Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

31569Re: MR - Why not Z?

Expand Messages
  • Patrick Tighe
    Apr 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I haven't read the May issue yet. However, Rob's post brings to
      mind the Feb, Mar and Apr of 1985 issues of MR where they did a
      series on the beautiful Rio Grande in three modules. In that series
      they covered everything from layout planning, carpentry, kit bashing
      N scale buildings, building handheld throttles to making trees.

      The end result was stunning, especially the mountain section showing
      a beautiful sweeping curve around a 4 foot wide end module. As I
      recall the other end module showed a city scene complete with a
      turntable and the middle module included a desert mining scene on
      one side and a rural scene through California on the other.

      That's the only issue that I can remember where MR devoted some
      serious print to Z scale.

      I have to agree with Rob that many of the MR layouts would be more
      appropriate for Z scale. In the 1985 series MR made the point that
      if big sweeping curves and mountain scenery was your focus, then Z
      scale was a good way to go.

      Patrick Tighe

      --- In z_scale@yahoogroups.com, ztrack@a... wrote:
      > I just received the May 2005 issue of Model Railroader. One
      article really
      > caught my eye... Mountain railroading in a small room (page 86).
      The two page
      > photo shows the B&O Sand Patch Grade during the autumn. The photo
      is stunning!
      > The article goes on how you can model this sweeping curved scene
      in a small
      > room. Okay what scale, N or Z. Of course not, they are talking HO.
      The article
      > goes on to use terms such as tricky carpentry, and big time
      compression in
      > order to make it work. Also factor no room for staging. What the
      heck? WHY?
      > See to fit this in a 13' x 13' room, it require two levels
      including tight
      > curves on a helix. The room is crammed and can accommodate two
      > comfortably.
      > My question, why would the author even consider HO for this layout
      in this
      > space? N scale would be a better choice, but again compromises
      would have to be
      > made. Why not Z? The photo on page 86 would made an awesome Z
      scale layout or
      > series of modules. It could be done too scale! For instance, I
      estimate the
      > train shown in the photo is about 1000 feet long. That takes up
      about 1/2 of the
      > photo. In, Z, that train would be about 4 1/2 feet long. If this
      is the true,
      > the complete scene, modeled to scale would be about 9' - 10' feet
      long. This
      > would easily fit on one wall of a normal room (again, to scale).
      > So here is a classic case of the wrong scale for the right
      project. I wish MR
      > would stop forcing track plans on readers that do not fit the
      space. They
      > should look closer at the smaller scales the can realistically
      fill the space and
      > offer modelers choices such as staging and prototypical operations
      > uncompressed spaces. I do not want to bass MR, it is not my
      intent. HO is the king of
      > scales and because of this, it will also be a focal point for MR.
      To me, I
      > see this as another opportunity for Z to shine.
      > Rob Kluz
      > Ztrack Magazine Ltd.
      > 6142 Northcliff Blvd.
      > Dublin, OH 43016
      > phone/fax: (614) 764-1703
      > http://www.ztrack.com/
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 13 messages in this topic