I love my MTH loco, and I run it on an NCE DCC system, and everything works great. If I want to run a consist I have to run the Universal consist option, but it supports up to 4 locos which is fine by me. With my NCE powerhouse pro throttle, I have access to all 28 functions. (I really dig the coupler crash sounds)
I have the SD70ACe and the quality is excellent, and this thing pulls hard!
I will be buying more MTH locos.
Michael
CEO- Mile-HI-RailroadPrototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989
I have a few MTH only because I got them at a really good deal. I am not that adept to notice the short comings between DCC and DCS operations. Actually I have never seen their system in action so I have nothing to compare it to all that aside they are great look great operating and well detailed locomotives. The one down side their price is astronomical in my o/p. A mrr friend of mine who has mainly MTH locomotives in his engine roster refers to them as HO crack......... lol the detail is quite good and they typically run excellent so once you've had something that runs and looks so well it's hard to have anything else. Not for me it isn't. I guess if I had a completed or almost completed layout and had little or nothing else to spend my money on I may concentrate on getting a few more MTH loco's but that ain't gonna happen no time soon.
I wouldn't say MTH prices are astronomical. For example, I paid $209.00 each for all 9 of my MTH SD70ACe's. Now the MSRP is $249.95 however Athearn is releasing their SD70ACe's which will be of no better detail/sound/features for an MSRP of $289. Athearn is obviously more expensive. Or take into account my 2 MTH Steam engines. I paid $519.00 for my Challenger 3985 but it is die cast and is great sounding. I paid $389 for the SP Daylight 4449, but BLI wants about the same for their version of teh 4449. I love MTH, and it can run fine on DCC. You can't mess with CV's like on most other manufacturers but that's not my cup of tea anyway. I can raise and lower the volume and use different horns with one of the functions, so I'm a happy man with MTH.
Putting their DCS system aside, MTH locos operate smoother - especially at low speed - than BLI locos. However, BLI locos have better detailing - IMO - than MTH locos.
As David mentioned previously, DCS locomotives operate okay on DCC but you only have access to a certain number of CVs. For DC, you need a full 24V to get MTH locos to run at full speed. (At least according to the reviews that I read in MR.)
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
tstage Putting their DCS system aside, MTH locos operate smoother - especially at low speed - than BLI locos. However, BLI locos have better detailing - IMO - than MTH locos. As David mentioned previously, DCS locomotives operate okay on DCC but you only have access to a certain number of CVs. For DC, you need a full 24V to get MTH locos to run at full speed. Tom
As David mentioned previously, DCS locomotives operate okay on DCC but you only have access to a certain number of CVs. For DC, you need a full 24V to get MTH locos to run at full speed.
After all of the hoopla over the MTH-initiated lawsuits a few years back, I decided that I had no use for MTH, so I don't own any. But, I am very surprised to learn about the shortcomings of MTH engines on both DCC and DC. Now, I am happier than ever that I don't own any.
Rich
Alton Junction
After installing Tsunami's in my MTH's I love them.
Springfield PA
I agree wholeheartedly and utterly concerning the MTH frivolous lawsuit that necessitated me to buy a extra chip for my QSI sound equipped loce!!!
Hi Harley-Davidson,
I now own eight MTH HO engines (2 K4 Pacifics, 1 Triplex, 1 GS-4 Northern, 3 SD70ACe's, and 1 SD70M-2) and am VERY satisfied with the quality and operation of the engines. One of the SD70ACe's and one of the K4's had defects in their first year of operation and were repaired by MTH under warranty. None of the engines that are over a year old have had electronic or mechanical failures.
When I bought my first MTH K4 I was strictly a DC operator in HO. A lot of people complain about MTH engines running too slow on DC. That's true if you have a small power supply that can't handle the current draw of an engine with sound lights and smoke. The MTH engines are power hogs compared straight DC engines. I own a rather large DC transformer that has no problem supplying the NMRA standard 15.5volts (yes, it's 15.5v not 12v - 12 is the minimum sustainable voltage at rated current draw) of DC at higher amperage loads so I had no problem running at prototypical speeds. The comments about requiring 24 volts are now and have always been erroneous. They will tolerate 24 volts without damage but they certainly do not require 24 volts to run properly. That's like saying that because a car's engine can turn 6000 rpm that it must turn 6000 rpm on the freeway. It's simply misleading.
