Mark,
The point we are trying to make is that the interfaces for Digitrax, NCE, Lenz, CVP, etc. will allow third pary software and devices to work with the DCC system. Personally, I prefer to pay the manufacturer for the cable, circuit board, whatever too. I also like having a choice of devices and software to use with it. Some are free some are not. I know some people who were still waiting for the promised interface for their Prodigy systems. Prodigy Advance came out and left them out in the cold. Absolutely nothing currently offered by MRC works with it. Fortunately, MRC seems to have figured out that total obsolescence may loose some customers because the new Advance systems seem to be at least getting the options promised. They are quite frankly decent sytems. I just don't agree with MRC's business model.
Martin Myers
CSX Robert Well, this is what I used to interface my Zephyr with a PC: found at the bottom of this page:Team Digital Support Tools. Cost me about $5 and 10 minutes if soldering.
Well, this is what I used to interface my Zephyr with a PC:
found at the bottom of this page:Team Digital Support Tools.
Cost me about $5 and 10 minutes if soldering.
While I'm capable of tracking down suppliers for PNP and NPN transistors, and digging up some suitable resistors laying around the house, I'd wager that it's a lot more time consuming to dig up the parts and do the soldering than it is to plunk down $50 for a cable. For most people the workmanship is probably a lot better on the store-bought cable as well.
To me, my hobby time is more valuable than my normal hourly rate - so I'd be inclined to leave menial tasks like wiring up a PC interface cable to the DCC system manufacturers. Of course, if I needed a bunch of them that might be another story. I think the bulk of the time building such a cable for me would be trackig down all of the components.
Robert: So you built an MS100 That's really all there is inside that thing.
MRC either took comments here to heart or else saw tha tno one was buying their interface at the original price which was MUCH higher than $54.
As for MRC wireless - better run wireless, because their plug panels cost twice what the oens for NCE and DIgitrax do, and according to at least one person here who bought one, they have no components other than 4 RJ jacks wired together. The Digitrax ones have circuitry to support auxiluary power for the throttles as well as provide a connection and an LED to indicate local track status, and FIVE RJ jacks.
The thing about taking your Digitrax throttle to visit othe layouts - if they don;t already have radio, the radio throttle can be used as a wired throttle. No need to drag around a UR91/UR92. The same throttle works both ways. Well, 3 ways, as the radio throttles have IR in them as well. Works very well in an enclosed room with white drop ceiling tiles and the UR90 mounted up high. Not so good in a large open area or one with a dark ceiling.
Another nice thing with Digitrax is you cna get a wired throttle today and upgrade it to radio later for no penalty vs buying the radio throttle to start with. They charge the price difference between the two as the upgrade cost.
I will also add in the capabilities of Loconet which I've posted about many times, I should just type it all up on a page on my web site and ink it every time these discussions come up. Loconet can do things that absolutely none of the other popular (in the US) systems can do. And there is also the previously mentioned third party support - you cna do signalling and detection and turnout control without using a single Digitrax product if you so choose.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
CSX RobertRegardless, the main point was that a Digitrax radio throttle can be used on any Digitrax layout. Many clubs like to operate on multiple layouts in a round robin fashion. If you have a radio Digitrax throttle, you can take it to any Digitrax layout and use it, whether that layout is radio, infrared, or plug-in only.
I'd just pony-up and buy a Digitrax throttle (maybe radio, maybe not) if I operated on the 2 to 4 Digitrax layouts I know of in my area - assuming they didn't have an extra throttle laying around.
CSX RobertWith an MRC radio throttle, you can not use it on a non-radio layout unless you take the base station with you - you can not just plug it in and use it as a wired throttle(all plugging it in does is charge the batteries - I do, however, like the fact that the MRC throttles use rechargeable batteries).
Since I have a Prodigy Advanced Squared (PA2), if I had a Prodigy Wireless (PW) throttle I'd also have the wireless reciever dongle. I could then take that dongle and plug it in to either the base station or a plug panel on the visiting layout (as described on p.91 of the 02/08 MR) and be running wireless. Doesn't matter if their base station is a Prodigy Express/Advance/Advance Squared/Wireless.
