BLI vs MTH K4s


J

Joe G

Member
Was intending to purchase an HO BLI PRR K4, which just hit the market recently, but noticed that MTH is advertising a K4 in their 2013 HO catalog. Would anyone care to comment on these two units or the general pros and cons of BLI vs MTH steamers. Thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
While the details will be inspiring, the operating system may be frustrating. The BLI models all comply with the NMRA recommended DCC standards while the MTH models I think are still made with the MTH proprietary DCS system which doesn't completely mesh with a DCC system. He expects you to dump your DCC system and go with his own idea of running trains.
 
Sorry to break it to ya Ken, but all MTH locos manufactured within the last year or so, have full decoder CV functionality now.

So don't let that be an issue when deciding on MTH.
 
Joe G said:
Was intending to purchase an HO BLI PRR K4, which just hit the market recently, but noticed that MTH is advertising a K4 in their 2013 HO catalog. Would anyone care to comment on these two units or the general pros and cons of BLI vs MTH steamers. Thanks
Click to expand...
I have not seen the new MTH K4, but if it is like their prior run, it is of the loco "as delivered" while the BLI version is the modernized version. If you are detail oriented and care about the exact time frame portrayed on your layout that might be enough to make your decision. Sorry I do not know the exact date when they were modernized.

And, that is of course if you really want to do business with MTH.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Motley said:
Sorry to break it to ya Ken, but all MTH locos manufactured within the last year or so, have full decoder CV functionality now.

So don't let that be an issue when deciding on MTH.
Click to expand...

Motley, I just got off the phone w/MTH service about an hour ago and they said their "new steamers will not have CV functionality". "However, they work well with DCC systems". Now to me that means they are keeping the "RAM" sytle decoder in the staem engines. Literaly, it was just an hour ago because I want to send in my HO big boy for repair but wanted to wait if they could be updated with CV's. Again Motley, no disrespect, its only what I was just told.
 
Yeah, I was curious about that as well, and went to the website. All they say is that they have 28 DCC functions, including the ever present, Cab talk, clickety-clack, and of course the popular train wreck.

Still the thinking of mth that most HO gaugers are like their 3-rail counterparts, the more play value the better.
 
All digitally commanded locomotives will have configuration variables that are manipulable. It matters not if they are DCS or DCC. What does, or perhaps should matter, is that not all DCS CV's can be manipulated using an NMRA compliant DCC system. Yes, your throttle's function buttons will work on MTH decoders for the appropriate sounds and other functions, but that is the extent of the concessions offered after nearly 7 years in the HO market by MTH.
 
Sorry I did put my foot my mouth. I forgot the Steamers will not have the new CV functionality, but only their diesels.... SD70Aces.
 
Iron Horseman said:
I have not seen the new MTH K4, but if it is like their prior run, it is of the loco "as delivered" while the BLI version is the modernized version. If you are detail oriented and care about the exact time frame portrayed on your layout that might be enough to make your decision. Sorry I do not know the exact date when they were modernized.

And, that is of course if you really want to do business with MTH.
Click to expand...

Thanks for everyones input. I was looking for the "Post War" version which BLI offers in the 5000 number series. That would fit in with my thoughts of modeling the PRR in the pre PC, pre Amtrak, pre NJT days. Of course the K4 would be a strretch, but whose to say that in my world they didn't make it into the 60s. Also seems to be a big price difference with the BLI K4 selling on line for $349 to $370 and MTH going for around $499.

Joe
 
I think the rational for keeping the steamers in the standard DCS configuration, i.e. no MU capability is because the prototypes couldn't be MUd. They required a live person at the throttle in every cab whereas diesels could all be run from one throttle.
 
D&J RailRoad said:
I think the rational for keeping the steamers in the standard DCS configuration, i.e. no MU capability is because the prototypes couldn't be MUd. They required a live person at the throttle in every cab whereas diesels could all be run from one throttle.
Click to expand...

very good point, the only missing thing is using them in pusher service , thats the only reason i could see using mu ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top