Lionel , MTH, or K- Line. What do you guys recomend? ? ?

[Anonymous]

I LOVE Lionel. But My Uncle likes MTH, And I never tried K-line. What do you guys like the best for O?

[Anonymous]

I like the new K-Line stuff, A great company to deal with and I like theyre new fetures Weaver is great with the Brass and Reasonable diesels

[willpick]

This is one of those topics nobody wants to reply to, as it could possibly degenerate into "my trains are better than yours"[:0] .I actually buy from MTH, Atlas, Lionel, and K-line as each company has unique products--

That said, most of my rolling stock is MTH(80%) the rest is a mixed collection. Engines are MTH, with 1 Lionel, 1 Williams, and 2 RMT Beeps[:)] I run DCS mostly, but I do run conventional when the whim strikes. As for reccomending one over another, I can't[:p]. It's your choice----

[brianel027]

Depends what you are looking for:
*Scale proportions or traditional less-than-scale.
*What kind of electronics you want: DCS or TMCC or none.
*How much you want to spend.
*What roadnames you want.

Each company - Lionel, K-Line, MTH and I'll add Williams to the mix (though there's also Weaver and Atlas too) all make decent trains in a variety of price ranges. Different dealers and outlets all offer different discounts (sometimes blowout prices) on different items. It does pay to ask questions about specific items and to shop around.

As a general rule (in my opinion)
Lionel has the best overall variety in all price ranges. Lionel recently has had the best selection of low end starter cars and of train sets.

K-Line has good quality, possibly the best service record and competitive prices on similar items to other. K-Line has moved very decidedly in the scale direction, but has recently expanded some offerings on the beginner side.

MTH/Railking makes very solid quality, well designed and engineered items. Some items are pricey compared to others but their overall product quality is good. They do make the poorest selection of the tradionally smaller sized trains. Even the Railking stuff has always been on the large side, and is now going scale. the Rugged Rails line, designed to appeal to traditional non-scale operators has been allowed to languish for some years now.

Williams has picked up where Lionel should have. Basic, no frills, no electronic option ladder trains that are built and priced to run. In many cases you can buy a reproduction Williams engine for less money and more quality than the Lionel counterpart... the Williams GP-9, NW-2 and Centercab Switchers are good examples. Williams has the best roadname selection of the above companies.

Like said above, it's not so much a matter of one product being decidedly better than the others. They all have plusses and minuses depending what you are looking to operate, and what you want to spend.

A scale operator who wants correct proportions and accurate detail will have a much different opinion from me, who operates with 027 track and needs less than scale proportions. I'd say most folks still LOVE the Lionel name as you. But there are large numbers of folks who have become dismayed with Lionel prices and/or lack of quality in past years - which is why the others NOW have such a foothold in the market today.

Good luck in whatever you decide to buy.

[daan]

I have Lionel and K-line mostly. I love the Lionels with a pullmore or horizontal motor in it, K-line also is in nice detail, but since I have the cheap ones like the S2, MP15 and a smaller than scale alco pair, they are (though detail is great) toys. The problem is that the very tiny DC motors are built inside the trucks with allmost no gears in between. The trucks are too light and because of the very direct gearing the truck lifts its front axle out of the track if pulling a train. Lionel also make these kind of machines in the cheap pricerange and they are no fun to drive, since derailment is almost normal.
Besides the derailment they hardly drive slow, at 6 volt they allready race across the layout and have almost no pulling power.
The more expensive K-line is great, solid and works well, havn't tried the more expensive engines though.
If you want one with can motors, look for one where the canmotors are vertical, with wormwheel drive and momentum flywheel. That's the only way a can motor can be used to give power, good running qualities etc.
The best I've found are the old-style Lionels with pullmor motors. They run nice and are powerfull.
Something about e-units; an electronic e-unit can be frustrating, since it doesn't have a switch time. That means as soon as the power falls off for just one millisecond, the machine will stall in neutral, whereas conventional coil units are not that fast and stay in direction when crossing a switch. But that has more to do with the type of rail I use.

