In a separate thread, I mentioned I'm getting my two sons-in-law and my cousin's son, all 30-39, into the hobby. In advising them, I wanted to make sure I have the technology compatibility (just within Lionel) accurate. Look right? The big question I had was whether or not LC+2.0 locomotives can be run with a TMCC Command Base and Cab-1. I excluded Legacy tech since I don't see any going Scale/Legacy, at least now to start.
Replies sorted oldest to newest
You left out the most important category: Bluetooth. No control system hardware necessary - just download the App.
I don't believe you can run LC+ 2.0 with a Cab-1.
All LC+ 2.0 have Legacy tech and can be run with the Lionchief or Cab3/BT app, or a Cab 1L, Cab2, Cab 3. I have several LC2.0 + engines and I can run them with my Cab-1L or apps.
A nice feature included in the Lionchief app is Hotspot Mode. This allows you to pair the dedicated or universal remotes with the Lionchief app and use the app to run the train.
This feature is not included in the Cab3/BT app at the moment.
@Tracker John posted:You left out the most important category: Bluetooth. No control system hardware necessary - just download the App.
It's on there....LC with BT and LC+ with BT. Broke those out separately since some LC and LC+ were sold without BT. I assumed BT is included on all LC+2.0.
@raising4daughters posted:It's on there....LC with BT and LC+ with BT. Broke those out separately since some LC and LC+ were sold without BT. I assumed BT is included on all LC+2.0.
Yep, by the time they got to LC+ 2.0, all the boards had BT.
I have 2 LionChief 2.0+ engines I run w/ Cab1 and its base, so yes they’re compatible with TMCC in its original iteration.
LionChief Plus 2.0 includeds TMCC control, so all of the TMCC hardware from the c1995 Cab1 onwards can control those engines.
@Mark V. Spadaro posted:I have 2 LionChief 2.0+ engines I run w/ Cab1 and its base, so yes they’re compatible with TMCC in its original iteration.
Mark, to confirm, you mean the original Cab-1, not the newer Cab-1L ("L" for Legacy, I assume), right? If so, that's reassuring.
Lionchief 2.0+ includes TMCC, as well as conventional, Bluetooth and LionChief radio frequency control. Obviously responds to Legacy, as do all TMCC locos since 1995-96 or so.
Getting back to the O.P.'s question of what is needed to introduce family members to Lionel trains. My recommendation is start with Bluetooth (App or Universal Remote) and add a Base3 (an older system from the used market) later. With engines equipped with Bluetooth, a base is not needed unless:
1. You want to have more 3 engines active at a time. The Universal remote and the Cab3 App will pair with three. (Cab1 or later hardware needed).
2. You want to enjoy all of the speed control, sound, light, and other features of Legacy and Visionline engines. (Legacy or Base3 needed).
3. You want to run "Trains" with multiple engines and Command-enabled cars. (Cab1 or later hardware needed).
4a. Layout control - operate switches, routes, and accessories with the remote. (Cab1 or later hardware needed).
4b. Layout control using LCS devices. Some of these provide feedback from the layout (SensorTracks, STM2 switch throw monitor) necessary for some Apps. (Legacy, or Base3 needed).
5. You own or are buying older engines (pre-Bluetooth).
6. You want conventional operation with a Powermaster. (Cab1 or later hardware needed).
"The Universal remote can pair with two engines,"
I believe it's three.
@raising4daughters posted:Mark, to confirm, you mean the original Cab-1, not the newer Cab-1L ("L" for Legacy, I assume), right? If so, that's reassuring.
Confirmed
@Landsteiner posted:"The Universal remote can pair with two engines,"
I believe it's three.
yes- three engines.
@Tracker John posted:Getting back to the O.P.'s question of what is needed to introduce family members to Lionel trains. My recommendation is start with Bluetooth (App or Universal Remote) and add a Base3 (an older system from the used market) later. With engines equipped with Bluetooth, a base is not needed unless:
5. You own or are buying older engines (pre-Bluetooth).
Great points. I think for my cousin's son, I'll tell him to start off with ones with BT (which I presume would be paired with Lionchief). Plus, for him, the LC fantasy sets (like Disney, etc.) will be hits with his little kids.
For my two sons-in-law, since I started them each with 2 older TMCC sets (no cruise, etc.), I'm leaning toward a TMCC command base and Cab-1. They'd then have the option to run an LC+2.0 with the same Cab-1 or smartphone app. If they don't like the price of the LC+2.0 (which ain't cheap, I just ordered my first), they could go LC or LC+ with BT without having to add additional equipment unless they wanted to universal remote.
