DCC Question: Is DCC worth the price??

[Driline]

Tom and Chip,Not really..Most ADVANCED 4 x 8 foot layout designs was meant for one train operation at best with  6 or 7 car train length any more then that you end up with the old "engine chasing the caboose" syndrome..Even with small rtw layouts its best to stick with single train and  small train lengths as this adds distance to  small rtw layouts..This is especially true for rtw industrial switching layouts.Advanced layout designers has known for years less is best for small layouts.I have agreed with that philosophy long before DCC.

Personally I find this a very limited view, especially in light of the fact that I just mentioned that the joy of DDC on my layout was the fact that my son and I could run together.

On my 4 x 8 I have a 3-track yard, two towns and 3 staging tracks which easily held 6 trains. It was quite simple to have one train running mainline switching and dropping cars for the yard switcher who then switched local industries. It was a de facto interchange operation. I also had full engine service. Add passenger service and mine ops and there is quite enough to keep two operators busy for a couple hours. My trains never chased tails as you put it. It was simply impossible.  

   

Chip, I am going to Diss your layout. Why does it look pink? Are you shooting through rose colored glasses?

[Driline]

Indeed..The Zephyr is probably the best starter system on the market.

Here is the facts.

http://www.digitrax.com/prd_zep_basic_set.php

 

I didn't buy the zephyr because it doesn't hava a walk around throttle. You are stuck in one spot running trains. Its probably OK for a 4X8, but anything bigger.....forget about it. It is a cool looking transformer though.

[Driline]

I have close to 40 engines. All have been detailed, many are re-powered with expensive can motors and some I have custom painted. How much would it cost to convert over  

I am not talking about a starter set that would be obsolete the day after it is installed or cheap low-end decoders.

I think for the time being I will stick with DC. I run one train continuously on one cab and switch with the other. Having a double track mainline helps.

Perhaps I will switch over in 5 years but I would like to see what type of new technology, if any, comes out in the meantime.

Jim

A decent NON sound decoder from NCE runs about 20 bucks. You'll need $800 dollars + $140 for a DCC system. Most of my older locomotives are crap compared to the new ones. So' I"ve been buying new loco's latley that run fantastic. Sounds like you put a lot of time,can motors, and paint into some of your loco's. I would definatley add a decoder in those, but others you can simply abandon or resell, like I did.

I will help you start a fund raising campaign if you find thats necessary. 

[BRAKIE]

Indeed..The Zephyr is probably the best starter system on the market.

Here is the facts.

http://www.digitrax.com/prd_zep_basic_set.php

 

[SpaceMouse]

Chip,My comments has nothing to do with your layout..Those are the well known general comments of some of the great layout thinkers that has grace the pages of MR,GMR and MRP over the years..The layout Design Sig I am a member of also discuss those theories and principles of modern layout designs based on solid LDEs and prototypical operation disciplines.

Thanks, I'm glad you weren't getting personal.

I am a member of the Layout SIG and the OPs SIG--although I admit that I can't keep up with all the posts and have given up on the OPs completely.

Still, you talk about ops like there are rules. Frankly, I'd like to know what those rules are. The best I can come up with is the preachings of Tony Koester, yet when you compare it with other "operators," Chubb, Fugate, Hartle, etc.,  there are enough differences to create a lively discussion. I'd like to know what you feel are the SOPs (standard operating proceedures) even in general terms.  

Chip,First and above all never take what I say personal as it never meant to be but,I know at times it may appear that way.

As far as operations there are many from very basic to highly complex with fast clocks,train schedules and employee time tables.The secrete is to find a happy medium that fits YOU and your  layout needs.

Would you rather I do a topic on this?

I already started one. I didn't want to hijack this thread any more than I already had.

http://www.trains.com/trccs/forums/1046740/ShowPost.aspx

 

[simon1966]

Soo Line Fan,

 If you have that big a fleet, you need to consider how many of those locos sit in a box or on a shelf and won't ever be run.  Such considerations could greatly decrease the number of decoders you'll need.  Also, not all locos need to be done at once, do a few now and more later.

