@bigkid posted:Well, right on the box they say these are toy trains.....including the 2000 dollar vision line last I looked.
Hmm... right after I read this I went to the Lionel "Vision Line" site: they are referred to there as..." model trains". Couldn't find any reference to "toys"... Ah well, "a rose by any other name", right? 🙂
Mark in Oregon 🎄
What surprises me most about some of the comments is the hostility some folks exhibit to any company whom they deem as being unworthy to manufacturer and sell trains in their view.
I simply just don't get it. Personally, I give all those who manufacture anything for the toy train hobby a great deal of credit. They could have just as easily elected to manufacture a widget which would be much more profitable with a lot less headache.
If an item by a manufacturer doesn't meet your "specifications" then obviously you won't want to buy it. But keep in mind that what it lacks in your viewpoint may just be what the doctor ordered by others. For example simply good looking and base functionality.
To those that gripe the loudest and the most, I'm going to ask this simple question.
What have you designed, developed, put into production and sold that was a ten by all of your customers?
If you haven't, then by what right do you have to even begin to complain?
If you have never engaged in the development of a product, what do you really know about what it takes to bring a product to market? In most cases the answer is NOTHING.
With that being the case, then how can you judge anyone for their effort, especially if manufacturing a new product for the first time?
These are beta units - which means they are still working out the bugs. In industry terms like "prototype" or "mule" are often used. The auto industry, which is now nearly 120yrs old, still has prototypes that they build to work out the bugs, prior going into full production!
Having an elitist attitude because they aren't a mainstream train manufacturer is very telling of your prejudice.
Let us all simply employ the attitude of encouraging new entities into the toy train business by giving them honest feedback without being hostile and insulting.
Is it really a great deal at $160 or even $200 as a starter engine???
Need I continue??
Mannyrock
@Mannyrock posted:Is it really a great deal at $160 or even $200 as a starter engine???
WILLIAMS #23106 CANADIAN NATIONAL #1 - SCALE 44 TON SWITCHER 5.0 star rating $129.99
WILLIAMS #WIL1235 NEW YORK CENTRAL 4-6-0 STEAM ENGINE #1235 WITH WHISTLE, BELL & SMOKE 5.0 star rating $159.99
Need I continue??
Mannyrock
I think it’s important to note that those are special sale prices and not the everyday MSRP. We don’t know what Menards will sell the engine for at MSRP, but at $160, that is not a sale price. The MSRP of the engines that you quoted are considerably more $200 and that makes sense, given that they have a few more features, albeit no remote control (which, like it or not, is the future).
I think it is safe to say that Menards is not going after folks like you and me. They aren’t going after people who keep an eye on the trainworld sales. They are going after people in age my demographic who have young kids at home, who are shopping at the store, or even on their website, and want a present to pick up to bring home for the kids. The MSPR, if it ends up being in the $160 range, is a steal in that regard and is a great thing for our hobby.
Rafi
Very good points Rafi!
@Mannyrock posted:Is it really a great deal at $160 or even $200 as a starter engine???
WILLIAMS #23106 CANADIAN NATIONAL #1 - SCALE 44 TON SWITCHER 5.0 star rating $129.99
WILLIAMS #WIL1235 NEW YORK CENTRAL 4-6-0 STEAM ENGINE #1235 WITH WHISTLE, BELL & SMOKE 5.0 star rating $159.99
Need I continue??
Mannyrock
What will it cost to get them to run with a remote on constant voltage?
I welcome more choices in the hobby!! And I'm enjoying watching Menards learn along the way! Listening to customer feedback, good for them!!
Menards needs to let a bunch of 10 to 12 year-old's do the beta testing. I bet there would be rave reviews.
Tom
Received it today and ran it today. The only issue I had at first was the battery plate on the remote. It was screwed on with a power driver and off center. The hole around the screw head was cracked and it took a while to get it off but after that, no issues.
I agree that it starts up a little fast but not too bad once I connected 4 Lionel Southern Crescent cars. The top speed is adequate without running off the track like some post war engines. Control was a little fidgety and could use finer control steps.
Detailing was good and sounds and bell are okay, the horn is a little weak. However, comparing to a Lionel 2343 Santa Fe, it was actually a lot better horn, and no leaking battery needed.