[lionelsoni]

I have had a lot of bad luck with K-Line because of bad zinc castings. You can find a compilation of it here:
http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?page=-1&TOPIC_ID=10982&REPLY_ID=76964#76964

[daan]

That zinc problem is caused by other materials left in the mold, or unpurities in the casting process. It has been a problem with prewar and postwar Bing and BUB trains too, called zink-pest. It eats the zinc around the inbedded material making holes in it. Zinc is very easy in loosening it's own electrons when other materials start to lack them in case of corrosion. (Zinc plated rails doesn't rust because of the zinc which "protects" the steel sheet material. If another metal is inbedded in a zinc casting, the zinc "protects" the inbedded material, eating itself for it.) That's why it only starts to show up after a few years or decade's, the inbedded material first has to get in contact with air and start to oxidise before the zinc starts to protect it. If the unpurities are in the castingmaterial (due to bad temperature control during melting the zinc or inproper removal of the residu floating on top of the melted metal) the zinc will fall apart much faster then a piece of other metal being left in the mold.. It's a problem which can't be returned and something to keep in mind when buying new material..

[Anonymous]

I started out with Lionel in 1960 when I was four years old, and would purchase only Lionel for a long time, including Lionel Classics. I started purchasing MTH when I found out that they were making the Lionel Classics for Lionel (as they had the Alco PA's, the Scale Turbine, etc). If it was good enough for Lionel, it was good enough for me.

I am now very biased in favor of MTH. In my opinion, now better quality sound, far superior electronics, much better low speed performance, reliability, and detail. Also a much better control system (DCS). I do run modern Lionel trains with TMCC also, and they are still very good, just not quite as good (again, my opinion-no flames please). I have not tried K-Line personally yet, but have friends that run it (and let me run theirs) and it seems very good also.

Again, I am quite biased in favor of MTH-I am a part of one of the many and growing number of groups that does DCS demonstrations.

Bottom line is, its all good-MTH, Lionel, K-Line, Atlas, 3rd Rail, etc. We have more variety available than ever before in the market place and two great control systems that work great together.

This is the best time to be in the Toy Train Hobby. Any choice you make should turn out well.

[ChiefEagles]

I like RAK, grew up with Lionel. 1952 was my frist train set [still running today]. I was heavy into O guage in the late 70's and up to the mid 80's. There was only Lionel to speak of [some K-Line]. Got back into this early this past year. Had done some talking to Lionel and was ready to go to TMCC. Then, I found out about MTH and DCS. Well, after a lot of studing, I went with DCS. Why? Because you can run TMCC on DCS with only a cable and TMCC module. If you go with TMCC, you have to buy two complete systems to get DCS. $$$$ and common sense came into play. Now I am planning to purchase some of the command engines from all maunfactures, if they make the roadline I want. Rolling stock??? Got some of Lionel, MTH and K-Line. As I said, depends on what cars they make and what roadline they come in. Compitition has made it good for us who love to run trains.

[nblum]

I would make my decision first based upon whether you have a local dealer who is knowledgeable and helpful. Unless you can do your own servicing, all of these trains need exchange, repair and maintenance, and the newer stuff is no different and more complicated. If you have such a dealer, go with their recommendations and capabilities. If you have to go mail order, make sure you deal with a full service, authorized service station for one of the manufacturers.