It was my impression that you'd need a UR91/92 (MSRP ~$150) to use the Digitrax wireless throttle while visiting layouts. You might be able to rig one of these for quick-connect between layouts (it'd probably take some coordination) but it seems like the MRC "Wireless Conversion" dongle itself only costs $25 (based on the difference between the costs of the Wireless Computer Interface with and without the converter) and is cheaper and more portable.
Interesting that it can't function as a wired throttle... were you able to get your hands on one to verify this? Seems like it'd be nice to have the choice of running wired & charging or running wireless, but the dongle's portability hardly makes lack of this feature a show-stopper. I could imagine how offering dual functionality could increase the complexity (and cost) of the design.
NSColsMP6 MRC Cable, NCE Cable, Digitrax Cable - All right around the $50 mark. As you said, MRC is apparently using that $50 to pay for the cost of the USB cable, drivers, and software development. You pay about the same for the other cables and get a cable and... a link to someone else's software?
MRC Cable, NCE Cable, Digitrax Cable - All right around the $50 mark.
As you said, MRC is apparently using that $50 to pay for the cost of the USB cable, drivers, and software development. You pay about the same for the other cables and get a cable and... a link to someone else's software?
CSX RobertNSColsMP6While we're unable to use JMRI with MRC offerings right now, we're also not "forced to only buy their stuff" because they provide the software at no cost. But you do have to buy their interface, and how do you think they plan on recouping their development cost of the software? From their profits from selling the interface, of course. So when you buy the interface, you are buying the software too, it's a package deal.
NSColsMP6While we're unable to use JMRI with MRC offerings right now, we're also not "forced to only buy their stuff" because they provide the software at no cost.
NSColsMP6As for infrared, seems like you'd encounter line of sight issues. I don't know anyone using IR wireless so it wasn't high on my feature list. In fact, I steered clear of IR-only solutions based on my anticipated applications.
I've often thought about the reverse engineering thing. Not sure it would be legal to use the knowledge with JMRI. Of course so far no has come forth with the info. I just assumed no one that has the ability to do so really cared.
jalajoie NSColsMP6 So if I had a Digitrax system I could use throttles from other manufacturers that support LocoNet or would I "be forced to only buy their stuff"? If such a third party throttles existed, I am positive one could use it on a LocoNet network. In fact I use a third party computer interface to link my computer to LocoNet and JMRI. That is Loco Buffer. Something impossible to do with MRC.
NSColsMP6 So if I had a Digitrax system I could use throttles from other manufacturers that support LocoNet or would I "be forced to only buy their stuff"?
So if I had a Digitrax system I could use throttles from other manufacturers that support LocoNet or would I "be forced to only buy their stuff"?
If such a third party throttles existed, I am positive one could use it on a LocoNet network.
In fact I use a third party computer interface to link my computer to LocoNet and JMRI. That is Loco Buffer.
Something impossible to do with MRC.
There's quite a difference between impossible and "unsupported". Someone could reverse-engineer the MRC system to achieve JMRI support. MRC decision makers could wake up tomorrow morning and decide that developing proprietary software is a waste of money. All sorts of things could happen. It's a feature I'd like to experiment with, but the politics of it aren't really a critical concern of mine right now.
While we're unable to use JMRI with MRC offerings right now, we're also not "forced to only buy their stuff" because they provide the software at no cost.
CSX RobertNCE has had duplex for several years now.
Looks like that's the case. I checked p.73 of the 12/07 MR and it lists it as two-way, and that it "can do everything the wired version can". My uncle has an NCE system so I considered it, but I knew I wanted walk-around capability - that eliminated the NCE PowerCab from my entry-level choices.
CSX RobertNSColsMP6...- and those throttles are more expensive. Maybe it's the built-in flashlight. ;)... Or maybe it's more features and flexibility. The Digitrax DT402D(as well as all other DT series throttles) has two knobs to give you direct access to two locos or consists at the same time. Digitrax radio throttles can also be used as infrared throttles on infrared equipped layouts, and as wired throttles on layouts that do not have wireless.