It could benefit from getting rid of the chrome trucks and undercarriage and painting them silver. 2343 has no bell, no sounds, and no available remote control unless running on a Lionel remote system.
Overall, really nice for what I believe is the intended customer.
@Allegheny posted:1. Personally, I give all those who manufacture anything for the toy train hobby a great deal of credit...
2. To those that gripe the loudest and the most, I'm going to ask this simple question.
What have you designed, developed, put into production and sold that was a ten by all of your customers?
If you haven't, then by what right do you have to even begin to complain?
If you have never engaged in the development of a product, what do you really know about what it takes to bring a product to market? In most cases the answer is NOTHING.
3. Having an elitist attitude because they aren't a mainstream train manufacturer is very telling of your prejudice.
4. Let us all simply employ the attitude of encouraging new entities into the toy train business by giving them honest feedback without being hostile and insulting.
1. I agree. 🙂
2. Does that mean if I buy something that is not up to spec (car, appliance,etc) I cannot comment because I haven't manufactured those things myself? Let's face it, one of the allures of these Forums is to give us "little people" a voice, for both good and bad reviews and opinions in general. 👍
3. "Prejudice"? That's a rather harsh word to use here; after all, we are talking "toy" trains, are we not? 🤔
4. I will agree with that; just add that "he who lives in glass houses..." 🙂
Mark in Oregon 🎄
PS: I also agree with your opinion of the C&O 2-6-6-6. 😁
The only item now missing in Menard's portfolio to create a complete starter set (to compete with Lionel's offerings in the $280 - $370 range) is the transformer. Could that be coming next?
@Strummer posted:Hmm... right after I read this I went to the Lionel "Vision Line" site: they are referred to there as..." model trains". Couldn't find any reference to "toys"... Ah well, "a rose by any other name", right? 🙂
Mark in Oregon 🎄
We all know they are promoting 2k engines at kids, but if you look at the age warning level they say it is a toy to be used for kids above 14 (I haven't looked in a long time, given I haven't bought one in a long time, so maybe they have changed that).
@H1000 posted:What will it cost to get them to run with a remote on constant voltage?
That is a good point, even a basic DC commander or PS upgrade would cost a lot, same with DCC, especially these days, even for just basic control functions, let alone sound. Prob talking 150 bucks to be conservative.
Unfortunately, I missed out on this one, but it seems that it still doesn't have conventional operation which is a huge bummer.
When I'm asking for conventional operation, I'm asking for the following:
Optionally:
Simply bypassing the electronics and going through a rectifier for forward only operation misses the mark of what is expected from a manufacturers production run.
I think some of the griping with the Menards product is ironically that almost everyone would wish that O gauge 3 rail trains were a lot more affordable than they are, I don't know anyone who says current prices are a steal (and yes, you could make an argument that based on value of a dollar and so forth, a vision line 2000 dollar engine is bargain compared to the original 700e at 75 bucks in late 30's and what is on a vision line engine, but that is kind of an extreme case, the 700e was way expensive for that time, too). Those commenting on whether it is an f3 or FP7 , if it is scale sized and the like I think are coming at it from that angle, with the idea it would be really great if Menards could produce something that is at least somewhat scale fidelity and looks good and is cheap (and very understandable, heck I would love that as an operator).
As far as quality goes, again, people obviously want something that runs well and doesn't fall apart the first time someone uses it. The fact that Menards is doing these as limited run beta at a low price says they aren't ignoring quality or issues with it. Working in software development, there are jokes around what alpha and beta1 and beta2 and beta 3 and 1.0 versions mean, and it goes from "this stinks on ice, what the heck were they thinking" to "it stinks less, but still smells", "not a skunk, but maybe a polecat", 1.0 is really "extended Beta 2, since they ignored the results of Beta 3" and 2.0 is "sort of production ready". I think people have to keep this in mind when looking at the Menards unit, these are not a finished product (and I have no way of knowing if they plan on doing further betas, or if next step is prod, stay tuned). It sounds like they are listening, and hopefully for those who didn't buy it figuring that a beta release, like Lionel prototypes, will be valuable collectors items, and actually run the unit, they give Menards feedback on it. The other thing is quality these days is relative, we see problems with 2000 dollar engines because quality control is not a priority in this market. With regular engines it is to keep build cost low to maintain high margins. With Menards, which to be honest I doubt is making a lot if any money out of its train stuff, it is to keep the build cost low so they can offer it at relatively cheap prices.
