DCC Systems

[rhobat bryn]

Although it's a bit of a way off yet, I'm beginning to consider which DCC system I should use on the layout.  I had originally thought of buying Lenz because of their reputation for reliability but I'm not sure how user friendly the controller is.  I understand that it's not possible to programme the names of locomotives to show on the display screen, for example.  I'd be grateful if other members who have DCC systems would be willing to share the benefit of their experience, both positive and negative.

[duttonbay]

I have been using DCC on the Dutton Bay Tramway since the beginning of 2000 (converted the first loco during the Christmas/New Year break).  It has done wonders for operations on the layout, but I suspect it will be of little use to you. The system is EasyDCC, and locos can only be addressed by number. That has never worried us, as all the locos have a number... I must admit that I am not aware of any EasyDCC users in the UK - another reason why my experience won't be of much use.

[membership]

If anyone else is about to reply to the original question could they express an opinion on whether it is better to

a) control everything from the dcc handset or

b) use dcc for just loco's and have a control panel for other functions (points,signals, etc,etc,etc)

[B.Meldon]

It all depends on if you are going for any automation.
Using a DCC system with a computer interface can create a very complex automated model railway. But all you need to do is sit back and look so for an operator it is very boring.

My personal preference is for conventional analogue point and signals and DCC locos. However if you do this you can not use the common return of the track for the points and signals so the amount of wiring increases on the layout.

Brian Meldon

[rhobat bryn]

It all depends on if you are going for any automation.

No, I'm not intending to use any form of automation.

b) use dcc for just loco's and have a control panel for other functions (points,signals, etc,etc,etc)

My personal preference is for conventional analogue point and signals and DCC locos. However if you do this you can not use the common return of the track for the points and signals so the amount of wiring increases on the layout.

At Newport MRG which I occasionally attend, they use two DCC systems, one for the locos and one for the auxiliaries.  The idea is that if one DCC system goes down during an exhibition, the whole layout doesn't become fully incapacitated.

[JulienW]

I suspect that the best way to go about this is to try a few systems out (operateing others layouts or go to somewhere like DCC Supplies who have a demonstration layout with several different systems on) and decide what is best for you with respect to comfort and ease of use.

Whilst a cheep system may be tempting to get started going by the various plans you have I suspect that you would be better off getting something that has the capability of being expnaded.

[pilotfriend]

I would go with Digitrax Zephyr.

[rhobat bryn]

I would go with Digitrax Zephyr.

I love your cryptic comments, pilotfriend.  However would you like to elaborate on your choice and could I ask you whether you have ever considered the Lenz system and, if so, what conclusions you came to.

[pilotfriend]

I have built and installed a number of customer layouts and have fitted the DCC system chosen by the client.

Digitrax is a US system that has the advantage of the greatest development due to volume sales. I find it the most user friendly and the Loconet system, which is part of it is without parallel.

I too would side with Brian, that if automation is not considered, I would always go with manual point/signal operation.
JdF

[invercloy]

I have tried Digitrax, Bachmann Dynamis, Gaugemaster Prodigy, Hornby and NCE Power Cab controllers.

By far the best of the lot is the Gaugemaster Prodigy, it's the most intuitive to use, the most comfortable in the hand (obviously very subjective depending on hand size), and, in my opinion, provided the best results in terms of running.

The Dynamis was good, but I was really put off as the handset transmits/receives from the base unit using infra-red.  This lead to poor performance at exhibitions, and suffered interference from the lights on Dunbracken.  The NCE unit was good, but not as intuitive to use as the Gaugemaster, the Hornby one was too basic and felt cheap, and the Digitrax one had far too many buttons than was required and was unnecessarily confusing, as well as not being to my liking ergonomically.

I've rigged a Gaugemaster Prodigy up to Isle Ornsay to operate both the locos and control all the points using RC micro servos and ESU SwitchPilot Servo control boards.  I wasn't convinced about DCC point/signal operation, but when I'd tired it I was really taken.  It also means that there are only two wires crossing baseboard joints, these are passed through both coach bolts that hold the baseboards together... so, no connectors between boards whatsoever!  ;D  Having had a DCC layout that was DCC loco control only, and now one that is DCC for locos and points, I'll happily stick to the latter.

Chip wise I've tried 3 decoder manufacturers, Digitrax, Zimo and Gaugemaster.  The gauge master one was average, the Digitrax was cheapest but offered good performance when it had it's CVs fiddled with, but the Zimo one was best out of the box in terms of slow running, and required no fettling for me to be happy with it.

