Preferred DCC Systems


Which DCC Systems do you prefer for use in the club and at home? Why?

  • MRC

    Votes: 16 14.5%
  • Digitrax

    Votes: 43 39.1%
  • Lenz

    Votes: 5 4.5%
  • NCE

    Votes: 38 34.5%
  • Other

    Votes: 8 7.3%

  • Total voters
    110
Hi,

As a satisfied Digitrax user, I generally agree with the above sentiments.

However, I reckon you've got to be using JMRI to manage the whole mess - Decoder programming (& management) becomes a pleasure rather than a chore IMO - Setting speed curves etc becomes a "point & click" exercise - Really simple, and fun IMHO!

I quit trying to program from the throttle *long* ago :)

My 02c, cheers,
Ian
 
I love my NCE Powercab system. My layout is quite small and there are no plans to expand it. I have run the digitrax system on several local layouts that are much larger. Digitrax's ablity to expand for large home or club layouts makes it more popular for those applications. But for the average modeler's home layout, NCE is much easier to understand and operate IMHO. Mike
 
Im curious as to what the 2 "other" systems are?:confused:

My 1st thought was Zimo. On the other hand, if they are "System1" by Wangrow, shouldn't that count as NCE? After all, NCE built the boards for Wangrow, and they are carbon copies of each other.
Kinda the way Altlas and Lenz are married.
 
I chose MRC as it is what I have. I am not in a club so I can't help there. I had only used Digitrax on a friends layout and the MRC looked like it would be much easier to operate. I think it was the right decision. It is very simple to use.
 
I warn you in advance this response started out short and quickly got longer than intended. You may want to skip over this soapbox dissertation.

I have found in my 45 years of model railroading (23 years in HO followed by 22 years in N) and 16 years using DCC that anyone can learn to do anything with a fair amount of effort. This is not only true with DCC but ever aspect of the hobby. It takes time and effort to learn to design a layout, construct the basics of that layout, and then add all of the little things that make that layout ones pride and joy. You do not learn the skills necessary overnight required to produce that realistic looking layout with the detailed scenes. It generally takes time and effort.

Why should DCC be any different than any other aspect of model railroading.

I run a website dedicated to N scale club layouts in North America. Each club completes a survey that includes location, membership, and type of layouts but also type of control system. FWIW the number of clubs that have completed this survey is 144.

As of the last update 79.2% of all N scale clubs are using DCC on all or part of their layout. Of those that use DCC 87.7% are using a Digitrax system with 4.4 using Lenz, 2.6 using NCE, 1.8 using CVP, and 3.5 using something else.

The above figures indicate that no matter how user friendly a system claims to be in the end it is the system that can do the most is the one that is chosen most often. You may not desire to use all of the whistles and bells a system has to offer but it is nice to have them available should one desire to use one or more of those advanced features.

As a quick example Digitrax offers three different modes of wireless communications between the throttle and the command system while all of the others that offer wireless communications offer only one. I started with infrared communications back in 1998, added simplex radio in 2004 and early this year added duplex radio to the layout. Now anyone visiting my layout can bring any Digitrax throttle and use it to control a train on my layout no matter if the throttle was purchased yesterday or 15 years ago.

Now I am sure the above figures do not hold true for clubs that model in HO, S, etc nor are these figures accurate for the home layout but I have found that while the percentages vary between areas of the country and the type of layout (club/home) the DCC command system leader in North America appears to be Digitrax.

This does not mean that Digitrax is the correct system for every environment for it could not be but they offer a system that at this time has the greatest potential at a price most people can afford. I know of several medium home layouts that are controlled by a Zephyr and several small layouts that are controlled by the Super Chief.

Over the many years that I have been using DCC I have found the opportunity to operate on layouts that are controlled by systems manufactured by other companies other than Digitrax. Once you understand the concept of acquiring, running, and dispatching of a train I have found you can easily move from one throttle to the next. You may not like the feel or look of the throttle by you can use it.

For those operations that require frequent creation and breaking up of consists I use the command station assisted consisting while for those consists that are general fixed or very seldom altered I use decoder assisted consisting. This last method allows me to take my trains to other layouts and eliminates the need to rebuild the consist on their system. I just acquire the decoder address of the consist and I am ready to run.

DCC was designed to move from the control of the layout from controlling the power to the rails via switches to controlling the engine via communications from the throttle or cab as some would like to refer to the handheld device.

DCC was designed so that any system could control the basic features speed, direction, lighting, and sound of any decoder.

DCC was not designed to be a 100% compatibility of all devices of all systems. It was designed the way it is to allow for the most innovation in how we control the layout other than the communication between the command station and the decoder.

