Hamltnblue Actually I had no problems programming the MTH in program track or main mode. It had nothing to do with the reason for switching but if you read the thread and the BNSF SD70Ace thread you'd know why. Tonight I finished my second MTH SD70 Conversion. This one is the George Bush theme. Tomorrow I will add it to the consist with the other SD70 and Athearn SD60i. Just have to verify the speeds match first.
Actually I had no problems programming the MTH in program track or main mode. It had nothing to do with the reason for switching but if you read the thread and the BNSF SD70Ace thread you'd know why.
Tonight I finished my second MTH SD70 Conversion. This one is the George Bush theme.
Tomorrow I will add it to the consist with the other SD70 and Athearn SD60i. Just have to verify the speeds match first.
My reason for switching won't be because of CV29 programming. It will be due to the limited DCC functionality, inability to download soundfiles and just the general differences between the DCS/DCC decoder in the MTH and my other DCC sound decoders.
Engineer Jeff NS Nut Visit my layout at: http://www.thebinks.com/trains/
Springfield PA
dave hikel Hi Jeff, Good, it sounds like you're making progress. The values entered into CV29 are standard DCC like any other decoder. However, some bits are ignored including bit 0 for NDOT. This will be corrected when MTH adds support for advanced consisting, but for right now the engines have to run forward unless in a universal consist. When the software update for the SD70's becomes available it will be a free download from the MTH website. You will need access to an MTH DCS system to perform the upgrade. Currently, the valid values for CV29 on any MTH engine are: 0, 2, 4, 6, 32, 34, 36, and 38.
Hi Jeff,
Good, it sounds like you're making progress. The values entered into CV29 are standard DCC like any other decoder. However, some bits are ignored including bit 0 for NDOT. This will be corrected when MTH adds support for advanced consisting, but for right now the engines have to run forward unless in a universal consist. When the software update for the SD70's becomes available it will be a free download from the MTH website. You will need access to an MTH DCS system to perform the upgrade.
Currently, the valid values for CV29 on any MTH engine are: 0, 2, 4, 6, 32, 34, 36, and 38.
I'll wait for the upgrade before I decide whether to replace everything with a QSI decoder or not but right now I am leaning that way. We'll see what the upgrade brings.
Heritagefleet1 jbinkley60 This thread is going to motivate me to pull the DCS decoder from my new NS SD70M-2 and replace it with a QSI Rev-U decoder. I can't get the embedded DCS decoder to use the extended address, just the 2 digit address. Jeff... Dave is correct... also the problem may be your Command station or system - it may not have enough output to re-address or re-set the loco. The MTH, like many of the newer decoders, are designed to be programmed on the main. You may need a programming booster tied into your programming track in order to get this done. I use Digitrax and have no problem 4-digit addressing any of the dozen of these SD70 ACe's I have done. To reset the MTH, you must select CV55 and set it to a value of '55'...this will reset it to factory default. I would not mess with the CV29 unless you know exactly what you're doing. The Digitrax works as follows: Select Program then Select 'Po' left throttle knob to 55 - right throttle knob to '55' , then hit enter. This resets the engine ot factory default. Then , turn left throttle knob to 'Ad2' and depress right throttle knob to display 'Ad4' ...this will flash. Then simply input the 4 digit address and hit enter - the cue will ask you to confirm by displaying 'y?' hit Yes. Done. Select loco and Enter address and select. If you are using other than Digitrax, you'd need to refer ot the Owners Manual of your Command Station. I hope this helps you out.
jbinkley60 This thread is going to motivate me to pull the DCS decoder from my new NS SD70M-2 and replace it with a QSI Rev-U decoder. I can't get the embedded DCS decoder to use the extended address, just the 2 digit address.
This thread is going to motivate me to pull the DCS decoder from my new NS SD70M-2 and replace it with a QSI Rev-U decoder. I can't get the embedded DCS decoder to use the extended address, just the 2 digit address.
Jeff...
Dave is correct... also the problem may be your Command station or system - it may not have enough output to re-address or re-set the loco.
The MTH, like many of the newer decoders, are designed to be programmed on the main.
You may need a programming booster tied into your programming track in order to get this done.
I use Digitrax and have no problem 4-digit addressing any of the dozen of these SD70 ACe's I have done.
To reset the MTH, you must select CV55 and set it to a value of '55'...this will reset it to factory default.
I would not mess with the CV29 unless you know exactly what you're doing.
