# Need help picking a DCC/MTS



## shadowvfx (May 3, 2010)

I currently have a few LGB engines on a simple ceiling train layout. A few years back, I read about LGB's MTS, and it sounds amazing. Since then, I've tried to gather more information and it sounds like MTS isn't the only option. All the back and forth talk I've read regarding MTS and similar products is relatively confusing for a guy like myself. I'm looking for something that would be relatively easy to startup and get installed on my 3-4 LGB locos, and that won't break my bank. I might end up getting one or two USA Trains locos in the future too, so I'm not sure how MTS would handle that.

Could any of you experts please help point me in the right direction? I just want to know what multi train setup would work best for my needs/budget. Advice is very much welcome!


----------



## Stan Cedarleaf (Jan 2, 2008)

shadow.... If you would like to stay with the LGB locomotives and compatible MTS systems, while there are a number of systems out there that will work, the Massoth line is probably the most compatible to LGB. 

Massoth

Or you might contact Axel at Train-li-USA for his ZIMO product.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

The MTS system is very close to DCC, the older devices had limitations in the decoders. A modern DCC system will normally handle everything you need. 

Do your locos have MTS decoders already? If not, I would encourage you to only consider modern decoders that have "normal" DCC capability. Then you can use any DCC system, rather than being locked into only a few, and having to do "weird stuff" to make the locos perform (I won't go into details, just take my word for it). 

The Massoth as Stan mentioned is usually the easiest add on to LGB stuff, but almost any modern decoder can be added... and at a lower cost! 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Hello Shadow, welcome to MLS and the DCC forum in particular! 

You have quite a few good options, depending on your long term requirements. I'll suggest a few to give you something to research. 
If you don't anticipate running more than a few LGB locos at one time, then your power requirements are relatively low, which is a good thing for many reasons. To keep the cost down, you could spend the money getting one good wireless handheld such as the Massoth navigator, then find a new or discounted MTSIII system & power supply, which is just a simplified Massoth station anyway and is limited to about 5A. The MTSIII was designed to be used with the navigator so that way you get a relatively inexpensive base station but a really good throttle which I believe is the most important piece anyway. If you think you might need more than 5A someday then you could go to the Massoth 8A or 12A Dimax central station. To give you an idea, I'm running the navigator/MTSIII system and can run at least three double motored LGB locos no problem, because my grades are fairly flat and I run short Swiss prototype trains, so they don't use much power--typically


----------



## Stan Cedarleaf (Jan 2, 2008)

Shadow.... I tried to send a private message to you but it's blocked for only friends.

Could you email me? [email protected]


----------



## shadowvfx (May 3, 2010)

Thanks for the help and suggestions. To clarify one of the main questions asked; my locos don't have MTS already installed on them. I was interested in getting a DCC system going for a simple ceiling train layout I have at my parent's house. My setup isn't complicated, but looking at the costs involved in doing this, even for the cheaper DCC systems, I question whether it's practicable for me to be installing a DCC system with onto such a simple layout.


----------



## Stan Cedarleaf (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By shadowvfx on 01 Sep 2010 10:25 AM 
I question whether it's practicable for me to be installing a DCC system with onto such a simple layout. That certainly could be the case, shadow. If that's all you will be running, an adequate DC "transformer" would run the overhead very nicely. AND a whole lot easier and less expensive. 

Just put the trains on the track, crank up the "GO" knob and run.


----------



## Dan Pierce (Jan 2, 2008)

What are you looking for in Digital control? 

Just simple train control, or do you want sound and more complex digital control? 

Newer LGB engines are wired for decoder ready, but only controls lights and smoke with a limited amount of functions. 

Zimo has decoders that can control each light separately (direction, cabin, marker, smoke, even pantographs), plus they have sound versions that do the same thing. 

Lgb never saold theit sound units separately for individual engines, but did have a generic sound unit (no motor control nor light control) in 5 basic flavors. This LGB sound unit costs more than most manufacturers decoders with smoke, light, sound and motor control.


----------



## shadowvfx (May 3, 2010)

Stan, my PMs should be open now. 

Thanks for the replies everyone. My trouble is that I have three locos on a two rail parallel rectangular layout. This is problematic in that if I want to put prak two trains on track 1 so I can run the other on track 2, it requires a lot of switching switches, turning the motors off on certain locos, controlling the speed on track 1 then making sure the loco transfers to the power on track 2 Ok, then finally parking it, changing the switches back, then I can finally run the one train I want on track 1. In contrast, having MTS, I just flip a switch, the switches change, I drive Train B onto Track 2 and since it's DCC, the other trains on the system don't try to go at the same time. 