Since purchasing my first MTH engine I have converted to DCC. All my MTH engines came perfectly speed mapped right out of the box. When running on 128 throttle steps each step equals 1 scale mile per hour regardless of locomotive type. Understandably, some people complained that you couldn't re-map the MTH speed curves to match their existing fleet. Since I already had MTH engines when I converted to DCC I simply adopted the MTH speed map as my standard. My most recent arrival is an UP Heritage SP SD70ACe. Right out of the box it consisted perfectly with my GS-4 #4449 (yes, that's a prototypical configuration - I have the photos to prove it). I had to upgrade my NCE DCC system so I could access F13-F28 because the MTH engines don't support function mapping. I considered that particularly important for the diesels because the manual rev up / rev down sound features are F15 and F16. Using those functions makes the sound operation much more realistic IMO. MTH has said publicly that speed mapping and advanced consisting will be added to the SD70's with a future free software update.
Personally, you couldn't pay me to take the Protosound 3 electronics out of an MTH engine because they run so well and sound so good. However, for those like Hamltnblue who prefer to install some other decoder they have announced DC only stealth versions of the SD70's with standard 8-pin decoder sockets.
dave hikelWhen I bought my first MTH K4 I was strictly a DC operator in HO. A lot of people complain about MTH engines running too slow on DC. That's true if you have a small power supply that can't handle the current draw of an engine with sound lights and smoke. The MTH engines are power hogs compared straight DC engines. I own a rather large DC transformer that has no problem supplying the NMRA standard 15.5volts (yes, it's 15.5v not 12v - 12 is the minimum sustainable voltage at rated current draw) of DC at higher amperage loads so I had no problem running at prototypical speeds.
No where in NMRA S-9 is there ANY mention of 15.5 volts. Nor has there ever been. The current S-9 (aug 1984) DC standards require a minimum full throttle voltage of 12 volts at the expected load. No maximum is specified.
http://www.nmra.org/standards/sandrp/s-9.html
The old S-9 required locos/motors to perform in a "satisfactory manor" at 11 volts DC. (Feb 1961)
MTH locos may well run just fine on 15.5 volts, but the rest of the industry runs just fine on 12 volts.
As for this business of current draw and voltage, simple power supplies with only a transformer, reostat and rectifier will be subject to the regulation percentage in the design of the transformer - and will, depending on the quality of the transformer read much higher voltages at full throttle under light or no load situations - but at the rated amperage should be at or only slightly above the design voltage. So a simple power pack from the 1960's rated at 3 amps, might well read 16-18 volts under no load, but likley will only read 13 volts under a 3 amp load.
None of this applies to modern solid state regulated power supplies, which many power packs today have and which many advanced DC operators build/use in their home built systems.
A 13.8 volt, 4 amp regulated power supply will provide no more than the rated 13.8 volts regardless of load. And will continue to provide that 13.8 volts up to the rated current level, in this case 4 amps.
Motor speed of DC motors is controlled by voltage, or effective voltage in the case of full voltage pulses.
It seems apparent from published information and independent testing, that the triple mode decoders in MTH HO locos require 15-16 volts in DC mode to achieve normal top speeds. This is outside the industry accepted and current/previous NMRA Standard voltage of 12 volts.
I run my trains with Aristo Craft Train Engineer DC wireless radio throttles, powered by 4 amp, 13.8 volt regulated power supplies, as recommented for HO by Aristo Craft. All my locomotives run at prototypical tops speeds or above. Yet I am supposed to accept that everyone else in the industry is wrong and MTH is right?
Additionally, many dual mode DCC decoders in other brands of products do not work well with pulse with modulated DC motor controllers like the Aristo Craft Train Engineer. So, untill MTH offers its products in a DC version without all the complex electronics of it DSC and DCC systems, buyers should know they may not work well with all DC control systems.
Sheldon
Here is a shot of a MTH Mohawk stripped down. It had the drive fitting come loose, a dab of epoxy put things right.
This one uses a Canon EN-22 motor. I believe these to be normal 12 volt motors. The MTH electronics take up the extra voltage for all the stuff they do.
Mike WSOR engineer | HO scale since 1988 | Visit our club www.WCGandyDancers.com
Sheldon, at the risk of eating this dead horse again... Your right, it's not a standard, it's a recommended practice. I will apologize for the misstatement.
RP-9 dated May 1973, section 1, paragraph D reads: "Direct current power supplies and packs for propulsion use shall produce between 12 and 16 volts while delivering rated current."
Unless a person uses an unusual pulse throttle power supply, like your self, they should see more than 12 volts at full throttle when the running at less than the rated current. What's unusual about the MTH engines is that they require far more current than other engines. As a result, a power supply that can deliver say 15.5 volts at full throttle with a .5 amp load won't be able to deliver that same voltage at the 1.5 amps that many of the MTH engines consume.