The Digitrax works as follows:
Select Program then Select 'Po'
left throttle knob to 55 - right throttle knob to '55' , then hit enter.
This resets the engine ot factory default.
Then , turn left throttle knob to 'Ad2' and depress right throttle knob to display 'Ad4' ...this will flash.
Then simply input the 4 digit address and hit enter - the cue will ask you to confirm by displaying 'y?'
hit Yes.
Done.
Select loco and Enter address and select.
If you are using other than Digitrax, you'd need to refer ot the Owners Manual of your Command Station.
I hope this helps you out.
Ok, I was able to get it to recognize a 4 digit address. It can't read a CV variable in Ops mode but I can force program a value. I can't get the NDOT direction changed. I tried CV29=35, which is what I set all other decoders to and CV29=38 and both are the same direction on the MTH. So does anyone have the decoder ring for CV29 for an MTH or is it supposed to be the same as CV29 on other decoders ?
dave hikel Hi Rick, Have you successfully programmed an MTH engine on a boosted programming track? If so, what hardware are you using? According to MTH's R&D department not even a boosted programming track would work. My early attempts at program a K4 on a boosted programming track failed. Since MTH confirmed that it shouldn't work I haven't tried since. Incidentally, I believe they are working on adding support for boosted programming tracks in the next software update.
Hi Rick,
Have you successfully programmed an MTH engine on a boosted programming track? If so, what hardware are you using? According to MTH's R&D department not even a boosted programming track would work. My early attempts at program a K4 on a boosted programming track failed. Since MTH confirmed that it shouldn't work I haven't tried since. Incidentally, I believe they are working on adding support for boosted programming tracks in the next software update.
hi Dave...
well...to be honest, I've always had a Digitrax booster on the layout for programming but I don't use it(programming track)much anymore because of being able to program most of the newer decoders in OpS mode on the main. What I was offering was a suggestion - I don't think the MTH decoder will respond to a programming 'mode' - i simply program on a 'program track' but in ops mode which is hot with the main. Try setting CV55 to a value of '55' to get this reset first.
Didn't you just say you sold this engine?
I have two of those Pennsy K4s models and they run absolutely beautifully - I have them all addressed to the cab numbers(4 digit) and have never had a problem addressing anything from MTH.
The JMRI software is used by our club and is interfaced with the programming track. we just had a show and I had just taken the George bush out of the box @'03' to put on the main. I didn't use the program track there either - just placed it in the staging yard and changed the address to '4141'. No problems.
Sprog is what I've been using but am new to it and still learning what it can do.
Email me back and tell me exactly what your having a problem with again and i'll see if i can come up with a solution - it may be something you've already tried but it doesn't hurt to try again.
Rick
That's a nice model - I've got two of the 70M-2's myself.
Don't give Up...I'll help you if I can.
I'm not an advocate of QSI and believe that replacing what you have with a QSI decoder would only be a mistake.
I think the main problem you're having is not having a booster on your programming section.
One thing you may want to do, is try removing all other locos from the track and then try programming it on the main in ops.
I've programmed every one of mine this way, and have had no problems.
Hamltnblue I verified, it is a Canon. What is your source for the S/M LED's?
I verified, it is a Canon. What is your source for the S/M LED's?
I had a hell of a time trying to find the high intensity LED that the manufacturer is using on these and got a hold of a friend of mine who works at Raytheon. He sent me some from his personal parts bin at home and they worked okay but were still on the blue/cool tempreture side.
Then I tried something a lot easier and it works very well: Instead of changing out the LED(hard to work with S/M), I simply applied some Clear Amber Acrylic to the existing LED's - not too much just enough to warm the color tempreture -I did this while the loco was on the track and lighted so that I could experiment with how much 'tint' I wanted.
Too much will make the light orange and cut the light transmittance signifigantly - the nice thing is if you get too much, you can just wipe it off and start again...the best effect was achieved by just slightly dabbing the led with the color.
Once the shell is re-installed, the light affect is much better and realistic.
Tamaya was the brand I used and is what I recommend.
HamltnblueWith the extended address, try the programming track. The MTH doesn't like programming on the main.
With the extended address, try the programming track. The MTH doesn't like programming on the main.
Hamltnblue, that is TOTALLY backwards. The MTH engines can ONLY be programmed on the main. If you had read the owner's manual on your SD70 before replacing the decoder you might know that.
