soooo, what was this big announcement MTH was going to make...

[Anonymous]

Fair enough, Antonio. Although I don't totally agree, you make some good points.

[3railguy]

I'm an 3 railer as well as an N scaler with two layouts and collect HO to operate on a club layout and frequent both worlds. The way I perceive it is MTH is entering the HO market with what they learned in O gauge and things can get bumpy for them. There is a lot of differences between O gaugers and HO modelers.

MTH could have made a better choice than a K-4 for an introductory model because it's limited to Pennsy. O gauge operators are concentrated in the Northeast and the ratio of Pennsy fans in the O gauge market seems high. Pennsy is a big seller in 3 rail. I see Pennsy fan screen names all over the O gauge forums and Pennsy engines are very popular in O gauge. In HO and N scale, I do not see anywhere near this high of ratio for Northeast Road fans. I see an even ratio of roads spread all over the country with the more colorful roads being most popular. Pennsy was not what I would call colorful either. MTH should of picked a USRA design such as a mikado and offered numerous roads. Many 3 rail O gaugers are not road name specific and mix roads with whatever appeals to them. I do not see this in HO and N scale. HO and N scalers tend to model specific roads. So an HO K-4 is limited to HO Pennsy fans which may be a small percentage of the market.

3 rail O gaugers tend to be brand loyal. They base their layouts on their favorite brand which often has proprietary technology such as TMCC or DCS. There are no real standards in 3 rail O gauge. What little the NMRA has written is often ignored by O gaugers and manufacturers. In HO, standards are gospel. Sending out letters with threats to litigate to manufactures does not fare well with HO modelers because it conflicts with NMRA standards.

[AntonioFP45]

DCS has its good points. Sounds good in the O scale units I've seen. As for it being far superior? It's just like comparing automobiles, DCS and DCC both have advantages and disadvantages.

IMHO, the two biggest "downsides" to DCS is that:

(1) The N Scale market, which is serviced by DCC is not being targeted at all by DCS. This market is growing even faster than HO. A missed opportunity here.

(2) DCS is "Proprietery" while DCC is basically an "open platform". Personally I think it's neat that a modeler can have a Digitrax or NCE system and not give it a 2nd thought to run locomotives equipped with Lenz, TCS, and Soundtraxx decoders

Competition is increasing with Digitrax now throwing it's hat in the ring with sound systems and LOK Sound making "American" sound decoders. It's win-win!

MTH coming onboard can be viewed as one more competitor stepping into the ring which is good for business. But realistically the competition is going to be very challenging for MTH.

This isn't putting DCS down, it's just a plain fact. In the end HO and N scale modelers will speak very loudly and effectively............not on this forum............but with their wallets.

Peace out.

[AggroJones]

mthrules

Honestly, do you work for MTH?

[Anonymous]

All of the lawuits by MTH have been justified, especially the one against Lionel. When you steal blueprints and company secrets, justice must be served and you must pay the price. The MTH lawyers are not stupid and they're not ambulance chasers. The model train community does not have the true facts, just gossip and malicious lies.

[railroadyoshi]

uhhh

Atlas didnt go off sueing people when they entered the new market, did they?

[Anonymous]

DCS is a far superior system to DCC but it will take time to educate people of the benefits. There's nothing wrong with an O gauge company like MTH getting into HO. The more competition, the better. When Atlas decided to enter the O gauge market, they were welcomed with open arms. As of today, they're doing quite well with their O line because the O gaugers were open minded and happy to see the quality they offered. Just give MTH a chance and you'll see the same results.

[jnichols]

I find these posts about DCS interesting. I currently have a 16' x 35' 3-rail layout on a shelf around a game room and I run both DCS and TMCC simultaneously. I have one set, that's right, one set of feeders for the entire double mainline circuit (this also includes passing sidings and spurs). At no point on the layout is there ever a spot where the DCS signal level drops below an 8 (out of 10), and the TMCC locomotives work just fine as well. I installed both systems inside of 10 minutes and have been running trains for several years now without changes or problems of any sort!

On the flip side of this, both my HO/On30 and N scale DCC layouts are considerably smaller and have required a substancially larger time investment to install and maintain.... [;)]

[simon1966]

I'll save Rivet Counter the bother of posting[}:)][banghead]

"In my opinion, MTH had the best display of the show. All of the people I saw there were impressed by the K4 and DCS. Looks like MTH has their competitors on the ropes."

Blah Blah Blah...................silence..................


http://www.trains.com/Content/Dynamic/Articles/000/000/005/906enrww.asp

Read this link. This is for a 19' x 19' O scale layout. If you thought DCC was complex read this!

[dinwitty]

at the Cincinnati show?






waiting....