Lionel and MTH: Time to get your act together

Is dcc better than legacy and/or dcs?  I am curious about this because I recently thought about going HO, and from my limited research into dcc, I got the feeling I would be taking a step backward in a lot of ways.  It seems like dcc is an older and more raw system, which allows you more access to all the elements of the control system, but on the flip side requires more of the user in terms if setting up control for each engine.  The O gauge systems seem to be far more plug and play, but less customizable, which may actually be a better scenario for the O gauge market with its toy train aspects.  in the really nontoy train segment, 2r O gauge, dcc is already widely used,  Also, the top systems are quite expensive, more than dcs or legacy.

 

As for MTH, they have really already stopped requiring dcs, since the newest engines can be run with dcc, so the choice is in the hands of the customer, they don't need to buy dcs to run in command.

pennsy484,

 

It's not about DCC vs. Legacy/TMCC vs. DCS, it's about the culture in O gauge that is keeping our segment of the hobby back. By Lionel and MTH keeping a death grip on their respective command control systems, they are holdiong back great potential growth. With advances in electronics and manufacturing, a better system can be built if Lionel and MTH get out of the way.

Hi Stewart, sorry I edited my reply as you were posting. I added the last paragraph above.  Maybe the answer is making legacy engines compatible with dcc as well.

Stewart,

 

I believe your right but both DCS and Legacy are too entrenched for either maker to give up on them now. It must be profitable for them both so until it is not neither one will budge.

 

Dave

Dave, you are correct, they don't have to re-invent the wheel, but to play together otherwise, they will have to open up their architecture to one another, and to third parties, to fully maximize command control. As long as they stick to proprietary rights, the hobby loses out.

 

Jeff, no problem. I wanted to keep this thread focused before it spins out of control, which will probably be in 3...2...1...

The prouble is because Is HO with DCC is hot on the market.. plusO gage takes up alot of room compared to HO and N scale trains..Plus the prices on the O gages hurts too.  O gages draw more then 2 amps on the motors.. that a draw back on not using DCC system..cant understand why couldnt they make a DCC that can handle 3+amps motors.,I had a BLI PRR Q2 that has the paragon dcc system.. Boy it was AWSOME! had more bells and whisle on it.. has up to 30 codes/fetures..To bad Lionel and MTH trains dont have some of those codes!.wished they would get there heads out of there butts!.I had troubles with my Q2 with bad smoke unit and electrical proublems.thats my luck.Heres BLI Q2 webpage with video..http://www.broadway-limited.com/prrq24-4-6-4.aspxit had yard,frieght,passanger,crew,maintances,saw mill,citysounds with sirins,farm,different,whisle settings and other goodies..cant remember the rest..I got to PRR O gage steamers that Im trying to upgrade sound systems in them.. Would love to have all those features in my O gage trains!

Just want to make the point that I have no intention to run anything beyond conventional, even with equipment that has the ability to do so.  Further more, I do not want to see Lionel or WBB expand their platforms because that will only cause the price of new equipment to rise.  If someone were to build an N gauge layout the size of my O guage, I can see the need, but not with O.  Very few of us, I'm sure, have a pike large enough to warrant command control.  My two cents.

 Very few of us, I'm sure, have a pike large enough to warrant command control.  My two cents.

 

 

 This is such a mis-conception in all scales, that it is unbelievable. Command Control has as much or more to offer on a small layout as it does on a large layout. Command control offers the ability to control trains indenpently of one another, in close proximity to each other. A large layout offers many more opportunities for block control and seperation that a smaller layout just can't offer. Command control is an assest to large layouts as well, but it is on the small and medium size layouts where it's advantages really shine.

 

 Unless you are only operating a single train, on a single loop Command control can really enhance a layout operationally. Add a siding or two, a few spurs and two or more locomotives, and command control is the only way to go, ESPECIALLY on a small-medium layout.

 

Doug

 We the consumer pull our hair out waiting for inexpensive visitor friendly controllers while you focus on running trains from a cell phone or tablet. Your companies are disconnected from the consumer.