That having been said, for purposes of reliability, widespread availability of products and service, there is nothing better or broader than the Lionel product line. It does tend to be at the upper end of cost because of their reputation and brand recognition. But their lowend 027 is much better than it used to be, their sets are inexpensive for conventional running, and there is no simpler, more reliable, easy to use and install system than TMCC. The quality of Railsounds, acoustically, is clearly superior, to my ear. That having been said, the other systems and manufacturers are excellent. Williams is great, but will require going mail order in most instances, and there is no command or sound capability. MTH has a great product line, and it's sets are particularly good value, but their command system, acknowledging its whizziness and capabilities, is not as widely supported, easy to install or trouble free as TMCC. K-Line has the best value for money for most folks, and you can choose between command and conventional, as with Lionel, usually for lower prices. But it's not available except by mail order in many locations in the country. Atlas, Weaver, and 3rd Rail have their place and niches, but are, in general, not full product lines, like MTH, Lionel and K-Line.

Most of my purchases are TMCC equipped Lionel equipment, with rolling stock from pretty much everyone. You pretty much cannot go wrong if you are handy yourself or have a great local dealer. Otherwise, I'd stick with Lionel or MTH for most things, because of the wide sales and service networks.

[ChiefEagles]

Neil, your comments [as usual] about MTH and its DCS being hard to install and operate is totally wrong. I installed DCS on a temp layout on carpet and used telephone station wire [yes, that small a wire]. Get 10 signal strength all around. No problems. I had been lead to believe it was difficult. Very easy. Why was a special article about helping TMCC signal strength featured in CTT? Just thought I would give you a little pinch there. Friends with TMCC don't seem to have that signal problem. Both are great systems but why buy TMCC and can not run DCS? Buy DCS and easily add a module and run both. Common sense.

[nblum]

I didn't say DCS is hard to install and operate. I said it is harder to install and operate, and less reliable, more difficult and complex to trouble shoot than TMCC. Based upon experience, my own and those of many dozens of others.

To me it's not worth the additional hassle and work, based upon eight years of using command control. Other people's experience, like your own, may vary. In addition, I also don't presently feel inclined to support MTH in its aggressive business plan to put everyone else out of business.[:)] Once again, others' opinions and experience vary.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by nblum

I didn't say DCS is hard to install and operate. I said it is harder to install and operate, and less reliable, more difficult and complex to trouble shoot than TMCC Based upon experience, my own and those of many dozens of others.

I totally agree! I run conventional right now, but if I were to go command, it would be TMCC for the very reasons Neil stated.

[spankybird]

There is nothing simpler than two wires from the transformer to the TIU and two wires from the TIU to the track. With good basic wiring of your layout is the only other thing needed, whether its for convention or command mode.

[Anonymous]

Happy Holidays Neil,

I have experienced both the "good" side and the "bad" side of both systems many times. I have had a very good experience with both. I have had signal strength issues with both.

I have found both equally simple to install in most cases:
With DCS you connect the two wires from the transformer to the TIU, then two wires from the TIU to the track. Simple and quick

With TMCC you add one wire from the Command Base to the track or "U" terminal of the Transformer (assuming that one is connected to the outside rail). Also simple and quick.

For a simple loop of track it or two it should not take more than five or ten minutes to connect and enjoy either system.

Set up correctly, both are equally reliable, although DCS will provide a more positive response than TMCC.

Now for the dark side:

With DCS I have explored the outer limits of wiring vs. signal strength issues as my layouts grew. Correct wiring, correct TIU placement, and clean pick-up rollers are all that are required for good, solid operation. There is, at least, a way to check the signal strength with DCS.

With TMCC I have experienced the vagaries of bad electrical ground, bad or inadequate internal antennas, the necessity for grounding and insulating metal bridges and structures in order to get locomotives to pass through. There are issues with prevention of TMCC signal reflections with one track passing over another. Alas, there is no way to measure the signal strength of TMCC-a flickering headlight is not a terribly satisfactory diagnostic tool.

DCS also includes the ARC Recorder function, as well as the same functionality of two Powermasters (with the exception that the TIU's variable function will operate QSI and PS-1 equipped conventional locomotives, which the Powermaster will not do reliably). The Record/Playback function of DCS is also quick and easy to use, as opposed to the TMCC ARC recorder. With TMCC, ARC Recorders, Powermasters, etc. are all separate components which have to be wired in, adding to the complexity.