@raising4daughters posted:Great points. I think for my cousin's son, I'll tell him to start off with ones with BT (which I presume would be paired with Lionchief). Plus, for him, the LC fantasy sets (like Disney, etc.) will be hits with his little kids.
For my two sons-in-law, since I started them each with 2 older TMCC sets (no cruise, etc.), I'm leaning toward a TMCC command base and Cab-1. They'd then have the option to run an LC+2.0 with the same Cab-1 or smartphone app. If they don't like the price of the LC+2.0 (which ain't cheap, I just ordered my first), they could go LC or LC+ with BT without having to add additional equipment unless they wanted to universal remote.
FWIW- A Cab-1L will work with the Base 3 should they decide to go all in down the road. The Cab-1 remote does not.
Advantage is a physical remote that will still work with the new base, and access to Legacy features that the Cab-1 cannot.
With the Base 3 finally hitting layouts, I'm sure older systems will start to hit the market at reasonable prices.
I'm a big fan of the Lionchief line. I have several generations from the original LC's to the current LC+2.0's. Feature-packed engines at, by today's standards, reasonable prices. And being semi-scale, they will run on smaller layouts with tighter curves.
Bob
Hard to believe that Lionel has evolved to so many control systems. Let alone board configurations. Makes my head spin as I still just run conventional and TMCC on my layout with the occasional DCS in passive mode. G
@GGG posted:Hard to believe that Lionel has evolved to so many control systems. Let alone board configurations. Makes my head spin as I still just run conventional and TMCC on my layout with the occasional DCS in passive mode. G
That's why there's need for a sanity check. 
I've always been an advocate for TMCC/Legacy in everything, I never understood why we need LC/LC+, etc. Putting BlueTooth into the Legacy locomotives was OK, that allowed a simple way to run it without the Legacy system. However, I believe everything they push out the door should run with one command system, TMCC/Legacy. If they want a backdoor with BT or the like, I can live with that.
A single command system was where MTH had the high ground. It was sad that they never expanded the concept so you could run accessories, small motorized track vehicles, etc.
The original TMCC Command system (Cab1) will work with the Base3 via a LCS SER2 box. Connect the Cab1 base to the SER2 with a null modem cable DB9 Male to DB9 Male.
When LC first came out I was at York and heard a speech by a Lionel executive. After the meeting I cornered him to ask if TMCC/Legacy would be phased out. He said no, but said that the complexity of Legacy discouraged beginners and they needed something simple to attract new customers. The subsequent evolution of LC would seem to have negated that original goal and created an even more complicated situation.
Bill
@ogaugenut posted:When LC first came out I was at York and heard a speech by a Lionel executive. After the meeting I cornered him to ask if TMCC/Legacy would be phased out. He said no, but said that the complexity of Legacy discouraged beginners and they needed something simple to attract new customers. The subsequent evolution of LC would seem to have negated that original goal and created an even more complicated situation.
Bill
Good observations and conclusions by you and GRJ. Original TMCC was installed in both scale and traditional sized locos, same system different markets and price points. I can definitely see the very simple Lionchief application for the mass-produced entry-level sets. I think the mistake was made with creation of Lionchief Plus (1.0). Slippery slope. Nice upgrade over Lionchief but it led to platform proliferation, especially with the evolution to LC+2.0. So many platforms, so many roadnames....not the Henry Ford model of mass production.
Even worse, they quickly abandon stuff like LC+ and leave them orphans. The Universal remote was a good idea to try to tie things together, but the flawed execution negated much of it's attraction. The simple $12 LionChief remote has decent range, I get at least 30-40 feet out of it. However, running the same LionChief locomotive with the Universal remote I get around 10-12 feet of range before I start having connection issues. I don't know how they screwed up the Universal remote range, you'd think the same range should have been a no-brainer when they created it. Then as a slap in the face, they trashed all the TMCC electronics from the parts site, what was that all about?
@ogaugenut posted:When LC first came out I was at York and heard a speech by a Lionel executive. After the meeting I cornered him to ask if TMCC/Legacy would be phased out. He said no, but said that the complexity of Legacy discouraged beginners and they needed something simple to attract new customers. The subsequent evolution of LC would seem to have negated that original goal and created an even more complicated situation.
Everyone thinks they're different...
I love MTH PS 2 and 3 and DCS, which has worked flawlessly for me for several years since I got the DCS remote control system. Most of my command control locomotives are MTH PS3 and 3.
I like LC+ and LC+2.0 and the LC Universal Remote a lot, which also enables me to access the basic functions of the few Legacy engines I have, thereby eliminating any need for me to get the Legacy system since I’m not interested in the more complicated complex Legacy functions, So, I’m glad Lionel developed the LionChief lines of products. Arnold
@Arnold D. Cribari posted:I love MTH PS 2 and 3 and DCS, which has worked flawlessly for me for several years since I got the DCS remote control system. Most of my command control locomotives are MTH PS3 and 3.