 

Exactly...And with the new QSI Titan being released that blows both Lionels & MTHs sounds away the choice is simple..Go with DCC where you can adjust ALL the sound levels, ALL the motor settings AND swap horns, bells, whistles, chuffs, prime movers, pumps, lighting functions etc...What a concept  

MTH PS3.0 locomotives are fully DCC compatible.  They can run on AC, DC, DCC, or DCS.  It seems to me that MTH has already addressed the concerns of the original poster without compromising their ability to innovate and improve their proprietary DCS system.  Additionally, if I understand it correctly, the system previewed @ York by the Hikel brothers translates DCC protocols from RR & Co. or other layout control software to DCS commands, further integrating the two systems.

 

While Chessie Fan 72 is certainly entitled to his opinion, I must disagree completely.  In fact, I believe O Gauge is WAY ahead of HO and N in the command control arena, which is pretty incredible considering that the total O Gauge market is miniscule when compared to HO & N.

Not only did Stewart  come off with a rude title  , he followed that up with an uninformed opinion.

I'm sorry Stewart but I have to agree with Pat on this one.

 

I firmly believe that O Gauge is far ahead of HO and N scale in terms of technology in its command control area. O gauge may not have the ability to switch around sounds as easily with HO but O gauge command control has way more advanced features than DCC.

 

Also MTH and Lionel aren't creating a "schism" in the O Gauge market. That "schism" is called healthy competition and should be allowed anytime two companies are producing similar products in the same market. Granted I do believe if MTH and Lionel put their heads together for one control system that would make life a lot easier especially on the wallet, but I think the competition is what makes the industry grow. MTH and Lionel are always going head to head to produce better products which makes the consumer's job fun because it allows us to see now innovations and experiment with them.

 

When MTH came out with Protosound 2 it blew Lionel's TMCC Railsounds out of the water and now that Lionel's Legacy Railsounds are out they are blowing MTH's PS2 out of the water. MTH is answering with PS3 which IMO is a great sound system and if they keep working on it they could surpass Legacy. As you can see its a constant cycle between companies.

 

... "in my opinion."  But a lot of folks think otherwise, which shouldn't be any of your concern.

 

Pete

My EASY fix......CONVENTIONAL.

I like to follow what is going on in the world of command control because I am interested in the state of the hobby. So far, I haven't developed any interest in using any of the command control systems. I am happy to use switches and relays. I even built one control panel using ceramic based knife switches for a retro look.

 

To each their own!

I have both systems, use both systems, operate with both systems, and like them both.  Sure it would be easier and less costly if there was one universal system, but that's not likely to happen for a good number of reasons.  I can run anything I care to on my layout, ranging from a remote control Thomas set to the most sophisticated Legacy or DCS locomotive (consistent with minimum curvature required, of course).  And, if I choose to, I can still run conventional.

 

I will admit that I don't have much interest in operating my trains or layout via an iPad or some such gizmo, but I also recognize that there are others who love all that whiz-bang stuff.  I have no problem at all with respecting individual differences and preferences.

 

I guess I don't see what the big deal is about when it comes to competing systems.  There's something out there for everyone.

 

I believe and I hope someone can confirm, that I heard at York JonZ say the latest generation of Legacy engines are DCC compatible.

Ultimately I think price has a LOT to do with it.  It's a niche hobby to begin with, and the prices I saw in the latest Lionel catalog for a full-featured command engine just about curled my hair.  While the old timers (experience, not age) here may disagree, Command control is basically "table stakes" at this point.   You're not going to lure someone young into the hobby without an advanced feature set.   I just got into O gauge about a year ago and I have absolutely NO interest in traditional operations - if it weren't for CC, I'd have passed.  At the end of the day, the hobby needs guys like to grow the hobby and spend money.   Unfortunately, a lot of "guys like me" also have families that come with all the requisite expenses, and $1200+ for a loco is, well, loco

 

A standardized protocol would help to and extent - all players share in development costs. It would likely lower the cost of entry as well, allowing more players to enter the market.  It would be cool, for example, if Williams was able to offer low cost versions of their engines with CC.  The internet is a perfect example;  if every vendor was out there offering it's own proprietary flavor of access protocol, prices would still be outrageous and we wouldn't have access to many of the things we have now.  It's hard to make money developing a product or service that only serves some small fraction of the market.  It's even more difficult to develop and maintain multiple versions for different platforms.  At some point, technology is technology, whether it's in your phone or in your train.   The rules are basically the same.  

