Excellent review. Thanks, Stix.
Rich
HI,
I started with Digitrax and was reasonably happy when I discovered JMRI interface and used it for a few years.
I currently use ECOS from ESU why a number of reasons.
- I have a number on non USA models and this system is compatible with all protocols
- It has the ability to mix and match i,e you can use a Digitrax/NCE etc booster and throttles and still control them thus you can still use all ECOS power and still use most DCC manufactures Throttles, and other DCC add-ons ECOS a great way if you want to expand and not junk your old system.
- seven inch touch screen used for setup and control.
- very configurable e.g. The function keys can be programmed to either be push on/push off or momentary
- Loco Roster can be sorted, custom images uploaded so each of your locos has a unique picture of your loco, not a generic image/number
- also set up consists. Shuttle trains that run automatically point to point
- very flexible and expandable system
- Layout editor you can have a built in Panel indicating the layout and turnouts (See Pic)
In my opinion a best of both words, new features WIFI etc and still use existing throttles and power from Legacy hardware.
Thanks
Vik
1 Like
Just for giggles. I too started with MRC DC powerpacks and used several on the 13 x 24 layout I started building in 1997. Back about 5 years ago I was set to order a starter Digtrax system, donāt recall the model then got cold feet. Sometime after I bought the MRC hybrid Tech 6 DC DCC switchable system for itās easy ability to switch back and forth between them. That hooked me on DCC and led me to purchase the MRC Prodigy 2 Advance system. Why instead of NCE or Digitrax which I also looked at? Plain and simple, was about $100 cheaper than the roughly similiar others. I bought additional jacks for walk around then saw their wifi adapter, bought it, downloaded Engine Driver and became totally untethered since.
Programming my locos is simple but what does frustrate me is that while the MRC can program Digitrax and Soundtraxx decoders it canāt read the CV values, no problem with ESU which is mostly what I use.
If i were in the market today Iām almost certain Iād go with NCE.
1 Like
rich wrote:
āAll of this discussion about using different throttles is interesting to me, I have never given any thought until now about successfully using other manufacturers throttles with a different DCC command station.ā
As I mentioned earlier, the Roco z21 app can be used with the hardware from different manufacturers. Itās supported directly by
- Roco (of course)
- Digikeijs
- YaMoRC
- ZIMO
(may even be one more)
But beyond thatā¦
Iāve read that by using a new feature of JMRI which is called something like āz21 bridgeā, it can now be used with other hardware as well (probably most that can interface with JMRI).
The Digikeijs and YaMoRC hardware controllers are branded as āuniversalā because of the wide number of control interfaces they can handle.
The z21 app may become the first āuniversalā SOFTWARE control for dccā¦
isnāt JMRIās WiFi Engine Driver already the first universal controller
Vik, thanks for that post, including a great assessment of the ESU ECOS system.
Rich
Thanks for that reply, crsd60m. I appreciate that comparative assessment of various DCC systems.
Rich
Another fine comparative review of various DCC systems. Thanks for that post, OldEngineman. 
Rich
Still waiting to hear from a TCS user.
Rich
I started with Digitrax back in the 90s. Did a lot of research and Digitrax had a better technology (LocoNet) than NCE. Upgraded/added components over the years however started having a few issues about 3 yrs ago. Ordered some replacements and was disappointed. Throttles would lock up (602s) as I recall. Sent for repairs but they never found the issues. Decided to scrap Digitrax and sold it all and went with TCS after much research. (TCS has LCC which I can take advantage of). Iām also a member of a large club using NCE boosters/throttles and Digitrax for detection/signaling. After having issues with obtaining Digitrax replacement cards and NCE failures (We had 12 boosters for the layout) the same conclusion came that TCS was the best option. NCE hasnāt upgraded their technology in several years. The nice thing is that TCS throttles are compatible with NCE and Digitrax systems so users can use a TCS throttle on any of those systems. PS I have in IT/technology background so I understand some of the subtle differences in the various systems out there.
