Preferred DCC Systems

[RexHea]

I chose Digitrax because that was what the majority of the modelers use here. Although I do have experience with other systems, I personally believe that its the best for me. Also choosing a system that most modelers in the area uses, provides you with help that can be much better than any manual or tech support could be.
..........

I originally chose Digitrax Command for the same reasons and have been very satisfied that I did. I have since expanded to other Digitrax products including: signal drivers, detection, power district protection, stationary decoders. All have been very reliable and work well with my Railroad&Company computer software.

Complicated? I would think that is relative to the User and their needs. However, the manual has to be the worst written of all the MR manuals/instructions....and that means terrible !

 

[Larry Launstein Jr]

Definitely Digitrax. I has taken me awhile to get the hang of using my Zephyr, but I'm much more comfortable now - thanks to Loy Spurlock's fine book "Mastering The Digitrax Zephyr." I also have a UT-4 wired up to the back of the Zephyr, and even though it's non-programmable, for what I'm doing at home, it works fine. Their motion decoders have never given me a problem, but for some reason, I have problems with the SFX004. And I think I finally got an answer to that problem on another model railroad forum - it could be experiencing power drop off when I use one of the other effects when running, due to a certain type of capacitator they use with that sound bug.

As far as sound goes, I have not tried a Soundtraxx Tsunami (price quite high), but I do have a Quantam (QSI) in one of my other engines (Intermountain), and am very impressed with the sound quality.

 

[thaddeusthudpucker]

We have NCE on the club layout and are in the process of planning a layout. We will probably use NCE on that as well, we like it and its easy. To me, Digitrax throttles look like something NASA came up with (I agree with the Skylab comment) and NCE are a bit easier to understand. I do a lot of consisting of my engines (some of the guys just program their locomotives to all the same address, but I think thats a cop out) and I usually dont have any problems with it.

 

[Larry Launstein Jr]

Most of the model railroaders I know have Digitrax, and even though it took some time for me to get the hang of my Zephyr, I now really enjoy it.

But you know would really be nice? The ability to mix and mingle components (run a NCE throttle on a Digitrax-type layout or use other components on a layout). It would be nice to have a set series of standards so each manufacturer can build equipment that will work on any layout. They already do this with locomotives and rolling stock and track, why not do it with the electronic components necessary to run a train.

Now, that'd really would be something.

 

[diburning]

The communication language is different between the NCE and Digitrax systems. NCE uses their own, and Digitrax uses Loconet. Since Lenz also uses loconet, some components such as boosters can be used on both systems (you can use a Lenz booster on a Digitrax system and vice versa)

The digitrax throttle has all those buttons because they don't seem to like menus as much as the NCE people.

 

[Larry Launstein Jr]

The communication language is different between the NCE and Digitrax systems. NCE uses their own, and Digitrax uses Loconet. Since Lenz also uses loconet, some components such as boosters can be used on both systems (you can use a Lenz booster on a Digitrax system and vice versa)

The digitrax throttle has all those buttons because they don't seem to like menus as much as the NCE people.

That's nice to know. But I do think it would be nice to have one set of standards, or at least make them all cross compatible, so everyone could benefit.

 

[diburning]

That's like trying to tell Apple to start making windows based computers.

Although you can interchange boosters between Lenz and Digitrax, you can't interchange throttles. This is because the communications language is the same, but each manufacturer decides what to do with that language and program the features separately.

 

[malletman]

The biggest issue and I have heard it from many others is that the Digitrax system seems to be designed by techno geeks for techno geeks, the rest of us just struggle to understand it. Where as I notice my new NCE system is gear more toward the ablities of the average model railroader to understand. For huge home or club layouts, Digitrax is probably the best option. But for smaller home layouts with only 1 or 2 operaters, I think there are better options out there at much better prices. I myself like the menu set up on my NCE better than Digitrax. I think its much easier to understand what I am doing when programing decoders. I have been programing at a friends place using his Digitrax set up with radio throttles and found it confusing to say the least. But its a breeze with my NCE Powercab. Mike

 

[Espeefan]

For huge home or club layouts, Digitrax is probably the best option. But for smaller home layouts with only 1 or 2 operaters, I think there are better options out there at much better prices. I myself like the menu set up on my NCE better than Digitrax. Mike