WSOR 3801 Here is a shot of a MTH Mohawk stripped down. It had the drive fitting come loose, a dab of epoxy put things right. This one uses a Canon EN-22 motor. I believe these to be normal 12 volt motors. The MTH electronics take up the extra voltage for all the stuff they do.
Looks like the same Canon motor as in the Stewart Baldwin switchers. That would make it likely that what MTH did was instead of condensing the speed contol into a narrow range of about 9-12 volts like other sound systems do on DC, they raised the top voltage and 'subtract out' the voltage needed for the electronics. It also looks like there is a small pager motor up there for the smoke blower.
In most of the reviews they say the MTH locos don't hit full speed on DC until 22 volts - so that's still well over the 16V of the updated RP. Any way you cut it, sound (MTH or other) just doesn't work well on DC and there's really no way to fix that beyond either on-board batteries or some sort of auxiliary power superimposed on the DC contol voltage, in which case you might as well just use DCC.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
dave hikel Sheldon, at the risk of eating this dead horse again... Your right, it's not a standard, it's a recommended practice. I will apologize for the misstatement. RP-9 dated May 1973, section 1, paragraph D reads: "Direct current power supplies and packs for propulsion use shall produce between 12 and 16 volts while delivering rated current." Unless a person uses an unusual pulse throttle power supply, like your self, they should see more than 12 volts at full throttle when the running at less than the rated current. What's unusual about the MTH engines is that they require far more current than other engines. As a result, a power supply that can deliver say 15.5 volts at full throttle with a .5 amp load won't be able to deliver that same voltage at the 1.5 amps that many of the MTH engines consume.
Dave,
It may be true that many of today's locos draw low currents, but 1.5 amp draws were quite common just a decade or two ago, and much of that equipment is still running on layouts all over this country - so in that regard MTH is not unique or unusual. My old triple headed Athearn F units easily exceeded 1.5 amps pulling a 60 car train.
AND, the type of propulsion I use in not unique or unusual by any means. Pulse and pulse width modulation DC motor control is a 40 year old technology that has been in in wide spread use in model trains for at least 30 years now - have you ever heard of Troller power packs? from the 1980's?
The magazines and internet have been littered with both commercial products and do it your self pulse width throttles for decades. The Aristo Craft Train Engineer wireless throttle has been on the market and in use by modelers in all scales for nearly two decades.
NMRA RP-9 does say "between 12 and 16 volts" making it acceptable for the output voltage to be as high as 16 BUT, also making it acceptable for it to only be 12. Learn about transformer design and regulation percentage as I explained above.
At full throttle, with the pulse width modulation turned off (one of the features of the Train Engineer is that the PWM can be turned off), with the power supply I use, my Aristo throttles put 13.5 volts on the rails at any current up to 4 amps. That is well within any interpretation of NMRA S-9 or RP-9 - yet I suspect some, if not all MTH locos would not reach reasonable tops speeds.
That is a technical FACT that any prespective customer should be aware of.
Personally, I have long and often said, if someone wants onboard sound in HO or N scale, they need to use DCC, and I have no dog in the fight over DCC vs DCS or feature access, etc.
I personally do not use ANY onboard sound locos or ANY locos with dual mode decoders on my layout. I could, after gaining their permission, publish a long list of modelers still using DC who have also rejected the notion of onboard sound. Many have said so on this and other forums, others remain quiet.
Mike Wolf is apparently beginning to realize he cannot reshape the HO hobby in his highrail image and has seen the wisdom in offereing at least one loco in DC/DCC ready form.
I undrstand you like MTH products, that's fine. You listed your "collection" of MTH locos, a wide range of prototypes, areas and eras which obviously do not fit into any prototype or even protolance layout theme. You are obviously a collector/casual operator - and that is fine. I have always respected every approach to this hobby.
However, those of us with more specfic modeling goals cannot be tied to one manufacturer or one unique control system and hope to meet our modeling goals of creating realistic, plausable and believable model railroads. This is why standardization and easy interchange of brands is important.
MTH has only made two locos that would fit my theme, locale and era - both of which I already have from other manufacturers - I do not collect model trains that do not serve a theme based function on my layout. And his insistance up until now to only sell them with sound leaves me out as well. Additionaly, the detail on the MTH HO locos I have seen is less than satisfactory to me, especially for the price. Much of the detail is oversized and made in such a way as to make it more "handling friendly". That may be what some people want, I prefer finer more accurate models like Genesis, Intermountain, Spectrum and Proto2000.
