No, but I do like to only buy true O scale pieces. If they look like a decent representation, I'm perfectly happy. I don't sweat the details, I have better things to do.
Yes...1,2,3,4,4 and one half. 5,6,7,.......
Yes, I am. However, I am able to compromise.
Number 90 posted:Yes, I am. However, I am able to compromise.
I agree, compromise is paramount when you have three rails. I am comfortable with that.
I've found that it is very difficult to count rivets on a moving locomotive or piece of rolling stock.
Tom
Not really.... If they get major details wrong on a loco, Like the side rods/running gear or the wrong steam dome/sand dome placement wrong or smoke stack or placement of the headlight or marker lights, Even the shape of the tender used on the model isn't close to the prototype....that really bugs me. It didn't before but it has in the last few years. If I am paying a lot of money for a model I would want it to be as close to the prototype as they can make it. Instead of a paint job. I'm seriously considering 2/3 rail Brass Models now.
Quizshow904 posted:What's a Rivet???
I believe that is something a frog would do, you know, river. rivet. crock,crock...
ok that is bad.
I am a rivet monitor, I only look to see if there are rivets, I don't actually count them.
I have no idea how many rivets there is supposed to be in the first place, so it would be a waste of time to even bother to count them.
What's the right number of rivets on a 665?
All modeling is representational no matter how "authentic" the model. Therefore to me rivet counting is pointless, although I have nothing against it if that's what you wanna do.
Pete
I think you can't me a "model Railroader" without being a "rivet counter" to some degree. The term can refer to both actually counting modeled rivets to more generally referring to accuracy to prototype in the model.
A collector who wants to gather in each catalogued number of something, may not be a rivet counter. but someone who wants to get the most accurate F7 model, or most accurate PRR K4 pacific is.
prrjim posted:I think you can't me a "model Railroader" without being a "rivet counter" to some degree."
That's why I never call myself a model railroader, just like I don't consider myself a "biker". I'm just an old, fat guy that likes playing with trains and riding motorcycles, I don't want any titles.
I counted all the rivets on this project off of the actual PRR record drawings when I helped Sunset on this project.
Attachments
Images (5)
Rivets on my Prewar TinPlate?
Sometimes I see them and sometimes they were never put in.
Best is to leave my glasses off and to just see a blurred loco in standoff scale (looking at it 20 feet away and it looks like a train).
Just kidding.
I personally I m not a rivet counter, but think that the rivet counters are good for this hobby as the manufactures will put good and almost exact replicas out to please everyone with a quality products.
YES!
And every time I start, I lose count, and then I end up running trains in a circle... 
14,327,14328,14329,14330,14331 what? 1,2,3,4,5,6...
I can only count to 20, if I take off my shoes and socks, but I can count to 21 in the shower. 
Scrambler81 posted:prrjim posted:I think you can't me a "model Railroader" without being a "rivet counter" to some degree."
That's why I never call myself a model railroader, just like I don't consider myself a "biker". I'm just an old, fat guy that likes playing with trains and riding motorcycles, I don't want any titles.
Wait, isn't "old fat guy" a title too? It's one I've used for myself as well. 
i only worry about the ones that are missing and luckily those are typically easy to count.
handyandy posted:Scrambler81 posted:prrjim posted:I think you can't me a "model Railroader" without being a "rivet counter" to some degree."
That's why I never call myself a model railroader, just like I don't consider myself a "biker". I'm just an old, fat guy that likes playing with trains and riding motorcycles, I don't want any titles.
Wait, isn't "old fat guy" a title too? It's one I've used for myself as well.
Old and fat are not perceptions. You is, or you ain't. I is.
overlandflyer posted:i only worry about the ones that are missing and luckily those are typically easy to count.
Usually with tinplate there are only two rivets that really count. The ones that hold the trucks on. LOL
PAUL ROMANO posted:Are you a rivet counter or just live with the stuff they make? I'm not a rivet counter, but do make detail improvements wherever I can to make my engines and cars look better.
YES!!! I count each and every rivet again-and-again, besides I inspect also the welding under the magnifying glas...
In a way, yes.
I have to have everything as historically correct as possible and everything on the layout is placed with accuracy and plausibly as possible.
No, but I do try to be era correct but I find that isn't always easy. I like separate grab irons and sprung trucks but everything can't be perfect with toy trains. Real trains don't just run in circles but that's how I enjoy them.
Found this somewhere on the Internet.
"Don't say I never want you when your train gets lost" - R. Zimmerman
Are these on EBAY?
Ray
I wouldn't really consider it being a rivet counter but as long the model looks somewhat like the prototype, I don't mind. Unless it's Lionel offering Southern 630 with a Union Pacific body then I get a little upset.
I enjoy highly detailed and skillfully crafted historical accurate models. I also like a Christmas Train under my tree every year. So I guess I'd say I'm from one end of the spectrum to the other. LOL. On my "real" layout, we are depicting Glacier National Park; specifically the Marias Pass run. There is no way, rivet by rivet, anyone could do a realistic model of this area; less taking a shovel of dirt and placing it on a surface and saying: this is my "model" of "earth" of Marias Pass. Please lock me up in the looney bin.
I try to give a general "sense of place" and "feel" to the Glacier Line. There is no mistaking where or what it is supposed to be, but it is NOT remotely close to a rivet by rivet accounting.
I tend to follow the two-foot rule. If I wouldn't be able to see it at two feet I don't care. That said, I do roster checks and prototype research on locomotives and rolling stock I'm looking at purchasing.
As a means of controlling the extent of my motive power and rolling stock, I limit myself to my favorite roads (see my sig) and only scale-size. I have NO problem with less-than-scale, but I jut chose that method to restrain myself.
so I insist upon scale dimensions (or something reasonably close) but do not insist on elusive fidelity to prototype. One example: I won a 6-18031 Frisco 2-8-2 #4100. Now this engine is a redecorated Southern Mike, and so it looks very little like the real #4100, but it is scale sized (and pulls like a bulldozer), so I am happy. Others would reject its lack of fidelity.