Do you want centralized intelligence all to be in the command system where each time a new innovation is added you might have to update one or more of your command devices or do you want decentralized intelligence where each device is intelligent thereby you only need to upgrade that new device. When Digitrax add intelligent block occupancy to there system they did not have up upgrade any other command devices. The same holds true when they added signaling, Transponding, or their wireless communications devices. The cheapest wireless system on the market is the one used by Lenz but who wants to carry a phone in their hand to control a train, some do but I don't.

The NMRA Standards and Recommended Practices provides all the information necessary to design and build a command station, booster, and decoder if you can understand all of the tech-no talk.

Several of the DCC manufacturers have made available to the modeler all of the information necessary to design and build layout control devices for your particular system again if you can understand all of the tech-no talk.

The original LocoBuffer designed by John Jabour was hobbyist project that was later converted to a commercial product.

There are several DCC command system manufacturers that share a common throttle and/or layout control network allowing some inter compatibility between products.

There are several third party manufacturers that make layout control products that work specifically with one DCC command system manufacturer.

It is not DCC command system that determines which system to use but the demands of the DCC consumer.

In the end I generally suggest that before one takes that giant step from DC to DCC that they look at every aspect of DCC before making a decision on which systems to consider. There are a number of very important issues at stake and generally speaking since most model railroaders I know have limited budgets making the right choice the first time can save hours of pain, frustration, and what generally is expensive renovations later.
 
As of the last update 79.2% of all N scale clubs are using DCC on all or part of their layout. Of those that use DCC 87.7% are using a Digitrax system with 4.4 using Lenz, 2.6 using NCE, 1.8 using CVP, and 3.5 using something else.

The above figures indicate that no matter how user friendly a system claims to be in the end it is the system that can do the most is the one that is chosen most often.

SNIP

There are a number of very important issues at stake and generally speaking since most model railroaders I know have limited budgets making the right choice the first time can save hours of pain, frustration, and what generally is expensive renovations later.

I'd be interested to see when the system purchases were made by the answerers in your survey. I belonged to an HO club in Alabama for many years and was involved in the decision to go with DCC. We chose Digitrax for several reasons.

They were one state over and had a heavy market presence in our area. They were what the area dealers carried, while the other major manufacturers presence was almost non existent.
They offered a first time break to clubs which meant a deep discount in the initial equipment purchase. (not sure if they still do this) The system price was our number one concern. The next largest manufacturer at the time was NCE, and the equivalent amount of their equipment we would have had to buy would have cost twice what we paid for Digitrax. No brainer! This could go a long way towards explaining your results.

Bottom line, I think your last paragraph nails the real reason. Most all of us buy on price, not necessarily system capability. I see this every day in the retail marketplace, at train shows, and in hobby shops. If a club can get system "A" for 50-75% the cost of system "B", decision made. System capability is much less a concern as long as it will do what the club wants it to do.

Technical differences, system architecture, and specs mean very little to guys who just want to run trains, and that's most of us.

From my own experiences, and through talking with others here, I believe that first time purchases are mostly influnced by price, availability, and what we're exposed to by our friends. I think most of us care very little about the "techno-geek" aspects of one system vs another. (no offense if you are one :D)

The poll here was, I think, geared to guys with home layouts. Starter systems from the major players are all priced pretty close now, so when that part of the playing field is level, I think the responses we are seeing here are pretty accurate.

System users are usually fiercely loyal, as are those of us who prefer one loco manifacturer over another, so there is always some sort of discussion here about NCE vs. Digitrax, vs MRC; Athearn vs. BLI; Soundtraxx vs. QSI; MTH vs.everybody else, and so on and on.

At least we're all running trains:D
 
System users are usually fiercely loyal, as are those of us who prefer one loco manifacturer over another ...

not me. as soon as digitrax bothers to come up with attractive looking and ergonomic cab that is suitable for year 2010 we are in, i'm jumping ship :D
 
In the end I generally suggest that before one takes that giant step from DC to DCC that they look at every aspect of DCC before making a decision on which systems to consider. There are a number of very important issues at stake and generally speaking since most model railroaders I know have limited budgets making the right choice the first time can save hours of pain, frustration, and what generally is expensive renovations later.

On your final comment I can agree on. To anyone who is considering DCC I would submit that they "test drive" at least 2 different DCC systems before they plunk down any money at all. See what system can satisfy thier demands. See what system they can understand. Brand and price are secondary. Were not talking about what system you can afford now. See what system you can't afford to be without in 10-15-20 years.
12 years ago, when shopping for a DCC system for our club, someone suggested exactly what I just wrote and I listened. 12 years later the system and the club have more than doubled in size. Not only me, but now over 1/2 the club members have the same system for our homes!

