Hi all,

Just in case some of you are wondering how I do reviews when I write for mags.

1. Since I only model the Swiss RhB (in both 2m - 1:22.5 and HOm - 1:87) in a specific era, I more or less restrict myself to items that fit.

2. I buy all my items at regular price - that’s the price everyone else pays, including taxes, shipping etc. etc. - at dealers’ of my choice. That way I don’t have to worry about getting special treatment! ***

3. I do the prototype research - own library on RhB, Internet, good contacts at the prototype railway.

4. I made my apprenticeship in a toolroom (Switzerland), worked as inspector in a really high-tech toolroom in Switzerland, worked 30 years in the high precision machine tool industry (20 years running my own service company). Quite a few of my former customers produced injection moulds for the model industry, others for various high-end industries with really tight tolerances. In short I know what types of machines are used and what can be done. Yes, I have often been amazed HOW it is done!

5. I actually measure the items I review, using the standard tools in the trade (machine tool trade that is, not model railway reviewer trade!) i.e. digital vernier, large conventional vernier, height gauge, micrometers and dial indicator. All measurements of the prototype are converted to Metric (sorry TOC) and the measurements on the review item are taken within +/- 0.1mm (that’s what I consider close enough for the purpose).

6. The measurements - length, width, height and whatever else is relevant for visual appearance and scale fidelity - are listed in a table. The major measurements L, W, H have a comparison to the prototype which lists the actual scale of the dimension, as well as how large the percentage error is. I also have a rating system that works on percentages:
   +/- 1.0% or better : Excellent
   +/- 1.1 to 4% : Very Good
   +/- 4.1 to 7% : Good
   +/- 7.1 to 10% : Passable
   +/- 10.1% and above : Questionable

7. Items are checked for performance characteristics - I’m in the process of building a testing ramp for Large Scale motive power in order to check what drawbar pull can be developed on which incline prior to slipping. Wheel sets are tested for concentricity and other runout (in a lathe), if they are wobbly enough.

8. Items are compared to the manufacturers information, manufacturing quality and design quality is inspected. (For qualifications check point 4!)

9. Design shortcomings are mentioned in the text, as are glaring errors in replicating the prototype. Since most manufacturers proclaim they produce model railway items , I take them at their word and the review is written as if a model is being scrutinized, not a toy.

10. I double check things, if there seem to be discrepancies!

*** There has only been one instance when that didn’t apply; a none RhB item which I couldn’t use anyway and it gets returned to the supplier as soon as the review appears.

I have never been asked “What did you really think of that item you reviewed?”, neither in person, on the phone or via email! But I have seen enough posts that exasperatedly exclaimed " HJ, tell us what you really think!!!"

And yes, I have received emails from RhB employees that found my reviews a bit too lenient. I accept that and try to do better next time. After all the qualified people on the railway know what the “model” should look like, some of them actually model in Large Scale and run the stuff on their own layouts, too.

Since I decided that reviewing a few NA proto items could be interesting, I assure you the same ten points above will apply. No shortcuts for this guy!!

Sorry if this was boring, but I feel one should mention once in a while how it should/could/can be done.

Hans ,
So you are strictly reviewing for scale accuracy ?
That is not what makes me buy/not buy a model . If it looks nice , I buy it .I find that applies to most people .
Obviously , there is a place for true scale , but my experiencs is that it spoils the fun .
So I buy LGB crap and enjoy it
Mike

Mike Morgan said:
Hans , So you are strictly reviewing for scale accuracy ? That is not what makes me buy/not buy a model . If it looks nice , I buy it .I find that applies to most people . Obviously , there is a place for true scale , but my experiencs is that it spoils the fun . So I buy LGB crap and enjoy it Mike

Mike, No, quite the contrary! I actually review the whole model but I look at it as a model, not a toy. As you can see by my rating system 0 to 7% deviation is rated excellent to good. Someone wrote the other day

someone said:
“The artist who aims at perfection in everything achieves it in nothing." Eugene Delacroix

I replied:

HJ said:
“The model designer who can not replicate width, length and height in a consistent, uniform scale is an artist; namely a caricaturist” Hans-Joerg Mueller

. How can consistent scale spoil the fun? What spoils the fun are certain reviews in certain magazines which look at the “models” in a cursory way. That’s when you get an item listed as 1:29; but the facts are the length is more or less 1:29, the width is 1:27.6 and the height 1:25.5. Unless we have a new mathematical system that isn’t 1:29! And anyone who does their homework will find the same. Of course the “dumb” consumer won’t know that, unless he sets the item beside another item that is 1:29. And then he starts to wonder, which of the two is out?? A wonderful situation! Devious me recommended to the one hobby shop owner to set a LGB Stock car beside the AMS sample, after all they are the same thing, aren’t they, Stock cars of the same proto line. That should sell AMS product like hotcakes except to the RBB. For your enjoyment

look at all the LGB stuff I have, every item carefully selected to fit scale, era and RhB portion modeled. Some of it will be kitbashed some more in order to get closer to proto. So I buy the good stuff from LGB that fits and enjoy it.

So, does all that mean that I am switching all my rolling stock purchases to AMS from USA and LGB and Bachmann because of AMSs fidelity to scqale and appearance? Yeah…but I also like their product so much better than the others! Until AMS came along I was satisfied with them. But I also want to concentrate on Colorado NG. While none of the manufacturers have it exactly, it seems to me that AMS has it closest. Does all that fit it with your postulations, HJ?

Wey hey , don’t start one of those daft true scale arguments .
With my model trucks --lorries , juggernauts , bigrigs , what ever you like to call them , I get all sorts of stupid comments about true scale , to which I respond
“Yes , it is not true scale , the tyres are plastic , the wheels are plastic , the engine is electric and the brakes aren’t very good . Oh , and the splitter doesn’t work either . So how did you know it was a Scammel ,Mack , Bedford (highlight as required ) ?”
Yes there are all sorts of smart ass answers to that , but usually thought of 50 yards down the road .
Let’s play trains .
Mike

Nope…not from me Mike. One thing I’m NOT is a rivet counter. I don’t think I even own an 1:20.3 ruler. And everyone knows what a lousy mathematician I am - so I can’t even use formulas to convert! No rivet counter here!

Well , Towne ,
I actually saw a bloke counting rivets today , he was rivetting a full size boiler ,and got paid by the amount of rivets . His comment was he’d earned enough to get a drink so’s he could carry on doing it . I hasten to add that was on TV . To see a real rivetter at work is quite something .
Anyway , there is a place for it then . Counting to see if any fell out . My problem is I get the right number and the wrong size . So I have been told .
Mike