The one glaring thing is why they don't allow conventional control, I am sure that building a control chip that allows sounding the horn via the whistle controller and F/N/R via the direction button is not exactly expensive. Why should they do that if they have a controller? Easy, if the controller gets broken, and this is really for kids, the conventional is a backup, especially if controllers are not easy to replace or (heaven help us), can be fixed.
The rapid startup speed probably can be fixed. I will add that it wouldn't be unique, Williams engines tend to be fly off the table runners, too, unless you put the motors in series *shrug*.
"When I'm asking for conventional operation, I'm asking for the following:"
I think this will greatly increase the cost of the loco, and thus is probably a non-starter for that reason. Just guessing, but I think if it were feasible it would have already been done. Examples are the difference in cost between LionChief (no conventional; command only) and LionChief + (command plus conventional), which were the better part of $100. LionChief + 2.0 even more, due to adding TMCC into the mix.
@Landsteiner posted:"When I'm asking for conventional operation, I'm asking for the following:"
I think this will greatly increase the cost of the loco, and thus is probably a non-starter for that reason. Just guessing, but I think if it were feasible it would have already been done. Examples are the difference in cost between LionChief (no conventional; command only) and LionChief + (command plus conventional), which were the better part of $100. LionChief + 2.0 even more, due to adding TMCC into the mix.
I doubt seriously that the difference between lionchief and lionchief+ n terms of cost was the conventional operation, we aren't talking rocket science here, to do the FNR on voltage loss and to blow the horn when there is a dc signal superimposed on the AC is not exactly a big deal processor to create, FNR is simply reversing polarity or going open (N), the horn is basically just a switch that if it detects dc on the AC, it sends power to the horn unit. The err upgrades to support TMCC were 100 dollars at the time Lionchief + came out, nd that is retail (I realize that was without sound, but still).
Lionchief + came out later and prices were already rising, so you can't do that comparison anyway. My guess? That conventional will be there when the production unit comes out. I suspect they left it out of the beta because they wanted the controller used so they would get feedback on that, it would make sense to do it, since that is the 'new technology', not conventional control.
" That conventional will be there when the production unit comes out. "
We'll see, but I doubt it very much in the first iteration. Completely different hardware than whatever off the shelf radio control system they are currently using for command. Current LionChief locos about $200 street price. LionChief + 2.0 in general considerably more expensive, which is not surprising.
I agree if Menard's wants to reach the largest possible market, should have conventional as well, since most conventional users do not want command and remote, even though these locos (Lionchief and MenardChief) will work fine on a conventional layout. Just have to use the remote to operate rather than the transformer. Conventional folks don't want to do that is my impression.
Sadly, I agree that these may end up being a knee jerk purchase by fathers running to Menard's, "just to get a trainset" for Christmas. If the total set runs about $275 or so, it may be set up on the floor on Christmas morning, or the day after, and be one of those "toys" that the kids play with for about the first 3 weeks after Christmas. By then, the kids will be bored with it, and Mom will have had enough, and tell them to take it apart and put it back in the box. After that, it may be thrown together again six months later on the kids' bedroom floor, or not. Maybe it will be put together again for the next Christmas, or not.
As with most toys that kids get for Christmas nowadays, though, probably most of these trainsets will just be considered junk after 2 or 3 years and thrown out. Or, sometime during that time period, the remote will have been dropped and cracked a few times, so it won't work, and the whole thing will be trashed even earlier.
With parents buying their 10 year-olds $1,000 phones these days, $275 or so may be considered a cheap, disposable gift, rather than the start to a long-term hobby.
Mannyrock
But, mannyrock: how many of us started out with exactly that same or nearly that same scenario?
Agree totally, I think it is kind of revisionist history to think parents in the pw era bought train sets as the start of a hobby. I would bet most train sets were used only during the holidays. They might have been expanded w a car or accessory, but still was holiday only. Lot of ppl getting back into three rail do so as adults and then build a layout. Obviously there were those who had layouts and the like, too,don't get me wrong. I think ppl buying Lionel sets today are doing much the same thing, buying a holiday toy for the kid, not trying to create a new hobby.