Glad you like the Powercab Mike. I was a Digitrax user for years, and it's a good system, but I agree, NCE is easier to understand, more user friendly, and you can read the manual without getting a migrane

The one thing I don't understand is where the perception that one system or the other is better for large layouts or clubs. My club has a large layout, around 70 members, we have regular operating sessions, as well as open houses, and we run NCE. We have one of the largest NCE installations in the US, and we have not had problems with the system at all. I think that the origin of the opinion that Digitrax is better for large layouts may be a leftover from the old days when NCE was more expensive. When I bought my first system, a Digitrax Empire Builder, the equivalent NCE system was twice as expensive. Now they're within 50 bucks of each other. In terms of system design, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a layout that would tax the upper limits of either brand. I remember one layout in the Chicago area some years back, before JMRI was so prevalent. They ran Digitrax on their layout, and programmed with NCE . Kind of sums up the whole situation. I sold off all of my Digitrax last year after I bought my Powercab. It's all I need at home.

 

[julienjj]

just take note that digitrax has released a patch for the dt402 throttle about the trk=iddle mode. it is available for download for PR3 users

 

[Larry Launstein Jr]

That's like trying to tell Apple to start making windows based computers.

Although you can interchange boosters between Lenz and Digitrax, you can't interchange throttles. This is because the communications language is the same, but each manufacturer decides what to do with that language and program the features separately.

Just so you know - Apple's current line of computers will run Windows. They run on separate partitions and you can go from one to the other using BootCamp. And believe it or not, you can set it up so Windows will be the one that boots automatically on system startup.

I have two of them, a Mac Mini and a Mac Book, and they run fine.

The reason I have them? They were required by the colleges I was attending to take graphic art and web design courses, or at the very least, be able to run them in the Mac Labs. I was a PC person for a long time, but Microsoft wore out my patience when they introduced Windows Vista. I hear Windows 7 is way better, and more like their last successful version-Windows XP.

 

[julienjj]

Just so you know - Apple's current line of computers will run Windows. They run on separate partitions and you can go from one to the other using BootCamp. And believe it or not, you can set it up so Windows will be the one that boots automatically on system startup.

I have two of them, a Mac Mini and a Mac Book, and they run fine.

The reason I have them? They were required by the colleges I was attending to take graphic art and web design courses, or at the very least, be able to run them in the Mac Labs. I was a PC person for a long time, but Microsoft wore out my patience when they introduced Windows Vista. I hear Windows 7 is way better, and more like their last successful version-Windows XP.

Going off topic me too

Mac just dont have enought juice to runs game and cool stuff... believe it or not, but the 3D rendering power of Vista DirectX10 kick XP to the garbage. Vista was necessary to force people to upgrade their system with latest technology standards.

 

[Larry Launstein Jr]

Going off topic me too

Mac just dont have enought juice to runs game and cool stuff... believe it or not, but the 3D rendering power of Vista DirectX10 kick XP to the garbage. Vista was necessary to force people to upgrade their system with latest technology standards.

It depends on what you use your computer for. I use mine for graphic art and web design, for I'm in business for myself.

The PCs definitely have a significant advantage for games.

However, I do know a lot of people were turned off by Vista due to the bugs, and the fact they couldn't run the technology they already had on their computers. They felt that they should only update the operating system, not all their memory, and their video cards. My understanding is that Windows 7 is far more accommodating for everyone. It is one thing for gamers and people who love real cool visuals to upgrade, because that's what they are into, but for companies large and small to have to do that kind of upgrading, just because a new operating system comes out, requires a significant investment that many were not in a position to make. I'm not suggesting in any way that they shouldn't make that investment, but when you have a company already being squeezed by the economy going south of near no-return, and then having to make upgrades in overall technology, choices often have to be made. And it's often hard to justify making major technology upgrades when a company is laying off workers right and left.

I'd like to get back to discussing trains please - that's why I'm here and most people are here, to get away from all of that.

 

[diburning]

Just so you know - Apple's current line of computers will run Windows. They run on separate partitions and you can go from one to the other using BootCamp. And believe it or not, you can set it up so Windows will be the one that boots automatically on system startup.

I have two of them, a Mac Mini and a Mac Book, and they run fine.

The reason I have them? They were required by the colleges I was attending to take graphic art and web design courses, or at the very least, be able to run them in the Mac Labs. I was a PC person for a long time, but Microsoft wore out my patience when they introduced Windows Vista. I hear Windows 7 is way better, and more like their last successful version-Windows XP.

