The price of our pleasures!

Having made the long trek to Dijon (65 klics) to seek out some 2mm brass tube and wire for point ( turnout / switch ) ** control I just
happened to glance at the various offerings of old and more modern SNCF locos.
The prices caused physical pain in my eyes! A simple Co -Co shunter came in at 169 as did several other types. The nicely detailed 5 car TGV with working pantograph strolled in at 269.
I found myself thinking "Thank goodness that I am too poor for all this!"
** please choose the expression most suited to you!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Dijon ...... mustard. It's one of the few places I know of that have shops specifically for selling mustard, you can even have a tasting session ! I have seen a couple of HO Liliput SNCF 2-8-0 loco's with good detailing, DCC ready for about 160 ! in the UK.
Marklin do a SNCF model with a pantogragh and sound for about 290.
I remember reading about a comparison between the prices of today's model railway kit with those from the 40's & 50's. Today's kit is good value for money !
What's the price of a GOOD bottle of wine in Dijon !
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You can reckon on a good Nuit St Georges for about 850 or a St Emillion for about the same.
My favourites are a nice Tarragona ( with the fancy gold wire mesh) at lidl for 275.
I suppose that I could have mentioned that whilst I was in the model shop a guy bought an aeroplane for a cool 950. I don't think that included things like engines and control gear.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

SNIP
SNIP
Visited my favourite 2nd hand model shop today, noticed he had a few old hornby Jinties and Scots amongst many other locos. really liked the look of them and was very tempted to buy one or two of either. realised of course have enough jinties and the Scots are soon (I hope) to be upgraded. Then saw an LMS Black 5 and red Duchess (GBP35) - both tender drive of course, but again was tempted as it looked so good. Made me realise that no matter how many photos look at, despite having seen real thing and got the latest super detail version am not able to carry the vision of a super detail to make the not quite right one look a problem.
The point ? Well maybe should buy several older models rather than one or two new ones. May be happier ? Plus was reading another article in Modellers Backtrack where although rivet counters are not criticised as that is their preference the author felt that having a good overall impression of a real railway was more important than the fine detail (true they are not incompatible).
Cheers, Simon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

MBQ
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Me too! I'm not so much concerned with the fine details, as I'm not setting out to build a precise scale model of a particular location at a particular point in time. I don't have the time, the money or the skills to do it. I want to run trains, and RTR is good enough for me. If Railroad locos are half the price and look 90% as good, that's fine with me.
Fine-scale or kit-building afficionados are entitled to their views, but others are entitled to their own views of what is acceptable to them.
--
Martin S.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip> : ; was reading another article in Modellers : Backtrack where although rivet counters are not criticised as that is their : preference the author felt that having a good overall impression of a real : railway was more important than the fine detail (true they are not : incompatible). :
I've seen some bloody great "OO" gauge model layouts in my time that stopped me in my tracks (no pun intended) in the same way as a rivet counting 18.83 gauge scale model has, what was the common factor between each of these - scenery, the trains actually ran though a landscape, be that countryside or urban.
A good model railway is like a good oil painting from one of the great "masters", it doesn't need to be 'realistic' just convincing, for example both Buckingham GC" and "Eastbourne" (are) were never /true scale models/ but both were as convincing as Heckmonwick or Bodmin were even though the latter two were 'scale models' (one an actual location).
On the other hand I've also seen some very good - box opening - "Train Sets", were the concept of the layout is not to be 'convincing', just to have as much fun (operation) in the space available, in which they excelled - go figure, I guess, if it works for you then it works, f*ck what others think!...
...and Seasons Greeting to all!
[/ramble]
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Since I was given my first proper OO Duchess of Atholl in 1949 there have been two things which foster the discontent in me! These are valve gear and chimneys (or funnels as I prefer).
The over thick wheels and the ridiculous bends could be excused away but my bugbears no. As nippers we could identify any class at over 1000 yards by it's funnel and the valve gear made it into the super complicated machine which we worshipped.
I was happening to be looking at ads of the Black 5 with sound and the new Railroad cheap model. The later has the same motion as those aweful 60s & 70s versions (even back to the 40s come to think of it). This spoils the ship for a ha'pth etc but I am afraid that the sound fitted jobs are too rich for me but I am sure that I will get round to fitting one up myself eventually.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Sailor" wrote

