Is this forum usage more MEW than ME?

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

I suppose the site owners would have statistics or a database and know what percentage threads relate to each magazine but my perception is that a much larger majority of general engineering topics are discussed here than threads relating to models.

I only wondered about this out of idle curiosity but if my supposition is correct, then other thoughts lead on from it….

Are model engineers more knowledgeable so dont need to ask questions? or maybe they just have a different mentality

Does ME have better articles than MEW so all the answers are in the mag?

Does one type of member prefer to actually make things rather than spend time at the keyboard?

I am not expecting anyone to answer the above specific questions but just curious about the differences.

Ian P

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

[Sandy MortonParticipant @sandymorton10620]

I thought/hope that the site is about Model Engineering in general. I have no great preference since I do not subscribe to either magazine but over the last 50 odd years I have built a Minnie and quite a lot of atationary engines but I have also built, and enjoyed doing so equally, a great many tools. Simple answer is do what you enjoy doing and buy the magazine which suiys you best.

[AndyfParticipant @andyf]

I think it likely that more MEW than ME readers tend to post here. Someone with the experience and tooling to undertake many of the projects offered in ME is less likely to ask for advice. I'm not trying to categorise all MEW readers as beginners or inexperienced, but I imagine that a good proportion of them are nearer the foot than the top of the learning curve. That is certainly true of me.

Andy

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

Andy

That is the sort of thinking that occured to me. I was not trying to categorise the forum members but I'm sure that there are differences between the two camps.

Your mention of the 'foot' is probably another difference indicator! My impression is that (in general) ME's are more biased towards imperial measurements than MEW and its readers.

Ian P

[John CoatesParticipant @johncoates48577]

As a newbie (since 2009 !!) when I searched for a site to help me learn what I needed to know MEW was more relevant than ME

Having subscribed to MEW for the past three years I still believe this. As someone looking to learn engineering skills to use a lathe, mill and shaper at home the folks on here have been very helpful and patient with my questions. My knowledge has improved and that's thanks to the folks on here and some other forums

My motorbikes are my passion and I don't think ME would have been any help what so ever whereas MEW and this forum have been both inspirational and informative

My 2p worth

John

[NJHParticipant @njh]

The great thing about " model engineering" is the scope and variety of the subject. ME is associated more with specific building projects and often contains detailed information on ways to progress these. It also has a focus on the club scene. On the other hand MEW is about principles applicable to many projects. I guess, for folk from a mechanical engineering background, MEW is less useful

As far as this forum goes most of the topics are not "Model Specific" and it is a great resource for getting advice on any ME problem – (and much of it is useful) There are some very knowledgeable guys on this forum who are happy to give help and advice – I've certainly received some and hope, in a small way, to have added to the discussions. With no club very close it a great way of tapping into those with like minds and interests.

There is no reason why model specific  threads should not be run- in fact I seem to recall that there have been some in the past. The difficulty with the forum is finding "stuff" on it and it seems that threads run for a while with folk responding to new topics but then lapse and fade into obscurity.

Regards

Norman

 

Edited By NJH on 06/05/2013 23:44:11

[John McNamaraParticipant @johnmcnamara74883]

There are more than just model makers in this place.

I for one have never made a model in my adult life. In my business life the first thirty being in manufacturing soft furnishings bedding and the like, I made many different jigs and fixtures to assist production, also lots of maintenance work on the machinery to keep it alive. later we used CNC equipment some of it custom made. in a modestly equipped small workshop on the premises. That chapter closed and now I have moved away from manufacturing. However a love of metalworking continues. I still have a fair workshop.

Over the last couple of years I Designed and built an Epoxy based Worden grinder inspired tool grinder posted here on this forum, reground the bed of a large engine lathe with a custom made grinding jig, designed and build the electric drive mechanism for two different mobile art objects for one of my Sons uni friends, Designed and built a CNC wood router for a men's shed with a mate, Made bits for the car and around the house, Innumerable bits for friends and neighbours and am working on the design of a couple of new projects for myself. In particular A large Epoxy composite frame CNC Mill and also a small table top CNC mill using laser cut components. I design most of my work using Autocad before building.