Face it, I have, you are in a different hobby from me, and MTH makes products for your hobby, not for mine. Others in my hobby need to understand that before they spend their hard earned money.
ATLANTIC CENTRALHowever, those of us with more specfic modeling goals cannot be tied to one manufacturer or one unique control system and hope to meet our modeling goals of creating realistic, plausable and believable model railroads.
Probably the single greatest reason why most scale modellers would never get into DCS. The range of available DCS compatible locomotives is simply too narrow.
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
I own 2 of these fantastic units.
I have run them both on NCE and Digitrax and have had no issues with either system, also have had no issue MUing them to one another or to anything else. They are superbly detailed with no major flaw that will keep me from running them.
I will give Athearn a try when they are released to see if their will be any major differences.
One thing is for sure, I love the fact that MTH has installed operating ditch lights on the rear of their CN SD70M-2s, like the prototype, unlike any other manufacturer of plastic models to date. Lets see if Athearn will be up to that challenge.
John
John I have to agree with you. I purchased the Western Pacific Heritage unit and have come to the same conclusion as you have. I have no operating problems in DCC and the detail is excellent. This is my first MTH purchase and like you will probably purchase the Athearn Genesis Southern Pacific version.
The only time you'll have problems with them is if you do an advance consist or if you try to mix them with another manufacturers loco's. You have to admit though, the SD70 looks out of place running alone.
Hamltnblue The only time you'll have problems with them is if you do an advance consist or if you try to mix them with another manufacturers loco's. You have to admit though, the SD70 looks out of place running alone.
Not completely true. Here is my CN loco running with my Tower 55 decodered with an NCE DASR. I didn't do any modifications at all, it was MUed with a Digitrax Zephyr system. It ran beautifully.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJbWwVarO6Q
ATLANTIC CENTRALI undrstand you like MTH products, that's fine. You listed your "collection" of MTH locos, a wide range of prototypes, areas and eras which obviously do not fit into any prototype or even protolance layout theme. You are obviously a collector/casual operator - and that is fine. I have always respected every approach to this hobby. However, those of us with more specfic modeling goals cannot be tied to one manufacturer or one unique control system and hope to meet our modeling goals of creating realistic, plausable and believable model railroads. This is why standardization and easy interchange of brands is important. MTH has only made two locos that would fit my theme, locale and era - both of which I already have from other manufacturers - I do not collect model trains that do not serve a theme based function on my layout. And his insistance up until now to only sell them with sound leaves me out as well. Additionaly, the detail on the MTH HO locos I have seen is less than satisfactory to me, especially for the price. Much of the detail is oversized and made in such a way as to make it more "handling friendly". That may be what some people want, I prefer finer more accurate models like Genesis, Intermountain, Spectrum and Proto2000. Face it, I have, you are in a different hobby from me, and MTH makes products for your hobby, not for mine. Others in my hobby need to understand that before they spend their hard earned money.
Hi Sheldon,
Obviously you're not aware of how I spend my days so I'll share a little of that and maybe you'll better understand my perspective and my posts. Do I like some of the MTH products? You bet. Do I own engines from a wide range of eras and prototypes? Yes. Does that mean my personal interests aren't focused on a single prototype? Not at all. I have a very different motive from "collecting" for purchasing such an unusual assortment of engines. Since 2002 I've made my living building model railroads. Today I have a crew of 10 full time modelers and builders working for me. My clientele includes people modeling in all scale and in a wide variety of styles.
The last project I completed was a table top N-scale layout based on a Woodland Scenics kit. Here's a few photos from that layout.
Right now I'm building a 3200 square foot O-scale layout called the NorthWest Trunk Lines. The NWTL is HIGHLY focused on scale fidelity in both operation and appearance. The first conceptual drawings for the NWTL were prepared by John Armstrong shortly before he passed away. I took over the duties of designing the actual track plan in late 2006. The design uses almost the exact footprint Armstrong conceived but features substantially more complex prototypical operations than his original sketches. The concept for the railroad is not that much different from your mythical Atlantic Central except for one twist. The NWTL has a freelanced track plan that fits a series of real life RR locations throughout the western US and Canada. My client's hope is that someone familiar with the real locations will be able to walk into the NWTL and say... "hay, that's Kicking Horse Pass on the CP!"