I assume your preference for 'funnel' is as a result of a sea-faring life? The reality is I've never heard of a railway man refer to a steam loco chimney in that way. Each unto their own though I guess Peter.
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip>
: These are valve gear and chimneys (or funnels as : I prefer).
Don't let us stop you showing up your utter ignorance then, I'm sure you would never dream of suggesting a ship has a left and right side, or worse still and nearside and offside, and would soon tell someone their fortune if they did...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Sorry Jerry but I have to tell you that as a submariner of some years we always talked of left and right rudder as well as up and down. Before that I spent a lot of my youth in and on locos both with family and my fathers driver friends. Perhaps we Bristolians see things differently!
To illustrate the submarine approach ( thanks be to the Courageous museum support group): I was ship control officer of the watch when my no 2 who was a sprog submarine officer asked the foreplanesman the time. He replies "Quarter to four sir." He got the terse reply " could we have it in more nautical terms please?" This brought forth "Yo Ho Ho and a bottle of rum -- and it's still quarter to four sir."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

It's more fun to see you showing yours. Hint: try a dictionary.
MBQ
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip trolling>
Fuck all left to reply to.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Since I was given my first proper OO Duchess of Atholl in 1949 there have been two things which foster the discontent in me! These are valve gear and chimneys (or funnels as I prefer).
The over thick wheels and the ridiculous bends could be excused away but my bugbears no. As nippers we could identify any class at over 1000 yards by it's funnel and the valve gear made it into the super complicated machine which we worshipped.
I have news for you all. When I was a pupil of the CM&EE at St Rollox in the 50's we always called what you English guys call a chimney, a 'funnel' This is a perfectly respectable locomotive engineering term. Don't let's start some new myths, we have enough of the existing ones. I even designed a funnel once when I was in the DO at the NBL later on in my training (SAR Class 25, if you must know). The thing the smoke comes out of is a funnel. The Scot's have a saying 'Lang may yer lum reek, wi' ither people's coal'. 'Lum' is another common term for a funnel also in common use on the footplate.
I'm glad to hear that someone else has a valve gear fetish. I'm a fellow sufferer and have regular bouts of revulsion at the efforts of modern RTR producers (both Bachmann and Hornby) who will persist in putting the Walschaerts gear return crank on backwards on one side of the loco. Modern RTR is just so good that this idiotic fault should not recur time and time again on new models, but it does. I guess the LCL's (little chinese ladies) don't know any better but it makes you aware of the poor QC being done these days. Back in Margate times Hornby always got it right.
Alistair W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
: <snip> : : I have news for you all. When I was a pupil of the CM&EE at St Rollox in : the 50's we always called what you English guys call a chimney, a 'funnel' <snip scottish urban myth>
There is no accounting for Scottish engineering slang, probably 'imported' from the Clyde-side ship yards, probably also why the term was also used in the sea port of Bristol - to pick up on another comment by "Sailor".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

However doesnt everyone know exactly what you mean when say chimney but has a moment of confusion when called a funnel ? If so then the fact that it was correct usage in olden times or limited circumstances would make some of us wonder if this is an affectation. :-)
cheers, Simon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
simon wrote:

Over here it's a smoke stack, or stack for short.
Christmas cheer all round, woklf k.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What did they "stack" to create it??? ;-)
Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Alistair Wright" wrote

They may have got the return crank correct, but for many years Tri-ang & later Hornby, insisted on putting the coupling rods on the wrong way round, with the 'hinged portion' forward of the centre driver rather than to its rear.
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"simon" wrote

Our hobby is a very catholic one, with individuals having a wide range of interests and skills. I know one locomotive enthusiast with minimal skill levels, whose interest in the hobby is limited to having superb models of locos and to a lesser extent rolling stock. He has a wonderful eye for the subtleties of indivisual locomotives, but wouldn't consider himself to be a rivet counter.
He regularly part-exchanges old models for newer more accurate versions, but even so regularly points out the deficiences in the newer models accepting them only as a stop-gap until the next re-tooled version becomes available.
Has he yet found the 'perfect model'? Absolutely not, but thinks one or two of the recent releases have come close, bearing in mind the limitations & inadequacies of British OO-scale.
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.