Most of the work is fairly basic industrial type construction, I am inspired by some of the truly magnificent objects the posters here and writers in MEW publish. always a source of inspiration.

However I suspect that there may be other like me who while not being model makers are interested in hands on small scale engineering. It would be interesting to know what percentage of the subscribers are in a similar demographic. Maybe the title might be broadened?

Cheers
John

Edited By John McNamara on 07/05/2013 09:32:20

[JoParticipant @jo]

My feeling is that having David Clark as the original Moderator may have attracted more of the MEW crowd. There are many other forums which attract are dedicated to specific types of model, but this site is well suited to discussing errors or omissions in the current/past magazine articles.

But based on past observations I suspect people are not going to post here about articles/model published in other magazines as there is likely to be a conflict of interest between the owners of this site and the competitors. e.g. if someone starts making negative comments about say poor drawings in the competitors publication. Equally I can imagine that making negative comments about models/castings/services provided by the ME suppliers could be a little difficult for the site owners.

Jo

[JoParticipant @jo]

My feeling is that having David Clark as the original Moderator may have attracted more of the MEW crowd. There are many other forums which attract are dedicated to specific types of model, but this site is well suited to discussing errors or omissions in the current/past magazine articles.

But based on past observations I suspect people are not going to post here about articles/model published in other magazines as there is likely to be a conflict of interest between the owners of this site and the competitors. e.g. if someone starts making negative comments about say poor drawings in the competitors publication. Equally I can imagine that making negative comments about models/castings/services provided by the ME suppliers could be a little difficult for the site owners.

Jo

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

Going back to Ian's original post, I think I would tend to agree. The more frequent posters tend to be MEW readers with general engineering queries/advice. I think also, if you look at the general profile of the readership of each magazine you will indeed find amongst MEW readers folk who enjoy forums, whereas amongst ME readers you will find folk who enjoy more traditional forms of socialising and, yes, they like to be in the workshop rather than at a keyboard. Without wishing to generalise over much, the age profile is probably different too, which is linked with the point above. MEW as a magazine covers so many interests apart from model making, as John has suggested above. Therefore many MEW readers – who have no interest whatsoever in model making – will visit the forum. Long may it continue!

What I most like about this forum is the willingness of so many people to help out if they can, regardless of the specific subject.

Diane

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

Going back to Ian's original post, I think I would tend to agree. The more frequent posters tend to be MEW readers with general engineering queries/advice. I think also, if you look at the general profile of the readership of each magazine you will indeed find amongst MEW readers folk who enjoy forums, whereas amongst ME readers you will find folk who enjoy more traditional forms of socialising and, yes, they like to be in the workshop rather than at a keyboard. Without wishing to generalise over much, the age profile is probably different too, which is linked with the point above. MEW as a magazine covers so many interests apart from model making, as John has suggested above. Therefore many MEW readers – who have no interest whatsoever in model making – will visit the forum. Long may it continue!

What I most like about this forum is the willingness of so many people to help out if they can, regardless of the specific subject.

Diane

[David Clark 13Participant @davidclark13]

Hi There

There is no database of individual users, only a subscriber's database for each magazine.

I think the website is of use to both ME and MEW readers in equal amounts.

MEW readers tend to use metal processes rather than make models but not exclusively.

Clockmakers tend to read MEW for the processes as well.

I think ME readers are on average about 10 years older than MEW readers.

You only have to look at the dates of birth on the free ads to see this.

regards david

[David Clark 13Participant @davidclark13]

Hi There

There is no database of individual users, only a subscriber's database for each magazine.

I think the website is of use to both ME and MEW readers in equal amounts.

MEW readers tend to use metal processes rather than make models but not exclusively.

Clockmakers tend to read MEW for the processes as well.

I think ME readers are on average about 10 years older than MEW readers.