Jeff,
Try programming on the the main and you should have no problems. Set CV 29 to 38 and your cab number will be the new address (they're pre-programmed that way). If you still have trouble post it here and I'll try to help. I own six MTH HO engines, including two SD70ACe's, and have had no trouble programming them on the main with my NCE power pro system.
Hamltnblue With the extended address, try the programming track. The MTH doesn't like programming on the main.
I've tried it a couple of times and setting CV29=38 . I may try setting CV17 and CV18 by hand.
Hamltnblue I forget right now but it's european and quite large. Believe it or not I currently have a second one open for a tsunami install. If you need to know I can open the motor housing to check. On of the pics I posted earlier in the thread shows it.
I forget right now but it's european and quite large. Believe it or not I currently have a second one open for a tsunami install. If you need to know I can open the motor housing to check. On of the pics I posted earlier in the thread shows it.
I've had many of these apart for the sole purpose of making changes to the S/M LEDs to a Warmer color tempreture - every one of these had the Canon (Canon label on the motor casing)motor so I'm not sure what you've got there. The Technical Dept at MTH has confirmed that they are using Canon motors for their operation properties and current draw - I don't know about the motor current but I do know they are Canon motors. These are the same exact motors that were used in the Tower 55 Gevos from Overland - I wouldn't be surprised if these were all made at the same factory.
The SD70 ACe is equpped with a Canon motor -these are as good as it gets - they actually run quite well with the Kato and Atlas models but my Athearns required a motor intensity change @CV214 - this was going to have to be done anyway, as the Athearns do not run well with any other of the manufacturers models including Genesis.(this is in regard to the Tsunami Decoders)
The update is in the form of new software - it can be transferred to your engine on a program track via MTH's TIU(track interface unit) and all the software will be available for MTH users free from their website. You must use the MTH wireless control unit to interface.
There will be available sound wav files also and some will also affect lighting outputs.
These are already available for the Steam locomotives offered ...I'm told that the Diesel upgrades and sound files will be available this spring.
I am glad top see that MTH was smart to announce NMRA compliant DCC friendly versions without sound for those modelers who do not want sound and wish to install their own decoder types.
This is a huge move in their favor and shows the commitment that MTH is making to the HO market.
Price? Identical to Athearn. 198.98 for non-sound units.
selector rjake4454 I actually sold my MTH K4 tonight due to the DCS issue, I will never buy DCS, so the only MTH engine I will be keeping is the Class J because its such a beauty and the Broadways are extremely rare now, I can't find the ones I'm looking for anywhere. These things are hard to program without DCS, and DCS will never catch on in the HO world. I lost a lot of money selling it, but it was worth the learning experience. Unless they come out with something like rare and crazy like the Q1 or the S1, I won't be buying anymore engines from them. I don't know how anybody else feels about this type of announcement/revelation/admission, but I think it takes a strong character to publicly admit that the poster has made an error, and has turned away from what he had formerly taken as the truth. Jake, for what it's worth, I hope you at least had some excited anticipation, and at least some early fun with those other engines. If you found an impediment to that enjoyment over time, you wouldn't be the first modeller to learn something of that nature. I can't name one person posting here who could claim to have made every perfect and lasting choice. If you peruse eBay, you are sure to find the odd BLI J Class. I know how hard it is, I was looking to replace my Spectrum dud last summer, and finally was alerted to a guy on eBay who also sold outside of that enterprise, and he had three or four DC versions. I learned this by posting on the BLI forums and a modeller in Australia shared his source with me. I can't recall now who it was, but if I find the paperwork I'll let you know. Welcome back to the simple life in DCC. -Crandell
rjake4454 I actually sold my MTH K4 tonight due to the DCS issue, I will never buy DCS, so the only MTH engine I will be keeping is the Class J because its such a beauty and the Broadways are extremely rare now, I can't find the ones I'm looking for anywhere. These things are hard to program without DCS, and DCS will never catch on in the HO world. I lost a lot of money selling it, but it was worth the learning experience. Unless they come out with something like rare and crazy like the Q1 or the S1, I won't be buying anymore engines from them.
I actually sold my MTH K4 tonight due to the DCS issue, I will never buy DCS, so the only MTH engine I will be keeping is the Class J because its such a beauty and the Broadways are extremely rare now, I can't find the ones I'm looking for anywhere. These things are hard to program without DCS, and DCS will never catch on in the HO world.
I lost a lot of money selling it, but it was worth the learning experience. Unless they come out with something like rare and crazy like the Q1 or the S1, I won't be buying anymore engines from them.