NSColsMP6...- and those throttles are more expensive. Maybe it's the built-in flashlight. ;)...
I suppose it'd be a nice capability to be able to operate two locomotives at once. Seems like the guys at my local club layout (they use Digitrax) tend to have trouble operating one train at a time without rear-ending the train ahead. It's not really something I'd use much on my 5x10 layout.
As for infrared, seems like you'd encounter line of sight issues. I don't know anyone using IR wireless so it wasn't high on my feature list. In fact, I steered clear of IR-only solutions based on my anticipated applications.
NSColsMP6So if I had a Digitrax system I could use throttles from other manufacturers that support LocoNet or would I "be forced to only buy their stuff"?
No radio throttles most likely because the 915mhz band is not legal for use in Europe. The new 2.4ghz is though. So time will tell.
These are but a few products that will work with it.
FRED
FREMO
Uhlenbrock
Locobuffer, Locobuffer II, Locobuffer USB provide an interface to JMRI and its throttles. JMRI provides the ability to control a remote layout via a network.
See the bottom of Digitrax's home page for a complete list of developers making products that work with loconet. Keep in mind that these are loconet devices, not decoders that can only take their commands from DCC track outputs.
I have also successfully connected Lenz, NCE, and CVP Zonemaster boosters to Digitrax command stations. All of those manufacturers will happily tell you how to do it as well as how to connect a Digitrax booster to their systems. There are also several do-it-yourself boosters on the net. Matter of fact, MRC used to have an 8 amp booster that could be interfaced with other systems. Don't know if they still make that product.
Third party Digitrax throttles DO exist - check out MERG's FRED throttle, among others they've designed.
Mostly because there's more interest in other items from third parties, there isn;t too much call for a third aprty throttle commercially. However, when it comes to track detectors and signal controlelrs, there are MANY third party products that work with Digitrax - see Team Digital, RR CirKits, CML, Logic Rail Technologies, and others - all LISTED ON THE DIGITRAX WEB SITE! Yes, vendors of competing products are listed and linked right on Digitrax's web site.
Jack W.
NSColsMP6CSX RobertContrast this to some of the statements made by MRC, such as "the world’s most advanced line of model railroad decoders" that are "world renowned for their highest quality, brilliant design and most importantly, their dependability"(dependability!?!?). I don't know anyone who would agree with these statements, and many would consider them outright lies. Most of the complaints I've read have been vague or completely unsubstantiated.
CSX RobertContrast this to some of the statements made by MRC, such as "the world’s most advanced line of model railroad decoders" that are "world renowned for their highest quality, brilliant design and most importantly, their dependability"(dependability!?!?). I don't know anyone who would agree with these statements, and many would consider them outright lies.
Most of the complaints I've read have been vague or completely unsubstantiated.
NSColsMP6I'd also probably check to see what the manufacturer of the locomtoves includes in it's sound-equipped locomotives.
NSColsMP6...Interesting that competitors seem to be bringing full-duplex throttles to market only now...
mfm37 Remember Digitrax had radio first. It was Simplex but loconet doesn't need duplex to work. Still doesn't. Duplex is required by some of the other systems so they had to have it. Not sure if it's required with MRC as they like to keep things secret. Guess that's one way to force you to only buy their stuff. Martin Myers
Remember Digitrax had radio first. It was Simplex but loconet doesn't need duplex to work. Still doesn't. Duplex is required by some of the other systems so they had to have it. Not sure if it's required with MRC as they like to keep things secret. Guess that's one way to force you to only buy their stuff.
davidmbedard 1. JMRI is the standard to which all other programming software is compared to.
1. JMRI is the standard to which all other programming software is compared to.
I think the NMRA defines the standards in this area - last I checked there is no standard. JMRI may be the de-facto standard though. Maybe the NMRA should define a standard DCC <-> PC interface.
It should also be noted that standard doesn't always mean "best possible". Good standards (including DCC) seek to incorporate the best of a variety of non-standard attempts to solve a problem. They also adapt to changes.
CSX RobertBy stating the diameter of the range, he is clearly stating the range of the throttle around the base station.
Clearly stating it would mean removing the superfluous word "diameter" that senselessly doubles the published figure.