 Your comments about not wanting a starter system are right on the mark.  Contrary to what others have stated, the Digitrax Zypher system is Digitrax's starter system.  Lower amp output than they're other systems, no upgrade capability without purchase and entirely new system and starting over.

The best advice I give people looking at DCC systems is to go to the manufacturer's website, download the manual for their various systems and read them thoroughly.  Can you understand what is written?  How to set-up the system?  How to program a loco through their throttle?  Are all the functions of the system adequately explained?  Don't rely on the fact that your LHS sells it so you can call them for help.  Chances are they don't know anymore than you do, then what?  Calling the manufacturer - on a weekend?  Good luck!  But, if you can read and understand the manual, even without having the system in front of you, chances are you won't need to make those phone calls.

 jktrains

jktrains, your comment about the Zephyr "no upgrade without purchase and entirely new system and starting over" is completely off the mark.  You can add boosters, wireless, extra throttles, PC interface, block detection and signalling.  In fact you can add any of the many Digitrax add on modules to the Zephyr and keep it as the main command station without losing any of its capability.

Those of us that are talking about its ease of upgrade and expandability are talking from experience.  The Zephyr is a superb example of Digitrax market leading forethought that is now being responded to by other manufacturers.

[rrinker]

 Yeah way off base. This is part of the beauty of the Digitrax design, there are absolutely NO wasted bits as you upgrade. There are exactly 2 devices in Digitrax history that can't be readily used with a modern sysem, those being the LA-1 Loconet adapter that came with the ancient Big Boy system and the CT4 throttles from the original Challenger system. And even those can actually be adapted - primary use is to make operating the Roco crane super simple. Everythign else ever made is reusable in a modern system - which is why it's hard to get even old DB100 boosters cheap, they aren't surplus or inferior in any way.

 There are many ways to expand the Zephyr. If you just need more pwoer, add a booster. Move to a new house and finally started that 20 operatros monster basement dream layout? Add a DCS100 and get 120 trains/120 throttles. The Zephyr is still completely usable as a 2.5 amp booster AND the console throttle still can be used AND the jump port throttles can still be used. NO waste, no spare parts.

 

                                 --Randy
 

[BRAKIE]

Chip,My comments has nothing to do with your layout..Those are the well known general comments of some of the great layout thinkers that has grace the pages of MR,GMR and MRP over the years..The layout Design Sig I am a member of also discuss those theories and principles of modern layout designs based on solid LDEs and prototypical operation disciplines.

Thanks, I'm glad you weren't getting personal.

I am a member of the Layout SIG and the OPs SIG--although I admit that I can't keep up with all the posts and have given up on the OPs completely.

Still, you talk about ops like there are rules. Frankly, I'd like to know what those rules are. The best I can come up with is the preachings of Tony Koester, yet when you compare it with other "operators," Chubb, Fugate, Hartle, etc.,  there are enough differences to create a lively discussion. I'd like to know what you feel are the SOPs (standard operating proceedures) even in general terms.  

Chip,First and above all never take what I say personal as it never meant to be but,I know at times it may appear that way.

As far as operations there are many from very basic to highly complex with fast clocks,train schedules and employee time tables.The secrete is to find a happy medium that fits YOU and your  layout needs.

Would you rather I do a topic on this?

[SpaceMouse]

  Your comments about not wanting a starter system are right on the mark.  Contrary to what others have stated, the Digitrax Zypher system is Digitrax's starter system.  Lower amp output than they're other systems, no upgrade capability without purchase and entirely new system and starting over.

I'm sorry, but this information is not accurate. The Zephyr can be upgraded to quite a ways. I believe with additional power packs, etc., it can run up to 120 locos. That's more than I need.

[TwinZephyr]

The estimated $20 cost and half hour installation time makes sense for locomotives which are designed to accept a DCC decoder.

But what about older locomotives... like the ones with high-current motors, motors grounded to the frame, or no physical space available for adding a decoder?

[jktrains]

Soo Line Fan,

 If you have that big a fleet, you need to consider how many of those locos sit in a box or on a shelf and won't ever be run.  Such considerations could greatly decrease the number of decoders you'll need.  Also, not all locos need to be done at once, do a few now and more later.