I don't know how anybody else feels about this type of announcement/revelation/admission, but I think it takes a strong character to publicly admit that the poster has made an error, and has turned away from what he had formerly taken as the truth. Jake, for what it's worth, I hope you at least had some excited anticipation, and at least some early fun with those other engines. If you found an impediment to that enjoyment over time, you wouldn't be the first modeller to learn something of that nature. I can't name one person posting here who could claim to have made every perfect and lasting choice.
If you peruse eBay, you are sure to find the odd BLI J Class. I know how hard it is, I was looking to replace my Spectrum dud last summer, and finally was alerted to a guy on eBay who also sold outside of that enterprise, and he had three or four DC versions. I learned this by posting on the BLI forums and a modeller in Australia shared his source with me. I can't recall now who it was, but if I find the paperwork I'll let you know.
Welcome back to the simple life in DCC.
-Crandell
Thanks for the kind words Crandell, yes I've changed my attitude a whole lot concerning this issue. Its amazing what a breath of fresh air DCC is and I am glad to be back.
This thread has links to video's of the SD70 consisted to my Athearn SD60i, both with Soundtraxx Tsunami's
http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/p/166805/1833006.aspx#1833006
If you don't consist then the MTH is still a good product with the exception of not being able to control the individual volumes.
I corrected the speaker wiring to get them in phase and it resulted in a noticable increase in volume. The sound quality is also even better than it was.
Yesterday I purchased my DCC system (NCE PowerCab). So it looks like DCC is going up
Being a big MRL guy I almost placed an order for not one but three MTH SD70ACe but I didn't and I'm not going to. The whole DCS system scares me and now hearing the war stories about the two systems conflicting makes me not want any part of it. Though they might be great looking engines, I'm going to wait for Athearn to bring out there's. Sure I've heard that they might only be RTR units but if that is true then I'm still fine with that.
--Zak Gardner
My Layout Blog: http://mrl369dude.blogspot.com
http://zgardner18.rrpicturearchives.net
VIEW SLIDE SHOW: CLICK ON PHOTO BELOW
Paul3 I'd guess the profit percentages are the same for both DC and DCC locos. However, when you the option of selling 100 units at $150 or 100 units at $250, you'd want the $250 to sell, of course. It's the same reason why low-cost kits can't compete for shelf space with RTR's that cost twice as much...as along as they sell. I agree that there is significant market for both DC and DCC, and that will remain so for the forseeable future no matter what the zealots on either side say. But I also have to ask why you keep dragging BLI into this when they do make "stealth" versions. MTH? Yeah, they are missing the boat but BLI seems to get your point of view...as least in regard to sound and DCC.
I'd guess the profit percentages are the same for both DC and DCC locos. However, when you the option of selling 100 units at $150 or 100 units at $250, you'd want the $250 to sell, of course. It's the same reason why low-cost kits can't compete for shelf space with RTR's that cost twice as much...as along as they sell.
I agree that there is significant market for both DC and DCC, and that will remain so for the forseeable future no matter what the zealots on either side say. But I also have to ask why you keep dragging BLI into this when they do make "stealth" versions. MTH? Yeah, they are missing the boat but BLI seems to get your point of view...as least in regard to sound and DCC.
Paul, only a few more comments, because again, I largely agree.
Obviously any manufacturer would rather sell a higher priced item than a lower priced one, BUT, not if it means selling nothing at all or not selling enough volume to make a profit.
Why do I bring up BLI? Simple, you can not talk about the stealth series in the present tense. There is not one steath model currently listed for sale or for future production by them. They have gone off "chasing" MTH down the smoke, station sounds, high priced, working class lights, and so on road.
The BlueLine seems to be a failure based on what hear and see. The sound is generally bad, the DC performance is just as bad as any decoder equiped loco, some decoders don't like the factory onboard electronics, etc. I have one, worst sound system I ever heard. It does have DC jumpers, with them installed the lighting does not work correctly. Of course I fixed it by putting a nice quiet Spectrum tender behind it.
It's like they can't make up their mind who they want to compete with or how. Smarter businessmen focus on their customers, not their competition.
And again, one last time, people with simple power packs do count, because they do buy additional locomotives, if only a few each. I know, I ran a train department in a hobby shop for years.
Sheldon
Sheldon,Long winded? Heck, I'm probably worse in person.