I like LC+ and LC+2.0 and the LC Universal Remote a lot, which also enables me to access the basic functions of the few Legacy engines I have, thereby eliminating any need for me to get the Legacy system since I’m not interested in the more complicated complex Legacy functions, So, I’m glad Lionel developed the LionChief lines of products. Arnold
Arnold. No disagreement on liking them. I have numerous TMCC, slightly fewer DCS, plus one LC and one LC+. Just pre-ordered a LC+2.0. Throw in my grandfather's PW conventional, and that's 6 different operating methods!
Like them all for what they are but pine at times for simplicity; hence my posts on how I can avoid using the smartphone app with the soon to arrive LC+2.0 locomotive. It sounds like I can run it with a Cab-1 which means one less device.
If I can find a Chessie steamer with TMCC, I may part with my Chessie Mikado just to get rid of the extra controller. Or, I might grab a universal remote to run the Mikado and the new LC+2 engine.
@raising4daughters posted:If I can find a Chessie steamer with TMCC, I may part with my Chessie Mikado just to get rid of the extra controller. Or, I might grab a universal remote to run the Mikado and the new LC+2 engine.
One thing to consider for the Universal remote. The experience of many, including me, is that the Universal remote has a much shorter range for LC and LC+ engines than the dedicated remotes that come with the engines. I'm lucky to get 12-14 feet with the Universal remove to a typical LC engine, and the dedicated remote that comes with it easily handles 30-35 feet of distance from the engine.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:One thing to consider for the Universal remote. The experience of many, including me, is that the Universal remote has a much shorter range for LC and LC+ engines than the dedicated remotes that come with the engines. I'm lucky to get 12-14 feet with the Universal remove to a typical LC engine, and the dedicated remote that comes with it easily handles 30-35 feet of distance from the engine.
I wonder what the range of hotspot mode between the universal remote and the LC app is? That way you can leave the remote near the layout and use the LC app to walk around.
I know, the whole point is not to use the app-based control but just thinkin' out loud......
Between my small layout and my small basement, I can barely get far enough away to test. 
Bob
@RSJB18 posted:I wonder what the range of hotspot mode between the universal remote and the LC app is? That way you can leave the remote near the layout and use the LC app to walk around.
I know, the whole point is not to use the app-based control but just thinkin' out loud......
Between my small layout and my small basement, I can barely get far enough away to test.
Bob
You could try that, but I have no reason to believe that the link between the LC board and the Universal remote would be better with Hotspot mode. In any case, I can't stand on one end of my 12 x 24 layout and run trains at the other end with the Universal remote.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:I'm lucky to get 12-14 feet with the Universal remove to a typical LC engine, and the dedicated remote that comes with it easily handles 30-35 feet of distance from the engine.
@gunrunnerjohn after you made this comment, I went to the basement to doublecheck the range I was getting using the Universal Remote with the Thomas (1st generation) LC engine (using RF). I had no problem controlling it from 30 feet. That's the only RF-based LC I have to test. So I'm not sure if Thomas has a more sensitive receiver or I just have a souped-up Universal Remote.
I was planning on testing the UR as a hotspot once most of the Base3/CAB3 issues have been resolved. Frankly, I rarely run this engine so my interest in the UR hotspot is more of a scientific experiment than a capability I'll actually use day-to-day.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:You could try that, but I have no reason to believe that the link between the LC board and the Universal remote would be better with Hotspot mode. In any case, I can't stand on one end of my 12 x 24 layout and run trains at the other end with the Universal remote.
I get that. My point is I wonder if the hotspot connection from the UR to a smart device has a better range than the UR to a LC engine.
I'll fiddle around with it as well when I get a chance.
Bob
RF is a finicky beast and I imagine the specific environment has a lot to do with the performance we see.
@Bruce Brown posted:@gunrunnerjohn after you made this comment, I went to the basement to doublecheck the range I was getting using the Universal Remote with the Thomas (1st generation) LC engine (using RF). I had no problem controlling it from 30 feet.
I have to wonder if I got a bum universal remote, but I had the same issue at a last club outing with someone else's universal remote. I guess that's the risk of being an early adopter, you get the Monday morning production. 
All these myriads of incompatible and obsolete Lionel control systems makes me happy I have stuck with TMCC and Legacy (also with DCS/PS2/PS3). It's not that I especially decided in the beginning to avoid them; just never did buy any of it. And since Lionmaster stuff is not issued with Legacy anymore, I guess there won't be any new LM stuff coming to this address. Ho hum. 
Rod
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