 Your comments about not wanting a starter system are right on the mark.  Contrary to what others have stated, the Digitrax Zypher system is Digitrax's starter system.  Lower amp output than they're other systems, no upgrade capability without purchase and entirely new system and starting over.

The best advice I give people looking at DCC systems is to go to the manufacturer's website, download the manual for their various systems and read them thoroughly.  Can you understand what is written?  How to set-up the system?  How to program a loco through their throttle?  Are all the functions of the system adequately explained?  Don't rely on the fact that your LHS sells it so you can call them for help.  Chances are they don't know anymore than you do, then what?  Calling the manufacturer - on a weekend?  Good luck!  But, if you can read and understand the manual, even wothout having the system in front of you, chances are you won't need to make those phone calls.

 jktrains

[Texas Zepher]

Although I never tried DCC, I am planning on sticking with DC.  The reason?  I have a small layout.  I am perfectly happy with DC.

Yup, if one has already gone through all the contortions of putting in a cab system that greatly reduces one of the advantages of going with DCC "from the start".   

[SpaceMouse]

Chip,My comments has nothing to do with your layout..Those are the well known general comments of some of the great layout thinkers that has grace the pages of MR,GMR and MRP over the years..The layout Design Sig I am a member of also discuss those theories and principles of modern layout designs based on solid LDEs and prototypical operation disciplines.

Thanks, I'm glad you weren't getting personal.

I am a member of the Layout SIG and the OPs SIG--although I admit that I can't keep up with all the posts and have given up on the OPs completely.

Still, you talk about ops like there are rules. Frankly, I'd like to know what those rules are. The best I can come up with is the preachings of Tony Koester, yet when you compare it with other "operators," Chubb, Fugate, Hartle, etc.,  there are enough differences to create a lively discussion. I'd like to know what you feel are the SOPs (standard operating proceedures) even in general terms.  

[BRAKIE]

Chip,My comments has nothing to do with your layout..Those are the well known general comments of some of the great layout thinkers that has grace the pages of MR,GMR and MRP over the years..The layout Design Sig I am a member of also discuss those theories and principles of modern layout designs based on solid LDEs and prototypical operation disciplines.

[twhite]

twhite,
Not for nothing, but you can't be "hopelessly electronically stupid" if you have posted on an internet web forum over 2400 times over the course of 2 and a half years...and you have a website with over 200 photos on it.

Those people in my club who truly are "hopelessly electronically stupid" refuse to own a computer, and wouldn't know how to plug one in, let alone be able to post messages online or have a website (even the most basic).

If you can operate a computer enough to register and post here, DCC is nothing compared to that.

Paul A. Cutler III
************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
************

 

Paul--

Thank you for those kind words, LOL!  But believe me, when it comes to computers, it's just dumb luck, and my son set up my website for me (the reason I haven't posted any new pictures on it is because this is a new computer with a different photo-shop set up that I just cannot figure out to save my life!).  And when MR changed their forum style last year, I was just totally LOST, and had to leave until I could GET a new computer with all the appropriate bells and whistles just to get back on.  Which kind of ticked me off, because I could have used the money for a really COOL used brass Rio Grande L-131.  Oh, well--

I've seen quite a few DCC layouts that really impress me, but everytime I look at my bulging brass case (and I RUN them, not 'collect' them) and think of the National Debt that conversion would cost at my age (and relatively fixed income), all I can do is shake my head and think, "Well, if I were 20 years younger--MAYBE--"

But thanks again for the kind words.  I really appreciate it.

Tom  

 

[Paul3]

twhite,
Not for nothing, but you can't be "hopelessly electronically stupid" if you have posted on an internet web forum over 2400 times over the course of 2 and a half years...and you have a website with over 200 photos on it.

Those people in my club who truly are "hopelessly electronically stupid" refuse to own a computer, and wouldn't know how to plug one in, let alone be able to post messages online or have a website (even the most basic).

If you can operate a computer enough to register and post here, DCC is nothing compared to that.

Paul A. Cutler III
************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
************

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

But at my age, and my very basic electronic skills, ..., PLUS terms I'd not only have to memorize but try and pronounce to begin with,..., I just cannot even BEGIN to comprehend punching in a whole bunch of numerical codes for a locomotive, instead of just turning up the throttle on my Control 20, LOL! 