I realize I probably just confused a lot of people, but this is why I was investigating DCC. The other (and much more practical and simpler) option is to just take one train off and only run the two trains at a time, one on each track. But where's the challenge in that!? =D


----------



## chopperthedog (Sep 3, 2010)

I do run MTS and I am very happy with it. 


A grocery list for your set up if you want to go MTS


1. Any 5-10amp D.C. power supply (I use mrc power G set at 20volts)


2. LGB 55005 MTS central station


3. LGB 55015 MTS remote (avoid 55016, can't do turnouts or CV's)


4. LGB 55025 MTS 4ch. turnout decoder (for your sidings)


5. Qty. of 3 LGB 55021 or 55027 locomotive decoders (others will also work I use both Digitrax and LGB)






Extras for the geek in you.


1. LGB 55060 MTC computer control module (control layout from windows based PC)


2. Extra computer running XP pro or Win7 with 9 pin com port and hooked to your home wired or wifi network (not Vista No remote desktop)


3. Lap top or Netbook running XP pro or Win7 also on your wifi home network


See HERE for explanation of last 3 items






hope it helps you attain your goal of cool control.










good day.


----------



## Stan Cedarleaf (Jan 2, 2008)

Thanks, Shadow... PM on it's way.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Please note: if you don't already have LGB with factory decoders, you do NOT have to use any LGB or Massoth decoders. True they are easier to interface, but you also have limitations and quirks if you want to embrace some of the "old style" MTS features. 

Also, Massoth is high quality, but one of the most expensive alternatives. 

So, please don't get the impression that your choices are limited. 

I do applaud your intention to use a non-proprietary control system, my belief that more choices for the consumer is a better long term solution. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

It is always good to collect all the information and talk to the various vendors. The best is actually to test a system for two weeks. Granted you will not be familiar with all the specifics of a given system but you can quickly determine what extra questions you may want to ask and what obvious features you might like over the others.

We are representing ZIMO and I am more than happy to send you detailed information about the ZIMO system.

It is a common (perpetrated) misconception that only Massoth can deal with MTS decoders, or only Massoth decoders work under MTS. The truth of the matter is that there are other manufacturer's who's decoders work with MTS as well. Actually all decoders work with MTSIII and MTS II if it received the parallel upgrade. Some decoders such as ZIMO work with serial MTS as well.

With that said MTS II, III central stations have several limitations the predominant ones would be
- only 14 speed steps support (impacts the smooth operation of you loco)
- no support for 20 decoder functions
- Limits to programmability of higher CV values (unless you use external software)

While kept simple a lot of people (once the dive into DCC) hit the limitations of MTS and then want to upgrade.

ZIMO DCC controllers offer the most versatility in the industry. You need special adjustments for this and that you can be sure that ZIMO can offer this. ZIMOs new color touch screen handheld is state of the art. With integrated railcom engines will announce their real speed back to the speedometer display in the handheld. Engines can be display by name and their photographic image (not just by an engine address). Tri-state LED give you feedback about the setting of your F-keys or for switches the position of your switch thrown or straight. It's slick design allows for one handed operation, and the speed control give you an immediate visual feedback to the set speed.

If one stays within the ZIMO system (e.g Central station and decoders) then ZIMO offers so called absolute speed control. In that case you determine your maxspeed as an absolute voltage versus a percent of current voltage. The advantage is that if you have drops in your track voltage which happens over longer distances, than your engine speed will not change. E.g. most engine run on 24V much too fast, but it is good to feed 24 to the track. So in relative setting (the most common in the DCC market) you you put your throttle to 50% the engine will run with about 12V where it sees 12 V and with e.g. 8 V where it sees 16V. If you set max speed to 12V you can first off all set your throttle to 100% (which gives you a larger control range) and secondly the engine is consistent throughout the layout.

In addition ZIMO offers a switching button. Once pushed the engine goes automatically to half speed, therefore giving you finite control for your switching operation, while allowing you to quickly set the engine up for hauling service again with a push of a button.

If you ever intent to bring the computer into your operation than you can have ZIMO track module that recognize engines and allow you to have engine depend reaction in you software. Any engine under computer control can be easily taken out of its control with a "MANUAL" function, but then handed over to the computer again with the same push of a button.

The compact handheld also offers the easiest way of interfacing with switches. Up to 8 switches per named and pictured entry can be easily controlled with the simple push of the function keys F0 to F7 and as mentioned before have a green/red LED display the status of the switch.

I am more than happy to send you information and we offer FREE 2 weeks trial of the ZIMO system. Or have you ever bought car without test driving it?


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Ah I just saw a thread I almost overlooked - the simplicity of your layout.

How simple?