To make sure we get the details right I've made three road trips totaling more than 12,000 miles to take photographs and collect soil and rock samples. When we build the rock face of Eagle Nest Tunnel on the Milwaukee we won't have any trouble matching the colors and textures of the rock because we have a chunk on the shelf to duplicate. Here's a little treat for Milwaukee fans. You won't find a photo of Eagle Nest Tunnel in full sunlight in books because the rock face only sees full sunlight for about 90 minutes each morning during a six week window either side of the summer solstice. My girlfriend and I got up at 4am, drove 80 miles (the last ten on dirt roads), and then hiked 6 miles to get this shot. She's a real trooper!
Here's your truly.
This week I had one of my researchers tracking down photos of two particular freight cars from the CB&Q and the Frisco. We have the original Milwaukee waybills from when these cars were used to transport coal from a Wyoming mine to an Idaho school district in February 1955 and 1956 respectively. Both cars were routed through Lombard, MT where they interchanged from the NP to the Milwaukee. When we build Lombard we'll have the cars ready. And, of course, the terrain along the Missouri River will be covered with genuine Lombard dirt. We stopped there too.
Of course, the Milwaukee was electrified in the Rocky Mountain and the Coast divisions. When we build Milwaukee cantenary it's true to scale with the appropriate back angle on the poles, prototypical pole spacing, and other such details. This photo shows a section of our O-scale work for the NWTL that feature genuine St. Joe River river run ballast per the prototype.
The point is I'm VERY much involved with prototype modeling. I'm hardly a "casual operator." My services only have value to my clients when I know my stuff. When something new comes along it's a completely justifiable and worthwhile investment for me to spend my own money so I can test it and become familiar with it's capabilities. I spend several thousand dollars a year on models and other products have nothing to do with my own modeling interests, which focus on prototype operations across the Cascade Mountains (GN, NP, and Milwaukee) as well as their Puget Sound terminus. I make many purchases to further my knowledge of current products and make my time and experience valuable to my clients.
Such was the case when I purchased the MTH PRR K4 in 2006. I have no personal interest in the PRR for my own modeling. Likewise, when the Erie Triplex came out it had new features that the K4 lacked and merited testing ever though it's the only Erie piece I own. The GS-4 daylight actually does fit my personal interests because it has operated in excursion service across the Cascade mountains and along Puget Sound. My most recent SD70ACe (the UP heritage SP engine) operated with #4449 and UP #844 in the summer of 2007 in UP's Fife and Tacoma yards. Similarly, when I purchased DCC in 2006 I tested several brands to become familiar with their operations. I've kept my NCE PowerPro, but I also tested Digitrax, CVP and MRC systems. A lot of my clientele is in 3-rail and 2-rail O scale so I'm also quite familiar with MTH's DCS system as well as Lionel's TMCC and Legacy systems. In fact, I'm a volunteer beta tester for DCS software and I've done hardware testing for Lionel. I don't get paid by either MTH or Lionel. On the contrary, my testing services cost me money. However, being on top of new developments adds value for my clients.
As a result of my experience working across a broad range of this hobby I'm more incline to talk about what is possible and how to achieve it rather than what I wouldn't do. It's a "glass half full" instead of a "glass half empty" approach. When the topic of on-board sound comes up you do a consistently good job of explaining why you've chosen not to use it. That's great. It's a worthwhile perspective. On the other hand I'm much more likely to post about what is available and what it can do.
Take a look again at my first post. The original poster inquired about quality, reliability, and DCC operation. I shared my personal experience with my eight engines. I didn't shy away from the fact that two of them had to be repaired. But I also stated that they were repair under warranty and have been fine since. I offered accurate information regarding the MTH engine's DCC capabilities AND limitations (on function mapping, no programmable speed maps, no advanced consisting). I also gave some of the viable solutions to the limitations (upgrading my system to support 28 functions, future software updates for speed maps and advanced consisting, and using the MTH engines as the baseline for speed mapping).
The OP never actually asked about DC operation, but tstage in his post repeated a frequent misunderstanding about the MTH engines.
tstageFor DC, you need a full 24V to get MTH locos to run at full speed. (At least according to the reviews that I read in MR.)
For DC, you need a full 24V to get MTH locos to run at full speed. (At least according to the reviews that I read in MR.)
You made this comment in a slightly different context.
ATLANTIC CENTRALThat is a technical FACT that any prespective customer should be aware of.