Maybe a difference is: My 1965 Lionel Super-O Engine and tender ran fine for 45 years. My son played with it for two years. Then I had it professionally cleaned and lubed, and sold it. The big Star Trek type transformer ran well too.
Mannyrock
@Mannyrock posted:Maybe a difference is: My 1965 Lionel Super-O Engine and tender ran fine for 45 years. My son played with it for two years. Then I had it professionally cleaned and lubed, and sold it. The big Star Trek type transformer ran well too.
Mannyrock
If we appy this logic I bet many of our current trains with circuit boards (read: any modern train) won't run fine for 45 years. I don't think this is a menards issue. Although I think people have a point on these remote control only engines, it's no different than what lionel is doing with lionchief line.
Also, I've had TMCC engines fail due to plastic axle gears, so the big guys use (or have used) plastic gears too on engines in a much higher price range.
I do appreciate a good discussion, and Mannyrock certainly brings up some valid concerns.
Edit: I didn't think that lionel lionchief has the Bluetooth app too along with the universal remote. But still, will BT be a thing in 20 years and if the remote breaks?
@Mannyrock posted:Maybe a difference is: My 1965 Lionel Super-O Engine and tender ran fine for 45 years. My son played with it for two years. Then I had it professionally cleaned and lubed, and sold it. The big Star Trek type transformer ran well too.
Mannyrock
M.R.,
You're implying that, because of this single exemplary experience, your conclusion is, and ours should also be, that all Lionel product back in the day was flawless.
If so, why did the company have a service network, from day one?
Mike
@Mellow Hudson Mike posted:M.R.,
You're implying that, because of this single exemplary experience, your conclusion is, and ours should also be, that all Lionel product back in the day was flawless.
If so, why did the company have a service network, from day one?
Mike
Hmm... maybe it was because the likes of us who mess around with this stuff are "tinkerers" by nature and can't leave well enough alone? 😁😁😁
Mark in Oregon 🎄
@Mannyrock posted:Maybe a difference is: My 1965 Lionel Super-O Engine and tender ran fine for 45 years. My son played with it for two years. Then I had it professionally cleaned and lubed, and sold it. The big Star Trek type transformer ran well too.
Mannyrock
This is the discussion we have heard ad infinitum on here, "those modern engines won't last", "the old postwar is still running", and the like. I have a couple of thoughts on that, just to sum it up:
1)Those old PW's were built out of die cast metal , the use of plastics was limited. Leaving out the control boards, which the old engines didn't have (the e unit was a pretty rugged unit, as much as we curse at it). If you used the same materials today, Menards engine wouldn't be 160 bucks, period. Take a look at modern engines that are die cast, they are expensive, and they still have a lot of plastic parts in them I would guess.
2)As has been brought up many times, how much were those engines when new in 2021 dollars? I would bet that 1965 engine today would be prob 250-300 dollars in today's money.
3)Lionel built cheap starter set engines, still does. I bought a starter set for my son 20 some odd years before, set was prob close to 200, and the engine in it was pretty flimsy. In the past, there was the scout set, there were plastic engines even in the 60's cheaply made, not even gonna discuss MPC. They were designed as an introduction, a cheap one.
4)Bringing up a transformer is outside this discussion, you can run the menards engine on anything that can give 16vac and roughly 100 watts of power or so (can motors draw a lot less power than the PW engines did with the pullmor).
5)The Menard's engine is like the cheap starter set engines from the past, it is not built as a hobbyists engine, it is meant as something *gasp* to be played with. Like most toys (or electronics these days) if they break they likely can't be fixed easily, tho we won't know any details until Mendards a)decides to actually produce these engines (going to beta doesn't necessarily mean it will be produced, though likely it will be) and b)we see what they do with other engines in the future.
If it is like a lot of toys, there won't be parts available, if under warrantee you don't get it repaired, they give you a new one, if out of warrantee, you basically throw it out and get a new one. Given the price point, I would bet it is like that, rather than a Lionel or MTH where you can get parts (if available) or even have a dealer network (doubtful), it is basically like modern toys.
Again, trying to compare this to post war trains is about as valid as comparing modern command control engines with pw. PW's are rugged and can be kept going, things like brushes and bushings, and even armatures, are available because Lionel made so many of them and parts suppliers made them, you can get them, or get them used, really easily, and it is wonderful.