Most of the complaints I've read have been vague or completely unsubstantiated. There are a few guys that seem to be really vocal on the issue. I was probably going to pick my decoders based on a combination of features, price, and ease of installation. I'd also probably check to see what the manufacturer of the locomtoves includes in it's sound-equipped locomotives.
As for the statements attribted to MRC above, sounds like advertising bluster like "Try our world famous hot dogs!" at a restauraunt. Maybe we can convince JD Power to study reliability of DCC systems. I think I know who'd win "#1 in Owner Loyalty" but I've usually sought more tangible metrics.
NSColsMP6maxman betamaxHow many uses will actually have their antenna at the dead center of the room/layout anyway? How many users actually have a room where you can be 100 feet away from the antenna, no matter where it might be located? My 02/08 issue of MR fell open this morning to reveal a product review of the Prodigy Wireless. The MR staff tested it to 100ft - by walking around the corner and down the hall of a steel-framed building. I could see long range being helpful on a garden railrway. Could be enough extra power to bring trains on an interior staging track outside - or allow you to control trains from inside on a cold winter's day. Interesting that competitors seem to be bringing full-duplex throttles to market only now - and those throttles are more expensive. Maybe it's the built-in flashlight. ;)
maxman betamaxHow many uses will actually have their antenna at the dead center of the room/layout anyway? How many users actually have a room where you can be 100 feet away from the antenna, no matter where it might be located?
betamaxHow many uses will actually have their antenna at the dead center of the room/layout anyway?
How many users actually have a room where you can be 100 feet away from the antenna, no matter where it might be located?
My 02/08 issue of MR fell open this morning to reveal a product review of the Prodigy Wireless. The MR staff tested it to 100ft - by walking around the corner and down the hall of a steel-framed building.
I could see long range being helpful on a garden railrway. Could be enough extra power to bring trains on an interior staging track outside - or allow you to control trains from inside on a cold winter's day.
Interesting that competitors seem to be bringing full-duplex throttles to market only now - and those throttles are more expensive. Maybe it's the built-in flashlight. ;)
I've been over 100 feet away with my DT400R and had no problem controlling trains. That was 7 or 8 years ago.
We did a little NTRAK layout last year in Louisville. Digitrax Radio was required. On Sunday there were 91 radio throttles going on the 200 x 250 foot main layout. Some loops and a couple of independent layouts also had Digitrax radio going on different ID's.
Even if you do consider the statement misleading, at least it is factually correct(if the transceivers actually do have a range of 150 feet), because a point to point range of 150 feet would give the throttle a 300 foot diameter range. Contrast this to some of the statements made by MRC, such as "the world’s most advanced line of model railroad decoders" that are "world renowned for their highest quality, brilliant design and most importantly, their dependability"(dependability!?!?). I don't know anyone who would agree with these statements, and many would consider them outright lies.
As to range...
As applied to radio frequency signals, stating a 300 foot diameter is misleading.
The RF signal radiates out from the antenna, usually in a circle. Thus, 150 feet FROM the antenna would be the range. After that, operation may be unreliable. Stating 300 feet is just doubling the number, but it still remains at 150 feet from the antenna.
In fact, to get a 300 foot range would require a lot more power than 150 feet needs. So they are making it sound like their product has more power, and hence more range, than others.
How many uses will actually have their antenna at the dead center of the room/layout anyway?
Well then, I'd like to see someone use 32 at a time with MRC. They CLAIM that, but hasit been tested? Is there anyoen with a layout large enough to handle 32 or more operators even USING MRC? There are PLENTY that big using Digitrax. One or two is even a HOME layout, others are nly occasionally that big, such as the huge NTRAK layouts that get set up at major conventions. The NTRAK standard for DCC is Digitrax, and they have tested this and proven it works at least as well as described by actually putting together layouts bigger than any of us could hope to have as a personal layout and had it in operation for the duration of a show. I would consider the experiences published by these groups as more than satisfactory evidence that the Digitrax ads are NOT exaggerating the capabilities of their system.