I fully agree that modelers need as much information as possible so they can make an informed decision. I'm in the business of providing exactly that kind of information to my clients. But tstage's comment was quite misleading. You do NOT need 24 volts DC to run MTH engines at what most any modeler would consider acceptable speed. "Top speed," yes. "Acceptable speed," no. Wouldn't it be better for people to understand how the MTH engines actually work? The fact is that all the MTH engines run the same speed on the same voltage on DC regardless of prototype. Essentially, MTH uses the DC voltage as a command signal. It is quite correct that somebody running DC with a power supply that can only put 12 volts on the railhead will not be happy with the DC performance, and I said so. At 12 volts any MTH engine will be moving at 20 scale miles per hour. However, I went on to offer a solution that fits within NMRA RP's (again, I apologize for misstating it was a standard rather than an RP). A larger power supply that can hold 15.5 volts will have the MTH engine moving at 72 scale miles per hour. On most model railroads 72 smph is faster than people want or aught to operate. There are many DC transformers on the market from a variety of manufacturers that can accommodate the amperage and voltage needs of an MTH and any other sound equipped engine on the market and that met the NMRA RP's and standards.
Sheldon, you are quite correct that MTH engines will not run well on your particular system. At 13.5 volts the MTH engines will only be moving at 40 smph. I'm well aware of what PWM throttles are, how they work, and who offers them. In fact, my first paying job in RR construction was to replace an All-Trol PHM (pulse height modulation rather than pulse width modulation) system with command control. Unless you can offer some better evidence, I will stand by comment about your power supply and throttle system being unusual.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL the type of propulsion I use in not unique or unusual by any means. Pulse and pulse width modulation DC motor control is a 40 year old technology that has been in in wide spread use in model trains for at least 30 years now - have you ever heard of Troller power packs? from the 1980's? The magazines and internet have been littered with both commercial products and do it your self pulse width throttles for decades. The Aristo Craft Train Engineer wireless throttle has been on the market and in use by modelers in all scales for nearly two decades.
Many things have been around and available for a long time. That dose not make them big sellers and/or popular. If PWM throttles were still commercially viable today you would still see new and improved models coming on the market. Instead, Aristocraft is moving with the market away from remote controlled throttles to direct R/C control. Even though the Train Engineer system uses its own command codes the new products in the system, including the Revolution Train Engineer system, are now much more akin to wireless DCC, ala CVP's Air-wire, than a walk around throttle system.
Sheldon, I don't believe we are in different hobbies. Rather, I think we have very different perspectives on the same wonderful hobby. Happy railroading!
Thank you for the insite, I only have a few comments:
Even in their move to direct radio, The new Aristo Revolution still uses pulse width modulation as its motor control output, just as do DCC decoders. Their "onboard" recievers can be used trackside, they have plans to introduce a trackside version, and they intend to continue to manufacture and sell the 10 channel TE, and both the trackside and onboard recievers for it, as well as the new Revolution.
My view on "top speed" is simple, at full throttle I should be able to go a speed similar to the prototype's top speed. Not an unreasonable expectation. All my current locos do that at 13.5 volts. If I used a higher voltage supply and turned off the PWM, MTH locos would run fine on my throttles, and the 10 channel TE I use will handle 10 amps. BUT then all my other locos would run faster and I would loose control range on the throttle when operating them.
I don't see the glass half empty, I think there are lots of great things going on in this hobby. But, I am not a "go along with the croud", trendy, latest hot giszmo, kind of person. And with a strong technical background in electronics and sound, I have made my choice about command control and onboard sound - as you clearly understand - FOR ME. I don't have any customers to "please".
For me this is NOT a business - I restore 100 year old homes for a living. Model Railroading is my hobby and I will always keep it a hobby. AND, for me the hobby part is doing it myself - if I had to do it with a check book, I would find a new hobby.
And, if products like MTH are the future of the hobby, than I'm glad I have most of the locos I want.
There is one last aspect of this that I was unsure how to approach, after some relection, I will give it a shot, hoping no to offend too many.
You and I may be in the same hobby, but I suspect most of your customers are not. So I stand corrected, MTH makes trains for your customers, but again, not for me.
A person who buys a fully restored 57 Chevy is not in the same hobby as the guy who buys one in so so condition, takes it apart, and returns it to like new condition. EVEN, if that person only does some of the work and contracts out jobs beyond his skills or shop equipment.
I do feel the same about this hobby. I have no problem with ready to run anything, I buy a fair amount of it myself. Addmittedly however, most of it still gets some sort of personal touch from me - sometimes small, sometimes major. I have no problem with collectors, causal operators, or those who contract you to build a layout, but don't expect me to have much in common with them.
