The new Railroad Model Craftsman

[edwardsutorik]

I've just finished reading the January issue of RMC. That's after thumbing through it a few times. The 2-10-4 article was fantastic. When was the last time YOU same steam engine plans in a model railroad magazine? And that article on the Camas Prairie was pretty darn extensive. And thoughtful. But wait, there was more..............

The printing and paper quality is also superb. I've still got my copies from the fifties--practically newsprint quality, then.

It's almost like Mainline Modeler was resurrected. It's possible Model Railroader will finally be released from the onus of being the cutting edge of model railroading, speaking of the fifties and the sixties. Like showing the first sound equipped HO locomotive (a Varney 4-6-0). Or Bob Darwin's Big Boy article, which drew such vituperative comments. Before the internet.



Good work, people who did it!!!




Ed

[tankcarsrule]

Stephen Priest is the Managing Editor. He tells me everyone that works there is a serious model railroader.

Regards, Bobby

[nebrzephyr]

Just finished reading the January and February issues. Agree very "Mainline Modeler" like. Plus, the quality of paper and type put the RMC of years back to shame. I put in a subscription today. Bob

[mlehman]

This is very good news for the hobby in general as it encourages hands-on modeling. That may not be everyone's cup of tea, but anything that raises expectations beyond RTR by depicting such motivation and inspiration in the pages of a magazine exposes thousands to the fact there more to the hobby than opening boxes.

[stevef45]

I like that they gave the cover logo a bit of an upgraded look.

[atsfan]

Great news
MRN got better also with the same new owner.
RMC needed help recently
This seems like a good ended (start) ?

[Spikre]

may need to start getting issues when they are current again .
will give this some time to see if RMC can keep it up.
hate to see any magazine die,heres to RMC staying in Print.
Spikre

[riogrande]

It sounds like Carsten's failure helped force the magazine evolve and change in good ways. Personally I've felt the format and regular features of the old magazine had gotten stale and worn out - fresh blood is a good thing it seems!

[grahamline]

February just showed up, and shows continued improvement. The 3.5 columns per page format for feature stories gives them a lot of flexibility, although some of the half-column inserts seem a little forced. The advertisers must be thrilled with the look of the new glossy paper. It is also nice to see unfamiliar names on the articles. Reminds me of the best years of Prototype Modeler magazine, even more than Mainline.

[The Ferro Kid]

Jan 27, 2015 16:26:19 GMT -8 riogrande said:

It sounds like Carsten's failure helped force the magazine evolve and change in good ways. Personally I've felt the format and regular features of the old magazine had gotten stale and worn out - fresh blood is a good thing it seems!

I agree. It's wonderful that it survived and in reinvigorated form no less. Any concept can age and be in need of a makeover, but we do owe the Carstens a debt of gratitude for how long they carried the torch. The inception of the Protofile feature opened my eyes to "freightcarology" -- the immense variety of rolling stock with all the modeling possibilities in terms of lettering, weathering, added detail due to repairs and rebuilds, and the like. I also loved the in-depth multi-part articles, such as the one on GG1 paint schemes.

[roadkill]

Having read RMC since the late 70's it's taking a little getting used to... but I absolutely love the makeover! I was a longtime Mainline Modeler reader (have an almost complete collection) and was saddened when Bob Hundman pulled the plug on it. Makes Model Railroader look all the worse...

[buffalobill]

I agree, the revised magazine and format is a vast improvement over the final couple of years under Carsten's. They will leave Model Railroader in the dust.
Bill

[riogrande]

Jan 28, 2015 10:46:16 GMT -8 The Ferro Kid said:

I agree. It's wonderful that it survived and in reinvigorated form no less. Any concept can age and be in need of a makeover, but we do owe the Carstens a debt of gratitude for how long they carried the torch.

Honestly I have mixed emotions about giving Carsten credit, but that's mainly because I didn't find their format and features, on the average, of much interest to me - so it seemed they were just beating the same 'ol drum until they died the slow death.

I've skimmed through most of their issues between 2000 and 2009 and most of the content just reminded me of how they served up stuff which seemed antiquated and perhaps a narrow theme which didn't capture my interests hardly ever. I realize you can't make everyone happy all the time, but MR has always been - on the average - a more interesting magazine for me to read when comparing the two, as it tries to be a gateway to the hobby with some intermediate and occasional advanced content.

That said, as my interests in the hobby had matured and morphed over the years, I found Model Railroading and especially Model Rail Journal to be my biggest favorites - I was sorry to see them fold. RMJ had some great articles comparing models to the prototype, with lots of prototype freight car photo's to help us vet our modeling efforts! Many copies I have remain in my collection as reference material.

All that said, I am looking forward to seeing one of the new issues of RMC to see how it has risen from the ashes!

[oldmuley]

I feel like the newly relaunched RMC is much more reminiscent of the old "Model Railroading", which is a really good thing.