There are some of us old farts out here who are simply and hopelessly electronically stupid, and I'm right at the head of the pack, I'm afraid. 

Tom, I think you might be falling into one of the fallacies of DCC here (only in this part of your argument, cost to convert an existing locos in a real consideration).  DCC really take less understanding of electronics, and you can operate without punching in a whole bunch of codes.  Lots of people use big words, and make DCC sound hard.  And it is true that you CAN do a lot more with DCC that does take some learning.  But you don't generally have to.

Like I said, in your case sticking to DC could well be the right choice, but for almost any beginner DCC is really the way to go.  I just want to try to make clear that DCC does not require an EE degree to use.

[SpaceMouse]

Tom,Chip,I suppose it would really boils down to one's perception of advanced layout design following solid LDEs and prototypical operation principles and theories we have learned over the years.One cold hard fact is small "spaghetti bowl" layouts has fell from grace of advanced layout designers and multiple train operation on small layouts is also  fallen theory.

You're being a little vague here Larry. What specifically are you referring to?

I suppose you can justify that my layout design is a "spaghetti bowl" because the track goes through the scene more than once. However, I feel equally justified in saying that every piece of track has a purpose and I chose to run track to make the climb back and forth. If you look again at the design, you will see that by adding thick vegetation in the grey areas between the loops, what you are left with is one loop visible, which is about all you can expect from a table layout.

On the other hand, with the hidden staging--the three tracks on the right, (which cannot be seen from the operating area when the backdrop is in place,) I can bring trains in from both the East and West. These trains can drop cars to be switched locally, pick-up cars to be switched at the other town or back to staging. Just how does that fall short of prototypical operations any more than it would on any other layout concept? And why is forbidden to have more than one operator on a 4 x 8 when it was designed to be able to handle it.

Just because something does not fit a person's conception of what possible, doesn't mean that someone hasn't done it.      

[twhite]

I've been reading the pros and cons of DC vs. DCC, then I went out and looked at my garage empire and wondered "What would it be like to be able to run four or five trains at once on this puppy, instead of just two?"  

The answer for me was:  Absolute Disaster!

I'm not putting DCC down--don't even THINK I am, you'd be dead wrong!  But at my age, and my very basic electronic skills, PLUS the 45 or 50 brass locos I'd have to convert, PLUS terms I'd not only have to memorize but try and pronounce to begin with, I just don't see the advantage for either myself or the Yuba River Sub.  But this is MY opinion on MY skills and MY layout and not a judgement on the choice of DCC for anyone else. 

I think if I were 47 instead of 67, I might have a whole difference of opinion about this, but quite frankly, fellas, I just cannot even BEGIN to comprehend punching in a whole bunch of numerical codes for a locomotive, instead of just turning up the throttle on my Control 20, LOL! 

There are some of us old farts out here who are simply and hopelessly electronically stupid, and I'm right at the head of the pack, I'm afraid.  Heck, I can't even operate a cell phone or an IPOD!  How on earth could I begin to run four or five trains on a hand-held whatzits?

Tom

[BRAKIE]

Tom,Chip,I suppose it would really boils down to one's perception of advanced layout design following solid LDEs and prototypical operation principles and theories we have learned over the years.One cold hard fact is small "spaghetti bowl" layouts has fell from grace of advanced layout designers and multiple train operation on small layouts is also  fallen theory.

A excellent example of a small rtw short single train operation is found in April's issue of MR "Ohio Southern In  A Bedroom." by Jim Hediger.These single train layouts is what I have in mind.

Certainly DCC is not needed for such operations nor does the layout call for block overkill.

 I think there is a difference in "passion for DCC" put forth by many including magazines versus the real need..

Certainly it is a choice one must make for his/herself regarding the FULL costs including decoders,extra throttles,boosters(if needed) and other costs versus the real need..

 

[SpaceMouse]

Chip and Simon,

Thanks for the replies.

Well, start up at $300-400 is not too bad and the rest can be done a little at a time I guess. Has the price been dropping, like most electronics?