Actually, I think I'd like to see 32 WIRED throttles at the same time with MRC. I'd love to see how their polled system handles response time with 32 throttles connected.
Stevert Well, looking at the definition here of the word "range", I don't see any mention that "range is a radius". As a matter of fact, the word "radius" does not even appear in any of the common English definitions for "range" that are listed on that page. On the other hand, it does say, "3. a. The maximum extent or distance limiting operation, action, or effectiveness, as of a projectile, aircraft, radio signal, or sound." (emphasis added) While I can't speak for David, I can say that the ad's not "exagerative" or "mis-leading" to me at all. Steve
Well, looking at the definition here of the word "range", I don't see any mention that "range is a radius". As a matter of fact, the word "radius" does not even appear in any of the common English definitions for "range" that are listed on that page.
On the other hand, it does say,
"3.
Ok, so if you have a throttle with a "300 ft diameter range" then how far can you walk away from the transmitter and expect it to function?
Remember, Diameter (d) is a line across the center of a pizza. Radius (r) is a line from the center to the edge.
Interestingly, the MRC site lists the Prodigy Wireless range as "up to 80 ft" which they say is "the best range in the industry". If the Digitrax ad claims are true, 150 ft is a lot better range than 80 ft (even without exaggerating the figure by doubling it with the invented "diameter range" unit of measure).
Now I want to test the various wireless throttles side-by side under identical circumstances.
Of course, I own some Motorola GMRS radios that claim a 5-mile range. They only work until I get a tree or house between me and the wife.
Interestingly, MRC Prodigy Wireless seems to support 32 Wireless Throttles while Digitrax apparently suggests using no more than 10 wireless throttles with a single reciever. Apparently the new Duplex system will accomodate "dozens" of wireless throttles.
32 is two and a half dozen so MRC can already claim support for "dozens", so I wonder what the new limit of the Duplex system is... Could just be 24 (that'd still be "dozens"). Seems like the Digitrax DT402D is about $50 more than the Prodigy Wireless throttle.
NSColsMP6davidmbedard Lets be clear here on 2 fronts... 2. MRC has a history of mis-leading, mis-guided products and advertisements. They are exagerative and underhanded. The fact that they never live up to what they promise is why they still are way behind when it comes to decoder and system technology. Their latest ad featured 3 clubs (only 3) that are using MRC products exclusively......yay for MRC! I still cannot recommend MRC products based on #2. David B On page 77 of the 09/09 MR I was reading an ad for the Digitrax DT402D throttle. They seem to have come up with a new term when they site "300 ft diameter range". Range is a radius, not a diameter - so it seems that their advertisement is attempting to double the actual range of 150 ft (though some sources say 200 ft - the manual didn't seem to list a range). Does that meet your criteria of "exagerative" or "mis-leading advertisements"? ;) If we look to buy or products from a company that has never made an exaggerated statement in an advertisement we're probably going to be looking for a long time.
davidmbedard Lets be clear here on 2 fronts... 2. MRC has a history of mis-leading, mis-guided products and advertisements. They are exagerative and underhanded. The fact that they never live up to what they promise is why they still are way behind when it comes to decoder and system technology. Their latest ad featured 3 clubs (only 3) that are using MRC products exclusively......yay for MRC! I still cannot recommend MRC products based on #2. David B
Lets be clear here on 2 fronts...
2. MRC has a history of mis-leading, mis-guided products and advertisements. They are exagerative and underhanded. The fact that they never live up to what they promise is why they still are way behind when it comes to decoder and system technology. Their latest ad featured 3 clubs (only 3) that are using MRC products exclusively......yay for MRC!
I still cannot recommend MRC products based on #2.
David B
On page 77 of the 09/09 MR I was reading an ad for the Digitrax DT402D throttle.
They seem to have come up with a new term when they site "300 ft diameter range".
Range is a radius, not a diameter - so it seems that their advertisement is attempting to double the actual range of 150 ft (though some sources say 200 ft - the manual didn't seem to list a range).
Does that meet your criteria of "exagerative" or "mis-leading advertisements"? ;)
If we look to buy or products from a company that has never made an exaggerated statement in an advertisement we're probably going to be looking for a long time.