You only have to look at the dates of birth on the free ads to see this.

regards david

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

I was looking around my workshop, and I was surprised how many of my tools are 'home made' or heavily modified. That makes me MEW fodder! But then I like making models so I'm an ME bod.

A lot is bound up with budgets and disposable income, but the other big factor is time.

MEW readers have families and aren't at all averse to new technologies, as they want to make thinks that work and work well. ME readers have more time on their hands and are more interested in process, design and craftsmanship. They have the patience to remake a part a dozen times until it looks right (I generally draw the lina at 3, my record is either 9 or 11).

But – all broad generalisations are wrong!

Neil

P.S. Fascinated to read several writers and correspondents using metric measure in 1900s ME articles. If it hasn't caught on after 110 years, I don't suppose it ever will

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

I was looking around my workshop, and I was surprised how many of my tools are 'home made' or heavily modified. That makes me MEW fodder! But then I like making models so I'm an ME bod.

A lot is bound up with budgets and disposable income, but the other big factor is time.

MEW readers have families and aren't at all averse to new technologies, as they want to make thinks that work and work well. ME readers have more time on their hands and are more interested in process, design and craftsmanship. They have the patience to remake a part a dozen times until it looks right (I generally draw the lina at 3, my record is either 9 or 11).

But – all broad generalisations are wrong!

Neil

P.S. Fascinated to read several writers and correspondents using metric measure in 1900s ME articles. If it hasn't caught on after 110 years, I don't suppose it ever will

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

My interest in this hobby is as a means to learn something about the practical aspects of engineering, and along the way use that learning to do things which I would not otherwise be able to do, eg make something of use, or repair something. I have no interest in making models, full size or miniatures. Therefore MEW suits me completely.

The suggestion that the name of the hobby and/or the magazine title has come up before. It certainly seems that the name "Model Engineering" is indeed a misnomer, "Home Workshop Engineering" perhaps being nearer, but over the years, "Model Engineering" has stuck. To give an idea of just why it is wrong, people making clocks are not making models as in miniature versions – they are indeed making full size versions.

Re. metric measurements. In the early to mid 1970's I built some kitchen units to fit the tiny space available. As a child of the 50's I was taught imperial measurements with only a passing look at metric so I decided that I would make these units wholly in metric. Since then I have mainly worked in metric, only using imperial when it made sense, eg 12 inches being easier to measure than the metric equivalent of 304.8mm. The inevitable result now is that I automatically think in metric.

Regards,

Peter G. Shaw

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

My interest in this hobby is as a means to learn something about the practical aspects of engineering, and along the way use that learning to do things which I would not otherwise be able to do, eg make something of use, or repair something. I have no interest in making models, full size or miniatures. Therefore MEW suits me completely.

The suggestion that the name of the hobby and/or the magazine title has come up before. It certainly seems that the name "Model Engineering" is indeed a misnomer, "Home Workshop Engineering" perhaps being nearer, but over the years, "Model Engineering" has stuck. To give an idea of just why it is wrong, people making clocks are not making models as in miniature versions – they are indeed making full size versions.

Re. metric measurements. In the early to mid 1970's I built some kitchen units to fit the tiny space available. As a child of the 50's I was taught imperial measurements with only a passing look at metric so I decided that I would make these units wholly in metric. Since then I have mainly worked in metric, only using imperial when it made sense, eg 12 inches being easier to measure than the metric equivalent of 304.8mm. The inevitable result now is that I automatically think in metric.

Regards,

Peter G. Shaw

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

Posted by Stub Mandrel on 07/05/2013 19:02:39:

Neil

P.S. Fascinated to read several writers and correspondents using metric measure in 1900s ME articles. If it hasn't caught on after 110 years, I don't suppose it ever will

Neil

But then as a corollary, there is a (tooling) article in the current MEW 203 which is full of Whitworth fastenings and fractional hole sizes. I would imagine that sourcing a set of fixings would be harder than actually making the tool!