And yes, for 160 bucks you can get a solid PW conventional only engine that runs great, and if that is what you want, great. It won't have the controller, which kids quite honestly might prefer over using the handle on the transformer, and it would only have a horn or whistle (if that), but if it works, great, but to me there is no comparing them, very different beasts.
@Mellow Hudson Mike posted:M.R.,
You're implying that, because of this single exemplary experience, your conclusion is, and ours should also be, that all Lionel product back in the day was flawless.
If so, why did the company have a service network, from day one?
Mike
That is very true, and I have seen some things written that says Lionel even in the golden age had a lot of pieces that were DOA or broke soon after getting. I have some work on manufacturing and quality control history, and in the 1950's, given the way they were making things, the way they worked with suppliers, failure rates were pretty high, in the auto industry the fail rate in terms of warranty repairs was pretty high, with the methods they were using the average number of problems per 100 cars was likely around 400, these days the numbers I saw last was a little over 100. Obviously that doesn't mean that back then ever car had 3 defects, more like a lot had few and others had a lot or were DOA. On study I saw said with cars and other manufactured goods, DOA at the retail end was as high as 5% with some products (literally didn't work at all). So yes, it was likely given the number that Lionel produced and the methods, it is likely they did have a high fail rate. Survivors generally represent units that a) have been cared for and b)were well made. We think there is a ton of postwar out there, and there is, but if you look at Lionel's output originally, it is a relatively small number.
Interestingly, I have seen studies where they interviewed people who lived in the 1950' and were asked about the quality of what they bought, and people would go on and on about how the products were reliable, that unlike 'modern junk' they didn't break, were long lasting, and it often didn't tally with the reality of products back then, that records of warranty repairs and the like showed perception wasn't always reality. Cars especially, not only did they need a lot of warrantee repairs, but people forget that typically back then people bought a new car every couple of years or so, and that cars didn't last. Other appliances lasted but also needed repairs, but because they were simple and easy and (relatively cheap, you could do a lot yourself; replacing a belt on a washing machine for example, or a u burner tube in a stove or a thermostat). Quite honestly, the people on here who talk about how great the quality of PW were , were kids back then, and likely don't remember if engines had to be taken for service, Dad or Mom would take care of that, and honestly as time goes on I don't remember how well my toys worked or didn't work. in my case if my trains broke, my dad could fix them quickly and easily, so I wouldn't probably notice).
These days it is a mixed bag. Menard's trains, and Lionel and MTH, are quite honestly being built in a way that isn't all that much different than the 1950's, they aren't using lean production techniques, they aren't using modern methods because the 'old way' for them is a lot more cost effective, they are being built in Chinese factories that the people who worked in the Irvington plant would recognize in terms of process. if a board has a crack in it the production worker tosses it in the scrap heap, they don't ask the maker why, they test an engine at the end, if it runs, they are fine, but there could be a ton of marginal parts waiting to fail and it shows when you get it. In a lean production factory they don't let marginal parts or doa parts get thrown out, they go back to the supplier and say why are you giving me junk?
It is in stark contrast to things like automobiles or tv sets, that are made using lean production and quality techniques. There is a stark contrast between them and much that is mass produced, most mass produced items, thanks to the likes of Wal Mart and the like, are built cheaply to be thrown away if they break and you can see it with consumer goods. High end consumer goods like cell phones and high end appliances are built using quality control and lean production techniques (even if made in China) (when I say high end, I mean things like sub zero and the like, not 2000 dollar LG and Samsung fridges who quality is, well crap), things like ordinary household appliances might as well be being produced in a 1950's factory, mass produced and poor quality isn't a big cost to them, if the appliance dies after 90 days the consumer shrugs their shoulders and buys another one. Along with the way they produce them, to reduce costs they also are using modern, cheap materials, which can break, too.
PW survive because so many of the were made that there are a lot of survivors and yes, they can be repaired because they were simple units, and yes, the parts were rugged. It is kind of like the speed queen washer I have, it has a direct drive motor with bronze gears and bushings, the controls are a mechanical timer that can be easily replaced and it has a stainless steel drum.It is ruggedly made and is made to be repaired but because of its design likely won't need much repairing, it will likely outlive me. In a modern washer the drive is using a plastic kind of drive mechanism that if it goes, isn't worth replacing, and the electronic control circuits are much the same.