 

I have been SORELY tempted to return to HO where the economies of scale would allow to take advantages of the economies of scale that gauge provides, but I LIKE large, powerful trains that I can actually SEE from across the layout, and so do my kids, so I suffer through this... for the time being.  

quote:

The HO and N markets are booming while O gauge mucks along.

 

Booming?  I don't recall seing anything published that indicates any segment of the model railroad hobby is booming, period.  

 

People starting out is any segment of model railroading don't really know or care much about command control systems.  They want to play with trains.  The main issues with this hobby is that it requires a significant investment in time, money, and space.  Three things that seem to be in increasingly short supply in our society.  When you throw in "expertise" and "patience" that's usually the death knell in terms of mass market appeal for a hobby. 

 

I'm sorry but this is a niche hobby.  It's been that way since the mid fifties when toy trains stopped being "the toy" and just became "another toy".  As much as I love the hobby I don't see anything on the horizon that will bring it back to it's alleged glory days and that's ok with me.  If "fixing" the issues with market share or interest in the hobby were as easy as publishing command codes they (all of them) would have done this a long time ago.

If DCC is as good as some say, why is it that Williams by Bachman do not install DCC in their locos. I would love to see that. Sell that scale GG1 with DCC they would fly out the door. But hey what do I know.

It pretty simple for me. I won't buy any MTH locomotives because I don't want to buy another control system. It's TMCC only for me.

I used to think that way, then I ended up with a PS2 locomotive at a bargain price.  I bought a $30 DCS Remote Commander to operate it, and figured that was that.  But then I started noticing that MTH had some features and equipment that I liked better than the options I could get from Lionel.  I ended up with several more PS2 locomotives, and finally bit the bullet and bought the DCS system.

 

Buying a DCS system is less than the price of a single new locomotive, so it's not like it's a deal killer, right?

I firmly believe to cover the complete area of Command Control DCS and Legacy should be included in harmony on all layouts. It gives you the ability to cover a huge spectrum of locomotives, operating accessories, and switches.

The problem is that the hobby has people that run the course from those that just want to run a train for their child at Christmas to those that would like to dial a number on their Ipad and say "Sandy, start the trains." and everything would start and run without any problems. If you looked at most clubs you would find all kinds. Those that have trouble getting their trains on the track much less getting them to run and those that insist on being able to run command control with all the bells and whistles available. This is the market for O gauge. Good, you have no trouble understanding DCC and all the programming options that the CV's offer. That is good, but remember that that nice gentleman standing next to you still dosen't understand the difference between AC and DC and has no idea what an engine address is. This is the market that Lionel and MTH must deal with and I believe thay are doing a good job. When DCC has the market penatration in new equipment in HO or N that Legacy and DCS have in the O gauge market come and we will talk.

 

Al

quote:

Buying a DCS system is less than the price of a single new locomotive, so it's not like it's a deal killer, right?

 

Exactly!  AND, it will play nice with Lionel's systems, aka they won't fight!

The problem with O gauge is the cost and space required.

If I could do it all over again, I would have went HO.

I will say it again, there is no reason to have to pay $1000-$2000 for a locomotive.

The more this happens the more the hobby becomes a hobby exclusively for the rich.

Look at the track and what you pay for one 10" sections versus what you pay for HO.

If not for my eyesight, I would have switched despite the investment.

Now having whined I will also say that MTH's Rail King line and moreover Williams Trains are the saviors of O gauge.

Eliminate both those and this becomes a rich mans hobby only.

Just some thoughts here Stewart. I think theres alot of assumptions here that are just not true.

 

 

As far as price is concerned O guage was just as expensive years ago prior to command control, as it is today.It doesn,t matter what the controller costs if you still cannot justify the price of the locomotive,which if anyone would actually go back and look has remained fairly constant, in some cases "new" locomotives are $100-$150 LESS than their prior 2000 release. The 1990 Lionel 700e MSRP was $100 MORE than the new VL version, and the original 1937 version "adjusts" to about $1400 in todays money. MTH prices have changed little if any.

 

When Lionels TMCC first came out it was available for licensing by any manufacturer that was interested, this has been beaten to death. Mth chose to design their own. TMCC/Legacy will operate any other brand of CC locomotive.Folks that like DCS, have that option. I wouldn't want a mustang and camaro to be the same either.

 

 

Maybe its about "choices" in O guage, I don't know, "different strokes for different folks". Prewar/postwar, conventional or command,carpet layouts,green plywood or high detailed realistic scenery, DCS, Legacy and now maybe even DCC if the rumors are true.

