TMCC VS LEGACY POWERMASTER

MICHAEL464 posted:

I'm currently using two separate TMCC Powermaster's with a Powermaster Bridge on my layout and wonder what if any benefit there would be by converting them over to Legacy Powermaster's besides the obvious elimination of the Powermaster Bridge.

Thanks

Please try to locate the instruction manual for this product. I bought one and after finding out its complicated setup procedure, my opinion, I would not have bought it. Plus, according to the manual it must be powered by two bricks of identical power. This is not stated in the Lionel catalog. Again, had I known that I would not have bought it.

Steve

The Legacy Powermaster has 200 speed steps, and it also has the macro capability to run MTH locomotives and access many of their features in conventional mode.  A much improved circuit breaker is another plus.  Finally, of course, it does eliminate the PowerMaster Bridge and the latency it introduces into the command stream.

RideTheRails posted:

MICHAEL464 posted:

I'm currently using two separate TMCC Powermaster's with a Powermaster Bridge on my layout and wonder what if any benefit there would be by converting them over to Legacy Powermaster's besides the obvious elimination of the Powermaster Bridge.

Thanks

Please try to locate the instruction manual for this product. I bought one and after finding out its complicated setup procedure, my opinion, I would not have bought it. Plus, according to the manual it must be powered by two bricks of identical power. This is not stated in the Lionel catalog. Again, had I known that I would not have bought it.

Steve

Where does it say in the manual you need two power supplies for a Legacy PowerMaster (6-37146)?

Anywho, back to the OP, John pointed out the pros of converting.  And from what I get out of your post it totally sounds like the way you should go.  I personally hunted down the TMCC PowerMasters because I could run TMCC/Legacy locomotives conventionally with a Cab-1 remote.  This is due to the TMCC PMs getting signal from the Cab-1, not a command base via the U terminal.  Weird reason, I know, but I have my reason.

sinclair posted:

RideTheRails posted:

MICHAEL464 posted:

I'm currently using two separate TMCC Powermaster's with a Powermaster Bridge on my layout and wonder what if any benefit there would be by converting them over to Legacy Powermaster's besides the obvious elimination of the Powermaster Bridge.

Thanks

Please try to locate the instruction manual for this product. I bought one and after finding out its complicated setup procedure, my opinion, I would not have bought it. Plus, according to the manual it must be powered by two bricks of identical power. This is not stated in the Lionel catalog. Again, had I known that I would not have bought it.

Steve

Where does it say in the manual you need two power supplies for a Legacy PowerMaster (6-37146)?

Anywho, back to the OP, John pointed out the pros of converting.  And from what I get out of your post it totally sounds like the way you should go.  I personally hunted down the TMCC PowerMasters because I could run TMCC/Legacy locomotives conventionally with a Cab-1 remote.  This is due to the TMCC PMs getting signal from the Cab-1, not a command base via the U terminal.  Weird reason, I know, but I have my reason.

Sinclair - wrong document. See document 7-82883 (Legacy 360 Powermaster) page 4 (kind of implied) and page 8. There was a thread about this recently.

Steve

The Legacy 360PM manual is wrong, that was discussed here recently by the Lionel folks, specifically Dave Olsen.  The only reason they stated that was because the circuit protection on a single transformer would likely trip before the Legacy 360 PM circuit protection.  However, that's not a safety or damage issue of any kind.  He acknowledged that the "warning" was probably a bit over the top, it should have really been a "by the way" statement just pointing out that fact.

Of course, since we were talking about replacing the standard 180W TMCC PowerMaster with the similar Legacy version, this whole discussion is really moot and not on point.  Let's discuss what the OP actually is wanting to do, not drive off into the weeds on a totally different trip.