I have personally witnessed more than 1 person purchase a DCC system they did not fully understand.:eek: Then the frustration of not being able to run trains set in. Those systems were later torn out sold, and were replaced with a system the owner now understood. It wasn't fun and it wasn't cheap. So everybody, do your homework and think ahead before you buy!:D
 
Although cryptic, notation continues to sneak-in trying to suggest that Digitrax is a difficult system to learn. I have agreed that the manuals are ridiculously difficult to learn from and sometimes, impossible. However, the system itself is not. The DT400's cab may be intimidating to look at, with all the buttons and gizzies, but you are only concerned with those that you use for your level of operation (as with a TV remote) and most are simply click and go.

Many have used consisting as an example: with Digitrax, you enter one loco number on the right cab knob and other in the left knob; click consist and "Yes" (dang, that was really difficult). The left cab can now be used to enter third loco address (or more) for the same consist or individual loco control while your consisted locos are controlled by the right.

To enter loco address: click desired left or right knob, click loco and enter number, click loco button again.

To operate stationary decoders (turnouts,etc.): simply click SWCH (switches), enter number and select "T" or "C"

To program a decoder CV's: click Prog, select type programming to use (for program track or mainline). Dial CV number on left knob, value with right, click enter, then exit when finished.

Functions are the same as any other system and speeds of two locos are controlled by the two knobs, i.e two cabs in one.

Based on the above, there is No way I can see the basic operation of Digitrax being more difficult to operate than any other, if someone takes the time to learn. Like so many areas in our hobby, instructions for DCC operations are not written in a way that makes learning easy. Even the "Get Started Quick" manuals are lacking in getting the information across to the reader. This said, lets not blame a system on their manuals or our will to study and learn.

I do wish that someone would be more specific on "difficult". This opinion has been used in hundreds of threads, but never with any concrete evidence and I would like to be enlightened enough to have a better understanding of the comparisons being used. I am not suggesting that one system is better than another, but saying that many "favorites" are simply based more on design of cab or familiarity of a particular system used in an area or club, and not where it should be: capabilities to meet your today and future needs.:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What I've noticed with this hobby is that some people are stubborn and want everything handed to them. They're unwilling to learn.
 
We use Digitrax because its a great system, our local area friends all use it (compatibility, tech support), and we have a nice guy locally that is an independant Digitrax dealer. Keith is always great for tech support and a smokin deal on new Digitrax gear.
 
I'm considering a PowerCab for myself and a 5 amp Powerhouse for a friend's layout. That way I can operate at the local NCE-based club, on my own running a couple of trains, and on his layout when I go up to install the Powerhouse. I also like the Recall button on the hamerhead controllers. I'm sure Digitrax controllers have something similar, but I don't need a degree to read the controller.
 
I've been using MRC at home and recently tried out NCE at the club. I like both for the most part. Both are easy to setup and use. Both have many features. I may switch my home layout to NCE just because thats what the club uses and it would be more compatible. I'm planning to at least buy my own NCE throttle for club use.

As far as decoders, I generally stick with digitrax as they are easy to work with and affordable. I plan on upgrading my engines with Tsunami sound at some point as well.
 
I've used NCE, Lenz, and Digitrax. I've not really had any problems with Any. It would be cool to have a Tsunami or two when funds permit, but I don't feel an overbearing need for sound.
 
I may switch my home layout to NCE just because thats what the club uses and it would be more compatible. I'm planning to at least buy my own NCE throttle for club use.

If your home layout is small to medium size, why buy a separate throttle for club use? If you switch to a PowerCab system, you can take your throttle to the club layout and plug it in to the throttle buss and "poof" you now have a Procab!

As far as decoders, I generally stick with digitrax as they are easy to work with and affordable. I plan on upgrading my engines with Tsunami sound at some point as well.

Nothing wrong with that! I think in the last 12 years, I've used them all. Soundtraxx, QSI, Zimo, Lenz, Digitrax, TCS and NCE. I've only had 2 issues that were not caused by me letting the smoke out of them. Both were manufacturer related problems that were remedied by thier makers pretty quickly.
 
If your home layout is small to medium size, why buy a separate throttle for club use? If you switch to a PowerCab system, you can take your throttle to the club layout and plug it in to the throttle buss and "poof" you now have a Procab!

Yeah, I may just pick up the entire Powercab system rather than buying just a throttle. NCE's starter kit isn't much more than just the throttle alone anyways.

I currently have the older MRC prodigy advance system, which is more than I need, but I got it used at an incredible price when I finally made the plunge into DCC. Now that I've gone DCC the only time I run DC is on loco's that have yet to be converted to make sure there are no issues with them before adding a decoder.
 



Back
Top