How well does a DC engine run on the DCC address for non-decoder equipped engines? Is it hard on the motor? I would assume this would not allow any DCC equipped engines to run during this time, since the DCC voltage is being varied to the rail. Or am I mistaken?

My main complaint is the engine terminal. I have a medium sized (15 engine capacity) terminal and getting the engines out that are blocked in by others can be a pain. Sometimes I like to switch the terminal as well.

Jim

The main thing you want to know about running a DC engine on DCC is that you don't want it to remain sitting for a long period of time as it might overheat. If you plan to set it on the layout, use your blocks to shut down that part of the track. As for perfomance. I've not seen much of a issue, although there is a slight audible buzz whn idle.

DCC engines do just fine when a DC engine is running.

[Soo Line fan]

Chip and Simon,

Thanks for the replies.

Well, start up at $300-400 is not too bad and the rest can be done a little at a time I guess. Has the price been dropping, like most electronics?

How well does a DC engine run on the DCC address for non-decoder equipped engines? Is it hard on the motor? I would assume this would not allow any DCC equipped engines to run during this time, since the DCC voltage is being varied to the rail. Or am I mistaken?

My main complaint is the engine terminal. I have a medium sized (15 engine capacity) terminal and getting the engines out that are blocked in by others can be a pain. Sometimes I like to switch the terminal as well.

Jim

[tstage]

Tom and Chip,Not really..Most ADVANCED 4 x 8 foot layout designs was meant for one train operation at best with  6 or 7 car train length any more then that you end up with the old "engine chasing the caboose" syndrome..Even with small rtw layouts its best to stick with single train and  small train lengths as this adds distance to  small rtw layouts..This is especially true for rtw industrial switching layouts.Advanced layout designers has known for years less is best for small layouts.I have agreed with that philosophy long before DCC.

Larry,

I guess I would partially agree with the statement that "less is best for small layouts".  While I whole-heartedly agree and hold to the philosophy that "less is more", I look at that and your particular statement more from the standpoint of making a small layout simpler to operate and less cluttered "looking".  That doesn't mean that I can't have one small train operating the mainline while I have another industrial switcher is switching out a couple of cars on a siding somewhere.  DCC makes this simpler and easier from my perspective.

As I stated before, if you only have plans for running one train at a time on your layout, DC or DCC come out to be pretty much even.  However, add another locomotive or throttle to the mix, to me, DCC comes out ahead.

Larry, I have no qualms about DC or those who decide to stick with it.  However, on occasion, while one locomotive is circling the main, I enjoy moving one of my steamers onto the servicing track and replenishing it's tender with coal and water so that it's ready for it's next run.  DCC makes that much easier for me.

Tom 

[simon1966]

I have close to 40 engines. All have been detailed, many are re-powered with expensive can motors and some I have custom painted. How much would it cost to convert over  

I am not talking about a starter set that would be obsolete the day after it is installed or cheap low-end decoders.

I think for the time being I will stick with DC. I run one train continuously on one cab and switch with the other. Having a double track mainline helps.

Perhaps I will switch over in 5 years but I would like to see what type of new technology, if any, comes out in the meantime.

Jim

Jim, IMO you are the classic example for whom the switch to DCC is far from a trivial decision.  You are probably looking at spending an additional $20 per loco to convert them.  Having said that, you can get some excellent "fleet" decoders from companies like NCE that can be purchased for a lot less and still provide excellent performance.  Bottom line you are looking at spending north of $550 on decoders alone.  Of course you don't have to do it all at once, just as I am sure you did not paint and detail and re-motor all the locos at once.  I suspect that you spent more per loco on motors, details and paint than the cost of a decoder for each loco.  You were willing to spend the time and money to get the visible details right, there are some that would argue why not do the same for the operational detail?

Not all starter DCC systems are obsolete the day they are installed.  Digitrax, NCE and with much promise and fanfare MRC, offer starter sets that can be expanded and grow and don't become obsolete.  I do agree with your thinking that there is likely to be changes in technology over the next few years.  If I were in your shoes I would be very tempted to take a wait-and-see approach. 