Ian P

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

Posted by Stub Mandrel on 07/05/2013 19:02:39:

Neil

P.S. Fascinated to read several writers and correspondents using metric measure in 1900s ME articles. If it hasn't caught on after 110 years, I don't suppose it ever will

Neil

But then as a corollary, there is a (tooling) article in the current MEW 203 which is full of Whitworth fastenings and fractional hole sizes. I would imagine that sourcing a set of fixings would be harder than actually making the tool!

Ian P

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

Posted by David Clark 1 on 07/05/2013 16:26:55:

Hi There

There is no database of individual users, only a subscriber's database for each magazine.

I think the website is of use to both ME and MEW readers in equal amounts.

MEW readers tend to use metal processes rather than make models but not exclusively.

Clockmakers tend to read MEW for the processes as well.

I think ME readers are on average about 10 years older than MEW readers.

You only have to look at the dates of birth on the free ads to see this.

regards david

David

I'm not sure what the reason is but your posts often leave me confused! Taking your points in turn,

'There is no database' What about the two you mentioned?

'Website equally useful to both groups' But if there are more MEW threads then ME ones, then that would indicate a bias to being more useful the MEW contingent.

'Processes' Its also true that MEs make tooling etc, (but not exclusively).

'Clockmakers read MEW', I agree but so do plumbers and bank managers.

Not that I want to, but how could I work out the age of the readership by looking at the free adverts!

I might be wrong, but I sense that the MHS management regard this website/forum primarily as being for 'Model Engineers' probably because of tradition or maybe because the ME magazine was established long before MEW. In reality the forum it is used by more MEW readers than MEs.

Ian P

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

Posted by David Clark 1 on 07/05/2013 16:26:55:

Hi There

There is no database of individual users, only a subscriber's database for each magazine.

I think the website is of use to both ME and MEW readers in equal amounts.

MEW readers tend to use metal processes rather than make models but not exclusively.

Clockmakers tend to read MEW for the processes as well.

I think ME readers are on average about 10 years older than MEW readers.

You only have to look at the dates of birth on the free ads to see this.

regards david

David

I'm not sure what the reason is but your posts often leave me confused! Taking your points in turn,

'There is no database' What about the two you mentioned?

'Website equally useful to both groups' But if there are more MEW threads then ME ones, then that would indicate a bias to being more useful the MEW contingent.

'Processes' Its also true that MEs make tooling etc, (but not exclusively).

'Clockmakers read MEW', I agree but so do plumbers and bank managers.

Not that I want to, but how could I work out the age of the readership by looking at the free adverts!

I might be wrong, but I sense that the MHS management regard this website/forum primarily as being for 'Model Engineers' probably because of tradition or maybe because the ME magazine was established long before MEW. In reality the forum it is used by more MEW readers than MEs.

Ian P

[DustyParticipant @dusty]

The only thing I would add to this discussion is that "it matters not one jot what magazine you read or where your interests lay, but is the forum informative, do you learn from it, do you enjoy it" I have kicked around engineering for over 50yrs and I still find snippits on this forum that educate me.

[DustyParticipant @dusty]

The only thing I would add to this discussion is that "it matters not one jot what magazine you read or where your interests lay, but is the forum informative, do you learn from it, do you enjoy it" I have kicked around engineering for over 50yrs and I still find snippits on this forum that educate me.

[Boiler BriParticipant @boilerbri]

Ian, Whatever it is as far as i am concerned it's a valuable resource.

Although i own my own business which includes a fully tooled workshop, i am more involved with the running of the business and machine design that we sell, so i spend little or no time on the shop floor. If i have a problem there is someone here on the forum who can advise and help. So does it really matter which side has the bias?

I am just glad there is such a place that we can have questions answered, especially out of working hours, which lets face it is when most of us require the help that such a forum can offer.

On the Magazine front i stopped subscribing when model engineer was torn apart into two mags, which spoilt it for me personally. Now i pick a copy up occasionally if there is something in the current mag that appeals to me.

Bri

[Author]

Posts