I'm typing this from a Macbook Pro with dual boot. What I'm saying is, if you want that level of standardization, you'll have windows media player for mac and imovie for Windows.

The different brands of DCC manufacturers are different for the purpose of competing with each other. They all more or less conform to NMRA standards so that all decoders will work on all systems. Think of the DCC system as an operating system, and the decoder as a flash drive.

 

[kbkchooch]

Another happy NCE user, been so since 1998! I've used, and almost bought Digitrax back then, but then I got a chance to road test NCE.

I've even seem a few local layouts switch from Digitrax to NCE over the last few years. Seems the people wanted to run trains, and not read a manual over and over again!!

 

[CSX Robert]

...
But you know would really be nice? The ability to mix and mingle components (run a NCE throttle on a Digitrax-type layout or use other components on a layout). It would be nice to have a set series of standards so each manufacturer can build equipment that will work on any layout. They already do this with locomotives and rolling stock and track, why not do it with the electronic components necessary to run a train.

Now, that'd really would be something.

The NMRA intentionally left the cab bus protocols up to the manufacturers to implement as they saw fit to do. The reason was to not stifle innovation and to allow the manufacturers to build in distinguishing features for their systems.

The communication language is different between the NCE and Digitrax systems. NCE uses their own, and Digitrax uses Loconet. Since Lenz also uses loconet, some components such as boosters can be used on both systems (you can use a Lenz booster on a Digitrax system and vice versa)

...

...
Although you can interchange boosters between Lenz and Digitrax, you can't interchange throttles. This is because the communications language is the same, but each manufacturer decides what to do with that language and program the features separately.

Lenz does not use Loconet, in fact, Lenz's cab bus, which they call Expressnet, is much closer to NCE's than it is to Loconet because Lenz and NCE both use RS-485 for the hardware interface.

The reason you can interchange boosters is because the booster does not use the cab bus, all it does it boost a low current version of the track output(Loconet does include that signal in it's wiring, but it's not part of the actual cab bus communication). You can also interchange NCE boosters with Digitrax and Lenz.

...
The digitrax throttle has all those buttons because they don't seem to like menus as much as the NCE people.

I just find this comment funny because Digitrax's DT402 has 32 buttons while NCE's Pro Cab has 34.

...
The one thing I don't understand is where the perception that one system or the other is better for large layouts or clubs.
...
In terms of system design, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a layout that would tax the upper limits of either brand.
...

When it comes to really large layouts, both systems do have their advantages and disadvantages. If you use the command station consisting functions and run a lot of consists, a large layout can use up the 120 slot limit(by using advanced consisting and programming CV19 manually you can get around this problem); however, the 62 cab limit for NCE can also come into play. As an example, the Derby City Express layout from the N-scale convention a couple of years ago had as many as 93 operators running at the same time, something they could not have done with NCE.

 

[Espeefan]

When it comes to really large layouts, both systems do have their advantages and disadvantages. If you use the command station consisting functions and run a lot of consists, a large layout can use up the 120 slot limit(by using advanced consisting and programming CV19 manually you can get around this problem); however, the 62 cab limit for NCE can also come into play. As an example, the Derby City Express layout from the N-scale convention a couple of years ago had as many as 93 operators running at the same time, something they could not have done with NCE.

I don't know anyone who uses old style consisting anymore, unless they have some very old decoders.

As for exceeding the 62 cab limit, yes it can happen, but doesn't on home layouts. Sure you could do it at a convention with a big enough modular group, but home layouts are what the manufacturers are going after, not the maybe 1% of layouts that can be so huge that conventional DCC doesn't fit their needs. I don't know of any home layout that is too large for any of the more advanced systems on the market (Digitrax, NCE or Lenz)

 

[diburning]

*raises hand* I use old style consisting! I just find it easier to do. I just input the loco number, hit MU+ and then hit ENTER. (Digitrax). If the locos are speed matched, then I'm good to go.

 

[lmackattack]

good to see NCE is on the way up. I wish the 2 clubs I belong at were running NCE just for simplicity reasons. Would make life easy when trying to show club members how to use their own high end controler LOL.

 

[Danny Strain]

I'm in a powered wheelchair and NCE can be controlled with one hand. It had the most versatile design for speed control.
Regards