[SpaceMouse]

I have close to 40 engines. All have been detailed, many are re-powered with expensive can motors and some I have custom painted. How much would it cost to convert over  

I am not talking about a starter set that would be obsolete the day after it is installed or cheap low-end decoders.

Digitrax Zephyr $150

40 full-function decoders bought in bulk $400-500

Average half hour per engine install time.

And the fact of the matter is you probably only run 10-12 on a regular basis and most DCC systems will run a DC loco on 00--so your occasional-runners are handled.

So you could probably get away under $300 realistically.

[Adelie]

Looks like the manufacturers wants to open up their sales to the  DC market..

So the DCC future doesn't look so bright from their eyes..

Not to be the north end of a southbound horse, but that is a giant leap in logic.  What the manufacturers want to do is offer their products to the widest range of customers as possible so long as the cost of doing so is not prohibitive.  In other words, why limit potential sales unnecessarily, particularly when the overall market is not huge to start with.  That is what is going on.  

Back to the original question, nobody on this forum can really answer that.  Everybody has to weigh the pluses and minuses and assess the cost to come up with their own decision.  I tried DCC 4 or 5 years ago, and now wouldn't go back.  For what I want to do, it is simpler and provides me more flexibility in things like signaling and potential operating schemes later on.  But those things are not everyone's cup of tea or mug of beer.

Like many things in this hobby and the world in general, there is no one size fits all answer or even definite lines that can answer the question. 

 

[Soo Line fan]

I have close to 40 engines. All have been detailed, many are re-powered with expensive can motors and some I have custom painted. How much would it cost to convert over  

I am not talking about a starter set that would be obsolete the day after it is installed or cheap low-end decoders.

I think for the time being I will stick with DC. I run one train continuously on one cab and switch with the other. Having a double track mainline helps.

Perhaps I will switch over in 5 years but I would like to see what type of new technology, if any, comes out in the meantime.

Jim

[SpaceMouse]

Tom and Chip,Not really..Most ADVANCED 4 x 8 foot layout designs was meant for one train operation at best with  6 or 7 car train length any more then that you end up with the old "engine chasing the caboose" syndrome..Even with small rtw layouts its best to stick with single train and  small train lengths as this adds distance to  small rtw layouts..This is especially true for rtw industrial switching layouts.Advanced layout designers has known for years less is best for small layouts.I have agreed with that philosophy long before DCC.

Personally I find this a very limited view, especially in light of the fact that I just mentioned that the joy of DDC on my layout was the fact that my son and I could run together.

On my 4 x 8 I have a 3-track yard, two towns and 3 staging tracks which easily held 6 trains. It was quite simple to have one train running mainline switching and dropping cars for the yard switcher who then switched local industries. It was a de facto interchange operation. I also had full engine service. Add passenger service and mine ops and there is quite enough to keep two operators busy for a couple hours. My trains never chased tails as you put it. It was simply impossible.  

   

[BRAKIE]

I always tell people that if you plan on running 2 loco's or more at the same time then get DCC.  Chip summed it up perfectly, "Why drive a Yugo when a Beemer is sitting at your doorstep with the door open and the keys in the ignition."  DC is old school, DCC is the present and future of model railroading. 

 Yup it sure is.I will repost this.

In DC you can:

You can even us DCC sound and lights with Atlas or BLIs Quantum Engineer Controller..

http://www.firsthobby.com/store1/Product.asp?ProductID=ATL325&SN=2007022122492293

 

Then BLI will be producing DC Sound equipped locomotives.

http://www.broadway-limited.com/

Soooo.Operate in silence no more with DC..

 

Looks like the manufacturers wants to open up their sales to the  DC market..

So the DCC future doesn't look so bright from their eyes..

[BRAKIE]

Tom and Chip,Not really..Most ADVANCED 4 x 8 foot layout designs was meant for one train operation at best with  6 or 7 car train length any more then that you end up with the old "engine chasing the caboose" syndrome..Even with small rtw layouts its best to stick with single train and  small train lengths as this adds distance to  small rtw layouts..This is especially true for rtw industrial switching layouts.Advanced layout designers has known for years less is best for small layouts.I have agreed with that philosophy long before DCC.