I also concur that sound on DC remains spotty at best, but the Atlas Dual Mode decoders are 100% DC analog compatible since their jumper by-passes all digital electronics on the board. Other than them, the DCC decoders as a whole are not good on DC. They'll work, but not as well.
The reason why I brought up clubs was in reference to the question of whether DCC was stagnant or not. It's all but impossible to count home layouts as there's no way to get in touch with even the majority of them, IMHO. Clubs, OTOH, are trying to get noticed. In fact, the NMRA has a list of them on their website directory. It makes them easy to count and perhaps get a feel for DC user #'s vs. DCC user #'s at least in some kind of actual numbers rather than those based on opinions and anecdotal evidence.
I'm sure our experiences are different. But for me, I know far more club member model railroaders than I know lone wolves. Mainly because lone wolves keep to themselves and don't socialize except at a train show. Obviously, there are more lone wolves than club members in the USA. I don't deny that. But again, at least with clubs they can be counted. Lone wolves don't even want to be noticed.And the reason I brought up the X-mas and Ping Pong layout types is that that these sorts of folks are not going to be using any kind of control system at all beyond a single powerpack. Personally, I would not count these folks towards the DCC vs. DC users group. Or at the least, perhaps we should be comparing DCC user to a DC control system users (IOW, those that have advanced past the single powerpack level and just one block).
Paul A. Cutler III
Going back over my pics of the install I noticed I did an oops and will have to open back up tomorrow.
In this pic you can see that I hooked the 2 purple wires to the 2 yellow speaker wires and tied the white speaker wires together. This puts the speakers out of phase resulting in the sound not being as loud as it can be. There should be the yellow from one tied to the white of the other with the other yellow and white going to the decoder since they're wired in series.
With the QSI decoder in the Atlas loco's you can set the VSTART or start voltage. It can be programmed with a dc power pack. I'm not sure but you might be able to get the start voltage a bit lower.
http://www.qsisolutions.com/pdf/q_RevoA_Manual.pdf
Paul, again, agreed. Both of us can be long winded. I apologize if in the interest of brefity I sounded like I had some magical inside info - I do not.
I would say what counts for the maunfacturers is return on investment in each segment. So, this raises more questions than it answers. Are the profit margins the same or similar for DCC vs DC versions of the same loco. Does the double inventory justify itself? Is the market made larger by offering both products? I would guess the answers to most of these are yes, based on what most of the manufacturers are doing.
Obviously this could change in the future. But as it stands, it appears that there is sugnificant market for both and that by offering both the market is expanded. This is the basic point that MTH and BLI don't seem to get - there are people who simply will NOT buy their products due to higher price, unwanted features or lack of compatiblity. And that shrinks their market share.
As for Atlas decoders or others - let me be more specific. None of the sound decoders I have tested or seen others run, perform on ANY DC throttle in a way I consider acceptable. I have tested most of the major brands/products or seen others run them.
Some dual mode non sound decoders do run well on SOME DC throttles, but none I have personally incountered run well or correctly on the Aristo Craft Train Engineer or other pulse width modulation DC throttles.
There is nothing about the term DC that defines or implies that it must be a varible voltage pure DC analog signal. LONG before DCC, DC motor control for model trains and dozens of other applications had evolved past that.
But dual mode decoders generally do not work well with advanced forms of DC motor control through the rails.
What is is with the club thing? I don't have any interest in clubs. Been there, done that. I don't take my models to club layouts for others to man handle, crash, break or whatever, so compatiblity with what others are doing as a "group" is of no concern to me. If being a member of club is why some choose DCC, thats fine for them.
No offense to you, or David Bedard or anyone else on this board or in the hobby. I simply have no personal interest in participating in clubs with layouts, modular groups, freemo, or whatever that involves hauling my models or a layout or both all over the place. For me model railroading is a "at home" hobby. The modelers I associate with invite who they want to their homes, I invite who I want to share the hobby with to mine. Call us a bunch of snobs if you like.
Based on the number of modelers I know personally, and the percentage of them that belong to clubs with club layouts, the control system choice of clubs has little bearing on the "how many serious modelers are using DCC" question.
Since you are club focused, I'm sure your view is different. But I know lots of modelers, few are in clubs with club layouts.
So again, if Athearn sells 5000 units in DC and 5000 units in DCC of loco XYZ, but would only sell 6000 or 7000 if they only came DCC, I think selling both is better for them and the hobby. It does not matter if those extra 3000 are sold for Christmas tree circles or serious modelers.