Excellent points and discussion by all. I really don't have a dog in this fight, since I won't be buying one of the new Menards. I was just trying to investigate and understand why there appears to be so much excitement, and buying, among very experienced Members, the majority of whom probably only run high end locomotives.
I guess it's because, having a very large company jump into the game of manufacturing O gauge engines, even remote-only starter models, can only be a good thing, when so many other manufacturers are either cutting back or getting out of the game altogether. So, I certainly applaud Menards for that. Hopefully, they will grow into a new K-Line.
Mannyrock
Interesting comments. The lack of conventional control seems to be the major issue. Sound quality has also been cited several times. I regret not getting one of these so I could add it to my list of tested wireless control systems and see for myself what Menard's has accomplished. At some point, I plan to publish my wireless systems detailed test results.
Lack of conventional control is mildly annoying, but it wouldn't stop me from purchasing one. The diesel engine sounds mean nothing to me, but the horn and bell could be better based on the videos shown. The looks however are awesome in my opinion. I would like to see white leds for the number boards and perhaps something to spread out the number board illumination.
I intend to pick one up when possible, assuming they stay under $200, preferably under $180. I don't have any western road locomotives, but the Santa Fe warbonnet is so iconic as a toy train I would buy this. In fact I tried for both beta offerings but was too late. The only other roadname I would be interested in is Reading, possibly Reading and Northern.
Keep it up Menard's!!
@jhz563 posted:Lack of conventional control is mildly annoying, but it wouldn't stop me from purchasing one. The diesel engine sounds mean nothing to me, but the horn and bell could be better based on the videos shown. The looks however are awesome in my opinion. I would like to see white leds for the number boards and perhaps something to spread out the number board illumination.
I intend to pick one up when possible, assuming they stay under $200, preferably under $180. I don't have any western road locomotives, but the Santa Fe warbonnet is so iconic as a toy train I would buy this. In fact I tried for both beta offerings but was too late. The only other roadname I would be interested in is Reading, possibly Reading and Northern.
Keep it up Menard's!!
These are all valid points, but therein lies the rub:
We like the overall "vibe", yet still can point to issues that we might see: (better horn and bell, LEDs, road names). These are points that we "modelers" notice, yet as has been mentioned numerous times, these are "entry level" models, perhaps aimed for our kids and grandkids... with a corresponding price point. Would the kids we purchased these for even notice the bell, horn, LEDs or roadname?
I guess my point is this: our discussing this offering in these terms would be like a similar model in HO scale (say, a cheaper, train set loco like low end Life Like or Bachmann) being reviewed by more "serious", experienced modelers. It's really apples and oranges, kinda.
Will be interesting to see how many phases this model goes through: who knows what a "10.0/ Zulu" will be like...or cost? 😁
Mark in Oregon 🎄
@Mannyrock posted:Sadly, I agree that these may end up being a knee jerk purchase by fathers running to Menard's, "just to get a trainset" for Christmas. If the total set runs about $275 or so, it may be set up on the floor on Christmas morning, or the day after, and be one of those "toys" that the kids play with for about the first 3 weeks after Christmas. By then, the kids will be bored with it, and Mom will have had enough, and tell them to take it apart and put it back in the box. After that, it may be thrown together again six months later on the kids' bedroom floor, or not. Maybe it will be put together again for the next Christmas, or not.
As with most toys that kids get for Christmas nowadays, though, probably most of these trainsets will just be considered junk after 2 or 3 years and thrown out. Or, sometime during that time period, the remote will have been dropped and cracked a few times, so it won't work, and the whole thing will be trashed even earlier.
With parents buying their 10 year-olds $1,000 phones these days, $275 or so may be considered a cheap, disposable gift, rather than the start to a long-term hobby.
Mannyrock
We got my kids the cheap, large scale Polar Express Lionel set. The kids are 2 and 4. It's set up under the tree and the kids won't use it because it's too loud. I put tape over the speaker holes to muffle it but it's still too loud.
And even nowadays, $275 is NOT a cheap, disposable gift. Even in the era of $1000 phones - which, incidentally, parents don't buy their kids.
