Model Railway Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 1 of 43 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I don't know why we have to so anally retentive. My pleasure is in the modelling. OK I am working generally to era 5 but the main thing here is the word 'generally'. OK I know about incorrect era road signs and I dare say if I looked at the railway history in detail you might pick holes in my layout, but do you know what ...... I don't care. When i 'disappear' into my loft and engross myself in model railways I am not at work, and I am relaxing. The hobby is an escape from an extremely stressful job and it keeps me sane. So what if my history is not quite right, I have (or will have) a beautiful layout. I am avoiding modern stuff and have something I take pleasure in. To all of you out there where everything has got to be so exact I admire you but we are not all like you.

QUOTE (carltonf @ 11 Jul 2008, 20:50) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Hi. I know the magazine (and maybe this forum) has been here before, but the June edition of Hornby Magazine has a perfect example of why this era system should be scrapped by Bachmann (and the magazine). Manufacturers go to a great deal of bother to research their models, and they have all the information the modeller needs to fit a particular model into their layout / collection. So why are the Era systems so vague? The Era 4 covers 1948-1956. So, taking the new 08 diesel in Black, stated as era 4, one would think it would be suitable for the 8 year period. But the text of the review is quite right in detailing that the prototype was released in 1956, finished in Black, but presumably only suitable for 1956. Why can't Bachmann provide this information in their catalogue / on-line, for this and all their models, and not just this blanket period?
 
1 - 1 of 43 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top