 

 

While I have no interest in running trains via cellphone or tablet, there were numerous posts regarding the excitement and interest in demonstrations of this new technology at York, so it must not be that bad of an idea.

 

 

"Heres BLI Q2 webpage with video..http://www.broadway-limited.com/prrq24-4-6-4.aspxit had yard,frieght,passanger,crew,maintances,saw mill,citysounds with sirins,farm,different,whisle settings and other goodies..cant remember the rest..I got to PRR O gage steamers that Im trying to upgrade sound systems in them.. Would love to have all those features in my O gage trains!"

 

 

Whats wrong with just having the correct sounds for a locomotive delivered in the fullest most realistic manner, maybe with a few added smoke effects? This challenger doesn't make farm or sawmill sounds but it sounds ok. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mth's railking Y6 can be had for $500, and it doesn't sound bad either

 

Let’s get down to the real thing in both systems and that is money.  They both work well and they both have good features to operate the trains.  They have both invested money into their system to get there customers to buy that type of train and I have both myself.

 

If you want a better system or more universal type of control then you take your money and start it.  There have and there are other companies out there who have offered us ways to upgrade our trains if we want more operating features, also running with the two operating system at hand.

 

Until that company or you with a better system grow with costumers in a large volume and they become profitable will this happen.

 

Until a better system that your or someone other comes out with this system, Lionel and MTH are not getting out of the way.  This is why we have choices.

 

Phillip

I run TMCC in concentional.  I think somebosy needs to come up with a kind of RC block control, without the cost  For a 5x9 layout, that is all one would need.

 

Or, at least an E-Unit without sound which could red TMCC, they fall back to conv. if it did not.  The ideas of some sort of "train clicker" where one could follow his/her train is great!

 

 

Nice slice and dice Pete, an Incomplete quote, taken completely out of context. That comment was in reply to the statement, that "few of us have layouts large enough to warrant command control" My point was that CC offers operational flexibilty that conv control just can not offer, especially to smaller layouts, which IS A FACT, not an OPINION. 

 

 If someone prefers conv, that is totally fine, I am not even one of those forecasting gloom and doom forconv control. But, if one does want to control multiple trains in close proximity to each other, then CC does offer advantages that Conventional control simply does not offer.

 

Doug

 so am i to take it you guys are actually whining about having to deal with only two or three different systems?  ...wow.

 

That's not the way I remember it.  There were no licenses initially offered by Lionel.  It was only after MTH announced DCS that Lionel offered the licenses in a tactical move to "surround" MTH before DCS was released.

I have a relatively small S Scale layout that I added DCC to several years ago.  It's single track with two passing sidings and is pretty much a one train at a time railroad.

 

I can switch between conventional DC to DCC using my block toggles depending on what I am running and it's also very unlikely I'll convert all my existing motive power to DCC.

 

I have found no disadvantage to using DCC, nor have I found any great advantage. It's just another way of controlling my trains.  Ultimately, I'm more concerned the locomotive runs smoothly and looks good.

 

Future purchases will likely be DCC equipped, but I'm not going to ignore purchasing a locomotive I like if it's only available in conventional DC.

 

Most of my DCC loco's don't have sound, but I like the fact that I can bring the train to a dead stop and the headlight stays on, just like the real thing.  Also, the slow speed response seems better with DCC.  So, OK, two small advantages. 

 

My few sound equipped loco's bring in that added dimension, but I also have just as much fun running my "silent" loco's, both command and conventional.

 

The "learning curve" for DCC was about the same for me as it was for TMCC and DCS.  All three systems have options and features I don't normally use, so I keep the manuals handy and refer to them as needed.  It's no big deal.

 

Rusty

quote:

Lionel opened up TMCC for a limited time, some signed on as licensees

 

As I recall, there were a lot of strings attached, and Lionel may have even kept some of the features exclusive to themselves.

 

quote:

The 1990 Lionel 700e MSRP was $100 MORE than the new VL version

 

I think the street price on the 1990 Hudson was around $1200 without the case, and it was made in the USA. What was the street price on the VL hudson. Need to compare apples with apples.