With all the talk of conventional control in this thread, I'm curious how many people actually use that. I wouldn't be in this hobby but for DCS. It would be interesting to do a poll and ask command control vs. conventional and also asking peoples' ages.
@Mark Holmgren 110217 posted:With all the talk of conventional control in this thread, I'm curious how many people actually use that. I wouldn't be in this hobby but for DCS. It would be interesting to do a poll and ask command control vs. conventional and also asking peoples' ages.
There was a poll taken a few years back. If I recall correctly. Command control was far and away the most popular with Lionels tmcc/Legacy at the top of the list.
Maybe this poll can be found in the forum archives.
I don't understand all the aversion to a remote control. Are folks still getting up to turn dials on TVs? Am I the only one with a cordless phone? Heck, remote start on a vehicle is becoming factory standard.
59.... ran conventional till recently. Added a CAB 1L and DCS remote commander.
I've officially gone over to the dark side with a ERR conversion under my belt and more to follow.
Bob
The main attraction of remote control is the substantial number of operational features compared with conventional control. In addition, for many of us, controlling with a smart device has a lot of appeal which of course can only be accomplished with wireless remote control. Then there is that battery power option which has become quite popular. With all that said, I can still and do occasionally run conventional.
Incase you missed out, some nice gentleman has one for you on ebay 😉 I hope it doesn't sell.
@Mark Holmgren 110217 posted:With all the talk of conventional control in this thread, I'm curious how many people actually use that. I wouldn't be in this hobby but for DCS. It would be interesting to do a poll and ask command control vs. conventional and also asking peoples' ages.
I only ever use conventional. I have not owned a remote-train in my life, and given how bad I am at losing remotes for other things... It wouldn't be very pretty imo. 
My dad and grandfather have been "toy train enthusiasts" since my grandfather's childhood (a few years ago, when he was downsizing, we inherited my grandfather's pre-war Lionel Pennsylvania engine (238E) (with the E-Unit stuck in "neutral"...we think), and an AF 0-4-0 O-gauge. Neither my dad nor myself have ever owned anything with a remote. I think my grandfather has a G-Gauge remote-controlled, battery-powered engine, but that only ran when the track power was finicky beyond frustration. (Squirrels loved to chew on the PVC-coated wires for unknown reasons.)
My first engine was a K-Line S-2. I recall being so excited that Christmas because I got an engine at long last.
So, my aversion to remotes is because I don't trust myself to not lose them. I think most of the remote-controlled engines out there (even the reasonably-priced ones) can be run on conventional, in case the remote fails.
I have yet to misplace the transformer while the layout is up. Meanwhile I've misplaced my phone more often than I care to recall.
@Strummer posted:These are all valid points, but therein lies the rub:
We like the overall "vibe", yet still can point to issues that we might see: (better horn and bell, LEDs, road names). These are points that we "modelers" notice, yet as has been mentioned numerous times, these are "entry level" models, perhaps aimed for our kids and grandkids... with a corresponding price point. Would the kids we purchased these for even notice the bell, horn, LEDs or roadname?
I guess my point is this: our discussing this offering in these terms would be like a similar model in HO scale (say, a cheaper, train set loco like low end Life Like or Bachmann) being reviewed by more "serious", experienced modelers. It's really apples and oranges, kinda.
Will be interesting to see how many phases this model goes through: who knows what a "10.0/ Zulu" will be like...or cost? 😁
Mark in Oregon 🎄
I get where you are coming from. The things I am pointing out I feel are small items that bridge the gap between entry level and modeler. Sound files don't cost much to change since the hardware stays the same. Changing number board light bulb color would not seem to cost much, but getting the number board illumination to spread out would be a cost.
Again, I would purchase as is. The initial big issues for me where the batteries not making a connection in the remote and the super hard starts and stops. These items appear to have been corrected. If I had to nit pick it would be still seeing relatively high speed with only a small move on the remote. I have the same issue with lion chief machines though.
I hope they keep the shiny finish for the frame and trucks on the Santa Fe model.
@Micro posted:I think most of the remote-controlled engines out there (even the reasonably-priced ones) can be run on conventional, in case the remote fails.
This is not true. Lionel lionchief for example is just like Menards but some have Bluetooth capabilities allowing them to be run via cell phone app. But no conventional control.
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