I do feel however that if all the products in this hobby become Marklin/MTH like in price and features, to the exclusion of "modeler" oriented products, the hobby will be diminished, and maybe already has. And your job will get harder, not easier.
I do have a problem with those who think I must/should imbrace THEIR view of this hobby and that I should want/like sound, DCC, CTC panels on computer screens, smoke, station announcements, and all the high priced hardware and products that go along with it. In the short time of 1-1/2 years on this forum a lot of people have told me how "backward", "scared", etc, etc, I am because I don't want DCC or sound. Few knew I use DCC on a number of layouts on a regular basis, just not on my own. My background in designing Hi Fi speakers makes onboard sound in HO simply unsatisfying.
But after 40 years in this hobby, I know what I like about it and how I have fun with it. My work, both scenic and electrical, includes some well known and published layouts.
So, when I react to your posts, it is largely about being vocal to the manufacturers that not everyone wants this "new wave" of, as I used the term, "HO Highrail". And about speaking out, since so many that do share my views will not do so publicly.
Your photos show very nice work, I'm sure your customers are very happy.
johngriffey18ca1 I wouldn't say MTH prices are astronomical. For example, I paid $209.00 each for all 9 of my MTH SD70ACe's. Now the MSRP is $249.95 however Athearn is releasing their SD70ACe's which will be of no better detail/sound/features for an MSRP of $289. Athearn is obviously more expensive. Or take into account my 2 MTH Steam engines. I paid $519.00 for my Challenger 3985 but it is die cast and is great sounding. I paid $389 for the SP Daylight 4449, but BLI wants about the same for their version of teh 4449. I love MTH, and it can run fine on DCC. You can't mess with CV's like on most other manufacturers but that's not my cup of tea anyway. I can raise and lower the volume and use different horns with one of the functions, so I'm a happy man with MTH.
You might be right on the "no better detail", but the pictures I have seen of the Athearn model is extremely better detailed if you look close and it is correct in many areas the present MTH model is not correct. The MTH do look nice overall but they took some short cuts with detail.
The price you got them for is excellent and they do run well from what I have read.
CZ
And speaking of the SD70Ace, this is the 1982 today in Loomis Ca.
Colfax, Ca
CAZEPHYRYou might be right on the "no better detail", but the pictures I have seen of the Athearn model is extremely better detailed if you look close and it is correct in many areas the present MTH model is not correct. The MTH do look nice overall but they took some short cuts with detail.
This seems to be typical for MTH and BLI/PCM. They seem to skimp on finer details OR make them over sized or molded on to make them more "rugged" and/or handling friendly. Or, is it they have spent the money on the sound and had to skimp somewhere?
Compare a diesel cab unit diaphragm on a BLI diesel to a Proto2000 diesel, even a Proto2000 diesel from 15 years ago has better detail than most BLI models - just one example.
I'll take my Proto2000 FA's over any BLI diesel, except maybe the PCM F3's, now long gone - does MTH have that tooling?
I'll take finely detailed fragile models over "handling friendly" less detailed, especially since finely detailed seems to cost less, or at least no more.
Still happy with all my Bachmann, Athearn Genesis, Intermountain and Proto2000 locos.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI'll take my Proto2000 FA's over any BLI diesel, except maybe the PCM F3's, now long gone - does MTH have that tooling?
It is my understanding that MTH received the tooling for the F3's also in the lawsuit against the Korea builder. MTH will probably do those when the market it good for F units again. One problem that I have with the PCM F units is the number boards. The insert plate sticks out from the number boards instead of being recessed. It is not any easy fix, but it can be improved. If you want some to paint up, I have several undecorated ones that I will not be using.
cndash9Hamltnblue The only time you'll have problems with them is if you do an advance consist or if you try to mix them with another manufacturers loco's. You have to admit though, the SD70 looks out of place running alone. Not completely true. Here is my CN loco running with my Tower 55 decodered with an NCE DASR. I didn't do any modifications at all, it was MUed with a Digitrax Zephyr system. It ran beautifully. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJbWwVarO6Q
Good To see you got a match. make sure they're close enough in speed when detached though or you'll chance burning one of them up.
Did you use the old style consist or just program them to the same address?