If you are just looking to control the speed of a locomotive and maybe one or two switches I couldn't justify DCC - unless you want to be open to future expansions and you don't see just this project as the justification. DCC for simple layouts is an overkill. If you see yourself taking it one day to the next step you need to view it from "Invest once correctly - reap the benefits for a long time"

The best solution for simply controlling a train or two is via RF control. The old Aristo TE was very popular for it, unfortunately it is out of production, that leaves you now with only the new Aristo REVO. Now you are talking a closer investment to a low end DCC (MRC - granted not a very good system).

Unfortunately when looking at alternative solutions (Analog power with remote control, e.g. Bridgeworks) this is not cheap either.

I am more than happy to advise in any direction. While I am a DCC fan, I have developed an applicability scale, and unless any extra circumstances that I don't see justify it your are below the DCC applicability.


----------



## shadowvfx (May 3, 2010)

Alex, the impression I've gotten is that my setup definitely is too simple to justify a DCC system at the moment. Perhaps in the future, or if I have excess money to spend on the hobby, I can look into it more. However, the current inconveniences of my two parallel tracks running on a ceiling train layout simply don't justify the large cost and time and energy required to make it a DCC system.

I appreciate everyone's input and hope that this thread will perhaps help someone else make an educated decision in the future.


----------



## Jerrys RR (Jun 28, 2010)

This may help to sort out your options:

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/jerrysrr/LGB/Explore%20LGB.pdf

Jerry


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I like the "torture test" layout on page 94, where the track sections don't even line up in the drawing! 

Not a thing on MTS though. 

And to top it off, and explanation of the "conductive grease", which left me rolling on the floor.... Had not considered that theory. 

Good reference document Jerry, nice way to explain many of the LGB "boxes"... 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Jerrys RR (Jun 28, 2010)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 07 Sep 2010 04:16 PM 
I like the "torture test" layout on page 94, where the track sections don't even line up in the drawing! 

Not a thing on MTS though. 

And to top it off, and explanation of the "conductive grease", which left me rolling on the floor.... Had not considered that theory. 

Good reference document Jerry, nice way to explain many of the LGB "boxes"... 

Regards, Greg 



Hi Greg,

I suspect they used something like RR Track to design their torture track. My experience with RR Track is that it only gets me close to the final fit on something complicated and then I have to do the final cuts based on what I end up with.

Granted nothing on MTS but as Axel pointed out "If you are just looking to control the speed of a locomotive and maybe one or two switches I couldn't justify DCC - unless you want to be open to future expansions and you don't see just this project as the justification. DCC for simple layouts is an overkill" along with his response "Alex, the impression I've gotten is that my setup definitely is too simple to justify a DCC system at the moment."

I have no position for or against MTS/DCC. The book gives examples of what can be done without the need for DCC - if that is what he wants to do.

Actually I swear by LGB's Conductive Paste and I totally agree with the description:

*51010 Conductive Paste. For outdoor layout builders, this graphite lubricant is essential. Just put a small amount, the size of a pea, in each rail joiner to keep out water, resist corrosion and improve conductivity.*

I use that LGB paste on every single joint (even my stainless steel joints). I seldom use clamps - usually just using LGB or Aristo joiners and reserving (the expense of) clamps for when and if I find a problem. My personal experience has been that I often pull LGB brass track that has been outside for years and discover that while the rest of the LGB brass track is highly tarnished the rail under the joiner that has the LGB conductive paste still looks like new.

My crawl space/garage layout is unheated, uncooled and at times quite damp. It has 1,786 feet of LGB brass track including 113 electric LGB turnouts. There is not a single clamp anywhere on the layout but every single joint has LGB Conductive Paste in it. Occasionally I might have to run a LGB Track Cleaning Loco to clean the top surface of the track but I have never had a single instance where I needed to fix a joint due to any sort of conductivity problem that developed. I have had similar results with LGB brass track outside with LGB's Conductive Paste. Since my track never touches the ground I don't have an opinion about how the paste might work if it was subjected to dirt or immersed in water.

I would not try to convince someone else to use it but it would not be right for me to not speak up for a product that has performed so well for me. I would not make any effort to explain or defend its composition or characteristics beyond the simple fact that I could not be happier than I have been using it. I would freely admit that I am probably wasting my money putting it on stainless steel and nickel plated joints but it reassures me to do so - so I do it. 
Its sort of like the LGB Jumbo. Other power supplies may beat it hands down by every specification but regardless of the "facts" my first choice in power supplies (as with oil, conductive paste and gear grease) will always be LGB.