It can be simple or difficult to add either system to an existing layout for the reasons outlined above.

I think Chief Eagles nailed it here: "Both are great systems but why buy TMCC and can not run DCS? Buy DCS and easily add a module and run both. Common sense."

The bottom line is that both systems are good. One will have more functionality with DCS and a Lionel Command Base, as the Chief stated. Add a Cab-1 to provide the few functions not presently available with the current software load in the DCS Handheld and you can run anything.

Set up this way and you won't have to find yourself on either side of any debate because you can enjoy the products of all manufacturers.

[nblum]

Richard, I don't think anyone will disagree that a simple loop of track is easy to setup with either TMCC or DCS. Likewise, a complex layout, with conventional, PS2 and TMCC locos and recorder functions, etc. will be complex to set up with either system. But on a typical command control layout of moderate size, TMCC is much easier to implement and experiences many fewer glitches than the comparable DCS layout, in general. TMCC's signal is much less demanding of the layout wiring, trackage and other factors than is DCS's. All problems are easily overcome in most instances, but TMCC has more well defined and simpler problems to trouble shoot.

As far as why one might stick with TMCC and not bother with DCS, it is also quite simple. Layouts incorporating DCS/TMCC and conventional are more problematic, and thus, for some of us, less fun than the simplicity and rugged functionality possible with TMCC alone. No star wiring, no lightbulbs, no insulated middle rails, etc. Just what we've had for the last few years. Forgoing MTH locomotives is not a sacrifice for many of us because there are more than enough locos from the other five TMCC manufacturers. MTH is the odd man out and the DCS system, fine as it is for PS2 locos, is unnecessary and provides no real benefits and some detractions for those of us using TMCC.

These aspects of the issue are why I recommend finding a dealer first and picking a system or systems second. Even conventional locos need service and assistance, and the dealer is key. Both command systems have enough quirks that having a club or dealer or experienced friends around are more important than picking one system or the other, or both. I've used both enough to know that I don't need both, just as I don't need conventional locos.

[Anonymous]

Neil,

I think that, for the time being, we will just have to agree to disagree (I think we have a history with this!).

Dealer help is always a good thing to have, but forum help works too (although probably not quite as well as "hands on".

I hope you are running a lot of trains this holiday season! I am guessing with TMCC?

[ChiefEagles]

Thanks RAK for all your help on the forums. Some folks are missing the two words that you and I used. Not found in any classroom nor book. I think your comment about "hands on" knowledge is so true. Can't be beat.

[nblum]

"I hope you are running a lot of trains this holiday season! I am guessing with TMCC?"

Well, so far, one train around the tree, in conventional no less :). Too lazy to move the TMCC equipment upstairs. But as the week goes on, the TMCC basement carpet layout will get a workout. Best to you and yours Richard.

[Anonymous]

Neil,

We got the trains up under the tree on Christmas Eve-about two hours before the company showed up. I wanted to have the trains running because I have two nephew (3 and 4 years old). They like to run the trains too! They wanted to know if the Sea Monkeys in the Sea Monkeys aquarium car were real.

We used the smaller portable DCS/TMCC setup under the tree this year. Plug it into the wall, connect two lock-ons (one for each loop of track) and we are done-DCS and TMCC on both loops-conventional if we want too. Railking BigBoy on the outer loop (054) and Railking PCC on the inner loop (027). I wanted to run the new Lionel Zephyr on the outer loop but did not have room for 072 so it will sit waiting until the next visit to Angel's Gate in San Pedro.

Best to you and yours as well.

[Anonymous]

My favorite of all the train manufacturers is MTH. I feel they have the most features, comparable detail, and the best performance. A modular train club I belong to has found that MTH products seem to hold up best. Our club was used as a test track for MTH prototypes before they were released. We ran them to extremes to find out the weaknesses before they were mass produced. If you want no frills, Williams locomotives seem to be almost bullet-proof.