Hamltnblue cndash9 Hamltnblue The only time you'll have problems with them is if you do an advance consist or if you try to mix them with another manufacturers loco's. You have to admit though, the SD70 looks out of place running alone. Not completely true. Here is my CN loco running with my Tower 55 decodered with an NCE DASR. I didn't do any modifications at all, it was MUed with a Digitrax Zephyr system. It ran beautifully. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJbWwVarO6Q Good To see you got a match. make sure they're close enough in speed when detached though or you'll chance burning one of them up. Did you use the old style consist or just program them to the same address?
cndash9 Hamltnblue The only time you'll have problems with them is if you do an advance consist or if you try to mix them with another manufacturers loco's. You have to admit though, the SD70 looks out of place running alone. Not completely true. Here is my CN loco running with my Tower 55 decodered with an NCE DASR. I didn't do any modifications at all, it was MUed with a Digitrax Zephyr system. It ran beautifully. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJbWwVarO6Q
Just punched in the lead unit 8010 and then the rear unit 7789 and bingo. Nothing fancy.
I own a mixture of all common brands of locos and they all are adequate performers for the most part. The MTH products I own are superior to many other brands regarding quality control = fit, finish & function. Their priceing is very competitive for the performance and I have not had one problem with any of the 8 MTH engines I own. Most other brands I have, had problems of some sort or another, every so often. It is true that MTH has limited access to CV's in DCC mode but I have not found this to be a big issue. I just run MTH engines with other MTH engines and no problem is encountered. You can always adjust other brands CV's to match the MTH if needed. It just is not that big a deal in my case. For about $130.00 you can buy a DCS converter box to hook into your DCC system and switch it in or out as needed, to run full function MTH features. MTH is now offering some engines with an NMRA socket and no decoder or sound so you can install what ever decoder and sound you prefer. Are they worth the money? You betcha'. Are other brands competative with MTH? Yes, but you get what you pay for in most cases. Other manufacturers have many more product offerings and therefore more quality issues due to mass production but they all do a great job considering the amount of product they produce. Atlas, BLI, Athearn Genesis, Proto 2000 & Herratage steam (Walthers) are all good products. I run them all side by side with MTH using my Digitrax DCC system. The very best quality engines I run are the German, Trix brand that have the best quality drive system I have seen from anyone. The down side with Trix is product availability and US prototype offerings. They are also more expensive than most, but again, you get what you pay for. I enjoy all of the engines I own.
CZ is correct. MTH did get F3 tooling in their settlement with Korea Brass (aka Model Korea Trading Co.) over stolen drawings and production schedules for 3-rail O-gauge products.
For anyone who's interested, last month I got to take a tour of MTH's Maryland headquarters while attending the York, PA, train show. During the tour I spotted these test shots from the tooling on a shelf along side PA's and FA's.
Notice one of the B-units has a steam generator and one doesn't. Both of the A-units had MTH's remote operating couplers.
The first of MTH's F3's off the PCM tooling are due out in time for Christmas. They announced F3 R-T-R starter sets with track, transformer, two freight cars, and a caboose in their 2010 R-T-R sets and accessories catalog. They're offering DC versions of the sets at an MSRP of $140 and Protosound 3 DCC versions for $200. However, the sets catalog doesn't mention the set engines having the remote operating couplers. I suspect the engines in the photo are not quite will be in the sets. One neat item included in the sets is an ultra stripped down version of DCS that includes an IR remote control. It doesn't give access to all the engine's features, but it does give access to the 1 step = 1 smph speed control on any DC layout. The controller is also a separate sale item for $40.
Dave, thanks for the info.
I currently have Genesis, Intermountain, Proto2000 F units, and one ABBA set of stealth PCM F3's bought cheap on closeout. The PCM's are nicely detailed, and as I commented, one of the few diesel offerings from BLI/PCM up to my detail standards. After having "sampled" a lot of the F units out there, I have decided that any future F units on my layout will all be Intermountain or Genesis based on selection (especially of undecorated models since I freelance), running qualities, available non DCC/sound and detail.
I am a big Proto2000 fan but they have choosen to change their gear ratio and their undecorated F7's only come in the later "no skirt" body version.
I know this will sound picky, but another thing that will keep me from MTH is the DCS controlled couplers. I go to great lengths to couple all my equipment as close as possible for a realistic appearance on my 36" radius and larger curves. I have seen the MTH coupler with its grossly extended length/shank/coupling. No thank you. Again, why pay money for things I would remove/disable?
Again, like smoke and sound, since these features cannot be more realistic and cannot be universally applied to all the equipment on my layout, I feel the realism of my models and overall layout is higher without these features.
Trains don't just uncouple at the loco, so what benifit is that to my operational scheme?
So when Mike decides he wants to sell trains to the "other" half of the model train market, I might take a look.
And don't feel too bad about my dislike of MTH, I pick on Broadway Limited for their poor marketing choices as well.