Regardless, I didn't buy a 1990 Hudson until they could be had for around $700, NOS without the case. Many, if not most Modern Era pieces can be had at a fraction of their original street price. The prices of some Modern Era pieces have fallen a long way from their highest "instant collectable" prices.
IMHO, the prices on newly made Lionel trains have always been rather high. Even when I would have considered myself to be an operator more than a collector, I was buying Postwar because you got more bang for your buck.

I was very into n scale and was moving toward ho. I had a digitracks dcc. That was a top of the line system at the time. Yes the prices 10 years ago were high.It was about average for the stuff at that time. Still a lot though for me. I am single and dont make a doctors salary. I saw a lionel tmcc geep and tmcc remote and was hooked from the start. Then I bought dcs and mth engines. Ran both systems with mth tmcc cable. Now I have legacy and only legacy and tmcc engines ( Still run mth proto engines just not as much).Having given my brief back ground I feel I can comment on all three systems from my user perspective. Dcc- very un-user friendly for me. Never got or used the cv values feature. Decoders hard to install in small n gauge steamers at the time. To small for any sound decoders also. Reverse loops required more hardware to accomplish this task. Tmcc- easy to use. Very easy to understand remote and use. Sounds were great. Upgrades were easy. Diecast engines. Bigger size and easer to work on. Smoke feature on steamers. Ah and all those timeless lionel accessories. Speed control at first was not available. Then oddesy one and so so results. Dcs- great slow speed control. Lots of neat pfa sounds and random crew talk. Plus fan driven smoke in steamers.Remote had a lot more features and menus to get into. Plus a lighted screen. But I found my self running the remote more than the trains. Having to go from menu to menu to access features And set momentum values. Proto sounds still where not as good as lionel's except for the pfa and exstra crew talk dialog. Dcs able to run tmcc engines was a great plus. Legacy- awesome sounds, better slow speeds,and quill-able whistle. Smoke effects. Swinging bell. More crew and tower dialog. Very easy to use remote and changing the momentum setting is just a button push away.two screens and whistle lever and Train brake lever. Big red wheel ( velocity throttle) better than mth thumb wheel. Remote is very intuitive and user friendly. I feel lionel engineers can take the most complex and make it easy to use and understand. Now with all that being said would we have had any of these three systems or features with out competition I think not. I agree they could standardize and come together more. Will they, probably not. But free markets work and competition works. Then wall all win and get to choose what we like best. As for the prices in o gauge. They are exspensive, but you get so much more.they are heaver and more rugged. plus they have a nastolgic feel like no other scale. There is an initial cost and investment in the control systems just as with any other scale. plus now that there is a lot of tmcc,legacy and dcs engines out there on the secondary market and with the track choices available. One can over time have a great layout and collection. I used to envy those who had shelves full of engines and cars back when I had maybe two engines tops. Now I have more than my shelves will hold and a modest 12' by4' layout with lots of accessorys. The collection is always growing and layout will get bigger as space permites. Just be happy with what you have. Save for what you want and then look back in ten years and admire what you have built and collected. Just my two sense worth on the topic.

Street price on the VL hudson about $1400, even so, its been 20 YEARS, you now have a swinging bell, whistle steam,superior stack smoke,sound, performance and of course command control.

 

 

Even with the $200 price (over 20 years) difference theres no contest no matter where it was made.

 

The American Flyer SD70's are scheduled to be DCC compatible.

 

Rusty

Theres another thought? why dont they have duel system they all can run on?  With My BLI Q2 it can run on DC and DCC...With DCC you can run a DC transformer with a code program box.. They have that setup for the G gage..why not MTH and Lionel comeup with running on AC and have a program box to run sound funtions and other features..Not go spending 300+ for TMCC & DSC remote transformer.. Yes O was leading in sound systems in the 90's,but now Ho is the leader now.. with easy and simple system/and lower cost to run..when I'd bought my first O and it was the MTH challenger in 96.. got it for 350,00 and was happy as heck..Thought here compantion against Lionel ,because MTH at the time was starting out plus his prices was low.. But now it just as costly as lionels..

I think one of the problems here may be with our definition of a "smaller" layout.  You don't seriously believe that a 4x8 round'n'round layout with a couple sidings can possibly make good use of the "operational flexibility" of command control, do you?  In such an instance it would be a matter of want rather than need.  The other problem may be that we all would like for our opinions to be facts, but it ain't necessarily so.

 

Pete