[Anonymous]

Ah, Thanx guys,


,Colin


(LOCATION: NJ)

[Jim Duda]

Snell: What if...?

What if you could set up your favorite track plan and have it operate flawlessly with ALL the different control systems available? What if you chose your favorite train from each of the different suppliers and they ALL operate perfectly?

Betcha' you would have a "favorite" DEPENDING ON THE MOOD AND A BUNCH OF OTHER FACTORS at any particular moment, and this is an ever changing dynamic which complicates things. When the kids come over, maybe simple conventional control and an indestructable train wins. When you're trying to impress your neighbors, maybe lots of smoke, a varied and high fidelity sound system, and exquisitely detailed equipment would fill that best. And just maybe, during the Holidays, a pre or post war Lionel with it's redolent aroma and the flood of memories it evokes would be the most pleasing.

Bottom line: it's a moving target and perhaps the only way to meet your expectations is to have one of each...I know I would hate to be strapped to just one system or one brand of train. Hell, just choose anything that suits your fancy and go from there. Competition has forced 'em all to be good...

[thor CNJ]

Buy old Marx trains. They're cheap, they're fast and they run well!

[Anonymous]

Thor,

You missed one thing about Marx trains (I am surprised too). They last FOREVER!!!!

Happy New Year Thor!!!!

Jim,

Happy New Year to you too!!!

[3railguy]

Lionel.

[daan]

Any brand using high frequency remote control (DCS, TMCC, Maerklin Digital, Roco Uhlenbrock systems etc) have one thing in common. If you have a large layout signals alter frequency because of the length of the track. They NEED a lifewire under your layout to keep signals true. The high frequency is used to transfer the messages through track into the train which converts the signal into a function to switch on or off. The frequency of the signal HAS TO BE exact!! If it misses a part, or the amplitude changes because of track resistance the signal won't trigger it's function!!

That's one big problem because I stopped with Uhlenbrock digital on my h0 layout. The only thing to get it fixed was complete rewiring, in this case build a continouos loop under the layout where the signal and power would be tapped from to various points of the layout.
There has been another thing on the market, only for multiple train control, no functions.. I've had that and tried it. (only DC) and it works perfect. It's an analog multitrain system where wavelength is used to filter out it's signal, other to the digital systems where a set of high frequency waves is used to code a message. It featured continouos interior lights and 5 loco's at once could be used on 1 track. It was made by Jouef and a few other brands.
Because it used wavelength it was not depending on a code before a signal, and had the weak part filtered out; missing a part of the code is the problem with digital control.
The bad thing is that it was only suited for DC and has left the market since the 80's..
That was the first multitrain control.
If you make sure that you have a few parallel connections to your track on a big layout, a strong healthy transformer keeping base voltage upright and clear track, you should be ok with digital systems.
Interferring signals (causing it to miss its code): Sparking (wheels, rollers), bad connections, Huge coils connected to the track other than the transformer (the transformer is shielded) Metal benchwork, resistors in grades (to slow trains down),
capacitors between the middle rail and the ground (some operating buildings etc) conventional heating elements in postwar steamers (COIL!!) conventional e-units etc.
Anything slowing the signal down or coverting the message (coils slow them down, sparks and electrical interferrence: tv set, computers running, can convert or change the sent code or cause it to disappear) can cause malfunction.
If you have a seperate trainroom and use good track, wire it properly, there is no problem with high frequency function control and it will run perfect.

[2343]

Being relatively new to the hobby, I like postwar Lionel. I am not a big fan of "realistic station sounds" or something that makes trains seem like a computer generated experience. I'd rather have a smelly, noisy old engine pulling Rolling Stock with some tried and true accessories like a watertower, windmill, pumping station, etc., creating a throwback environment. I'm 37 and grew up with enough computer sounds to last a lifetime. I'd rather just have some good old fashioned fun!