2 Likes
I use NCE and chose it 10 years ago because the command station was on the throttle which simulates a wall around system. Doing my 20 minute research on which one to choose back then, it seemed that the programming of the power cab was more intuitive to me than other systems.
I have been perfectly satisfied with the NCE after upgrading to the wireless system. I have never tried another system. I am not interested in sampling new technologies when the vintage I have works fine.
1 Like
FWIW, I think the future of DCC is probably going to more like what weāre seeing now with Blunami - no need for an actual DCC system, just apply 6 to 21 volts of DC to the track, download the app to your phone or tablet, and youāre all set. You can operate wireless on your layout - or on someone elseās, since it will work with DCC power too.
Especially now that many DCC-ready HO engines now come with a speaker or speakers pre-installed. You can start out running the engine on DC silently, then later add a Blunami and have sound, DCC-like control, and wireless too.
Since blunami runs on a downloaded app, I wonder if there would be some built in obsolescence where the app would have to be upgraded from time to time. I donāt know how the technology works.
With dcc I own the software thatās imprinted on the circuit board and the hardware needed to operate it. Theoretically it should work forever just like dc systems as long as the components donāt break or wear out.
Iām not an expert on Blunami, not having tried it yet, but the app is a free download so I donāt see any reason for Sountraxx not to keep it available as long as theyāre in business. Eventually your phone or tablet might need to be replaced, but you would just download the app to the new one.
I have engines on my layout with sound decoders over 20 years old that still work fine, I assume the Blunamis will work that long or longer and still be viable. As with decoders, new ones may have new options, but the old ones should still work with the system.
There ya go. Finally, a TCS user. Good post, thank you valleyfan628.
Rich
Thanks, Douglas, good to hear from you.
Rich
Thanks, Stix. I donāt know much about Blunami. Someone ought to start a thread about it.
Rich
arenāt you replacing your DCC command station and relatively inexpensive DCC decoders with a more expensive bluetooth decoder?
you can run JMRI Engine Driver on a smartphone with all major DCC system by using a USB interface to the DCC system (NCE, Digitrax)
1 Like
What heās pointing out is that the Bluetooth decoder is just like any wireless decoder ā it completely removes any need for DCC modulation of the track power, with periodically reversing polarity. Or modulated track power at all, come to thatā¦ compatible with dead rail or charging-only DC. Thatās nearly a āfuture-proofā solution for new decoder production.
I canāt imagine including a Bluetooth core in a decoder is going to materially increase its production cost, and considering the potential savings on all the other paraphernalia, it would seem to me to be an attractive alternative. I confess (without costing anything out) that Iād prefer WiFi to Bluetooth as a control protocol, as the effective range can be much greater with costed-down/OTS equipment and there is already network support on many potential control devices.
I have NCE at home and we use Digitrax at the club. I was comparing systems some 20 years ago between NCE, Digitrax and Bachmann Dynamis (which had just been released) The NCE was my best choice hands down. It was like comparing DOS (Digitrax) to Windows (NCE) (and that would be the good versions of windows 
) The old Digitrax throttles and operation could not compare in ease of use. Dynamis of course became a dead end. I will say that the new Digitrax throttles and Zephyr are light years ahead of their old ones. However I still prefer NCE for several reasons. Ease of programming and consisting are two. We have found that there were quite a few decoders that had issues with Digitrax/ JMRI programming (even just the roadnumber) I have had to bring home and program on my NCE quite a few that would not program or reset on the Digitrax. Keep in mind I have never updated my 20+year old powercab and it works programming most everything out there. We just added a powercab programming station at the club because of this- If we just need to change a road number it is FAR easier- not to mention adjusting momentum which is a two click operaton. I think consisting is far easier in the NCE too. There is one feature though that the Digitrax throttles have though that I wish NCE offered- dual control knobs. It is nice to control two engines from the throttle without going into the recall stack like you do on NCE.(I do think the new neck strap is nice too but not a major thing) I have always liked the ergonomics of the NCE better though especially compared to the old Digitrax throttles.
Jim