[rhobat bryn]

Many thanks Tom for your detailed reply. It was precisely the kind of feedback I was looking for.  I particularly note your comments regarding Zimo decoders.  Slow running is going to be important on my layout, firstly because it's a terminus and secondly because there will be considering shunting both within the goods yard and between the goods yard and the harbour.  Forgive my ignorance but is it possible to use these chips with other DCC systems?

[Darren Hedges]

I have tried Digitrax, Bachmann Dynamis, Gaugemaster Prodigy, Hornby and NCE Power Cab controllers.

By far the best of the lot is the Gaugemaster Prodigy, it's the most intuitive to use, the most comfortable in the hand (obviously very subjective depending on hand size), and, in my opinion, provided the best results in terms of running.

Isn't the Gaugemaster Prodigy simply an older version of the NCE Powercab produced under license, or am I thinking of something else?

Darren.

[JulienW]

Many thanks Tom for your detailed reply. It was precisely the kind of feedback I was looking for.  I particularly note your comments regarding Zimo decoders.  Slow running is going to be important on my layout, firstly because it's a terminus and secondly because there will be considering shunting both within the goods yard and between the goods yard and the harbour.  Forgive my ignorance but is it possible to use these chips with other DCC systems?

If a decoder chip is "NMRA compatable" then it should run with any DCC controler.  The only problems I have heard of is with early Hornby controllers that apparently put out too high a peak voltage that caused other (non-hornby) chips to either shut down (failsafe) or to loose the magic smoke that it impossible to put back in but vital for the chip to work (new chip needed).

That being said there are some newer chips with multiple functions that are not so easy to control with older systems simple because there are not enough 'functions' on the controller (or they get more dificult to access).  This does not affect the driving of trains just things like some smoke and sound effects.

[Graeme Dunbar]

I went for the Digitrax Zephyr as I was looking for an inexpensive system that was nonetheless reasonably fully-functioned. Some of the cheaper ones had limitations on locomotive decoder addressing and programming decoders. (Not that I have ever needed to go beyond the limitations of the less expensive ones.) I was a little disappointed (perhaps underwhelmed is more accurate) how "plasticky" and insubstantial feeling the unit is. Not as solid as Lenz, but it does the job and you gets what you pays for.

Something to be wary of is that DCC will not turn a bad runner into a good one but it can make a good one better. The electrical pickup has to be just as good.

The best reason for using DCC in a 009 layout I think, particularly on shunting layouts, is the ability to have several locos on the track and drive any one of them without having to plan most carefully the dead sections in which to park the others.

[invercloy]

Many thanks Tom for your detailed reply. It was precisely the kind of feedback I was looking for.  I particularly note your comments regarding Zimo decoders.  Slow running is going to be important on my layout, firstly because it's a terminus and secondly because there will be considering shunting both within the goods yard and between the goods yard and the harbour.  Forgive my ignorance but is it possible to use these chips with other DCC systems?

Rhobat, glad that my drivel has been of use. 

To clarify about the decoders, Zimo may not be the best overall (they are actually more expensive than the others I mentioned), they are simply the best out of the box without adjusting the CV values for achieving slow running as far as I can determine.  I've by no means tried all the brands though, and I'm sure the TCS one I've just bought will be just as good once I've played with it a big.

As long as it says NMRA compliant and is a relatively new product I don't think you can go far wrong, it's when you go for older stuff like Julien has mentioned that things can go wrong.

Isn't the Gaugemaster Prodigy simply an older version of the NCE Powercab produced under license, or am I thinking of something else?

The Gaugemaster is a rebranded MRC Prodigy, NCE is slightly different in layout of controls, but the overall shape is the same.  There's also a wireless version of the prodigy available now, however it will only be yours once a considerable amount of small gold discs have changed hands...  :o

The best reason for using DCC in a 009 layout I think, particularly on shunting layouts, is the ability to have several locos on the track and drive any one of them without having to plan most carefully the dead sections in which to park the others.

I agree, running slowly is the best reason for DCC, I've found it easy to achieve with my basic knowledge of electronics - potentially easier than it would have been had I been using DC.  I think the constant voltage to the motor helps a great deal.

Check out this youtube video for an example of a Roco 0-6-0 running on DCC with a Gaugemaster controller, and Digitrax chip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl4L6vdhVDU