments by saying my criticism
of the RMC article does not reflect my opinion of the advertisers.
I'm sure they had the best of intentions in supporting our scale and
hobby.
I'm glad I was not the only person underwhelmed/angered/disappointed
by the RMC article. And yes, I agree with the "NASG Syndrome" comment
made previously. I believe until we recognize and publicly admit that
not all S is "the best" and some manufacturers tend to produce better
models than others and some items promote the scale better than others
S scale will never really advance. When promoting S, especially in a
scale modeling oriented publication such as RMC, it only makes sense
to get off the fence, pick a side and promote the hell out of it.
There should have been only passing mention of AF and Plasticville set
in a historical context. Those products are so long in the pass it
would be like an article on HO promoting Varney trains. The shot
comparing six different types of couplers used in S is ridiculous and
confusing to the S neophyte. This is 2011. Wouldn't most model
railroaders assume you would use some type of "scale" Kadee like
coupler? Same with the shot of the pizza cutters next to the code 110
wheel. Why even confuse the reader with such nonsense? The primary
shot of rolling stock was of two vintage style wood kits from Huff n'
Puff and a BTS flat. Sure the BTS flat looks outstanding in
comparison but why no brass or SHS or one of the modern highly
detailed resin kits to really promote the detail available in 1:64th?
Finally, no offense Don as your S-Trax products serve a specific
market well, the SHS S-Trax was a poor choice. It exemplifies the
gray middle ground being kind of scale and kind of high rail.
Integrated roadbed snap track is also most commonly associated with
beginners or toy train sets not fine scale modeling.
In trying to portray some kind of balanced, gray, middle ground of S,
the article only served to highlight the confusion and divisions among
S while not really presenting any sort of a "best of S" type
overview. Underwhelming and bland at best. A failure to promote the
scale overall and, sadly, a lost opportunity for S put it's best foot
forward on such a major stage.
Chris Borgmeyer
Westfield Center, OH
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
