Re: Z Stigma (long) ;-)
- I agree with Ole... well said, Bill! Keep that soapbox close and
use it often ;-)
--- In z_scale@y..., Ole Rosted <Ole.Rosted@g...> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2001 03:02:28 EDT, Bill Kronenberger wrote:
> [snip a lot]
> Had I read Bill's letter before I wrote my own, I wouldn't have
> bothered. Bill says it all!
> Love for Z has never before been expressed in such an
> regards Ole Rosted
- I can understand wanting to create large(r) layouts if you believe it will attract both manufacturers and new users, those I believe are
great reasons. I tend to agree more with Ole here, the beauty is in the precision and detail, not the mass. The recent NTS win was I'm
assuming, because of the level of detail, the creativity and imagination of Jeffrey... not because it was almost as big as the other
layouts. I think things like the NTS win or getting ZTrack into hobby stores will have more impact than a larger layout.
Instead of thinking of small Z layouts as briefcase layouts, I tend to think of larger scale layouts as "roofing trains". It's actually a good
deal more accurate as many of the larger layouts are based on 4' x 8' sheets of plywood.
I read MR (though not religiously) and go through the internet a bit on other train sites, yet the only place I've heard a small Z layout
referred to as a "cigar box" layout is on this very forum. With self-denigration like that, who needs (bigger scale) enemies?
It's not that I don't like larger Z layouts, I really do. But I don't believe they're necessary to validate the scale itself. Again if the goal is to
induce manufacturers and new users, then I'm all for it. If the goal is to be recognized as a peer by the larger scales... maybe I'm too
new to Z and to trains themselves, but I don't see the inherent value in it.