Regards,

Jerry


----------



## Tom Bray (Jan 20, 2009)

Maybe the LGB grease is why I don't see a dramatic difference between the clamps and the Aristo rail joiners ... never thought of that. The store that helped me get started insisted that I put the stuff on every joint, or at least the screws. Actually I usually run a small bead along the length of the joiner, plus put it on the screw threads. I just assumed that everyone used that stuff. 

I am not sure about trying to melt the stuff though. 

Tom


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

The part I referred to about the grease (which is a good idea)... is where they say there are tiny balls of graphite (nuts, since it's in flakes, just look at the molecular structure), that are insulators when then float in the grease, but when put in a joiner and then put on the rail the pressure "crushes" the "balls of graphite" and then they conduct. 

Jeeze, that IS funny. I wonder if they really believe that. Sounds like the "coating" on Aristo stainless track that Lewis said to not remove. 

Greg


----------



## Tom Bray (Jan 20, 2009)

Someone probably made a puddle of grease and stuck an ohm meter into it and it didn't read 0 ohms. I just ignored that part of it, especially after reading descriptions of how computer software works, or mechanical devices, electrical devices, etc. Many people will add their own spin. The balls of graphite may be related to trying to translate German into English and it got messed up. 

What coating on Aristo SS track? I do know that I get a coating on the wheels of the Eggliner if I don't wipe down the track before I run it - very annoying. 

Tom


----------



## Jerrys RR (Jun 28, 2010)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 07 Sep 2010 07:26 PM 
The part I referred to about the grease (which is a good idea)... is where they say there are tiny balls of graphite (nuts, since it's in flakes, just look at the molecular structure), that are insulators when then float in the grease, but when put in a joiner and then put on the rail the pressure "crushes" the "balls of graphite" and then they conduct. 

Jeeze, that IS funny. I wonder if they really believe that. Sounds like the "coating" on Aristo stainless track that Lewis said to not remove. 

Greg 

Hi Greg,

I did not see any reference to tiny balls of graphite but then I was not looking for them. Your comment mentioned "explanation of the "conductive grease" so I just did a word search for "conductive" which found the description I posted. I would not be surprised if there was an inaccurate description of the process as the product was probably designed/selected by someone who knew what they were talking about and the rest written by marketing who may or may not had a clue as to what they were writing about. 
Personally I would not know what form graphite is in and I have no idea who wrote whatever they did. I was just commenting on my appreciation for how well the product has worked for me. My impression is that the heat of the summer melts the paste which enables it to flow around the inside of the joiner. In fact the joiner has no paste where LGB put it onto the end of the rail so whether the paste flows to that or not I can't say.

Regards,


Jerry


----------



## Jerrys RR (Jun 28, 2010)

I looked again and found this: 



"Some people use mechanical devices to rigidly clamp the rails together. However, these “rail clamps” are expensive, and they prevent the natural and necessary movement of the rails with expansion and contraction. Soldering jumper wires to the rails is possible, but difficult. 

Another solution is far less expensive and far less difficult: LGB 51010 Graphite Lubricant. Just put a small amount—the size of a pea—in each rail joiner when you assemble the track. 

How does this help rail joiners? One of the materials in 51010 is graphite. Graphite is a low-resistance material, but as long as *the graphite is in suspension within microscopic balls of grease*, there is no electrical effect. However, when 51010 is placed under pressure, like between the rail and rail joiner, the situation changes. The *balls of grease *are crushed, leaving the graphite in direct contact with the rail and the rail joiner. 

Now current can flow from the rail to the rail joiner via the graphite. This lubricant also has a low evaporation rate and good resistance to moisture and oxidation. So it stays in the joiner after you put it there, even outdoors. That prevents oxygen from entering the joiner, and so, there is no chance for the brass to corrode." 



As I read it I don't see anything wrong with it (this does not mean much). Rather than saying the graphite is in balls it is saying that the grease is in balls. Of course I don't know if grease can be in microscopic balls or not.

I have no idea how accurate or inaccurate the description of the chemistry of the above is. All I know is what I have observed of the end result - that the brass does not corrode where it had been coated with the LGB Conductive Paste. 
Regards,


Jerry


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

The grease is not in balls, they really wrote it screwed up. 

The grease is the carrier, like thick liquid. The graphite is mixed in, it's in thin flakes, due to it's molecular structure. 

How can you have little balls of grease inside a big container of grease... it's like balls of honey inside a jar of honey... nuts. 

I think what they wanted to say was that there are balls of graphite in the grease. Since they are separate balls, there is no conduction in the grease "normally" (they have to explain why the "conductive grease" is not conductive when tested with an ohmmeter) 

Now, you are to believe that the little bits of graphite conduct when they are crushed between the rail joiner and the rails. 

In reality, there is metal to metal contact. You can prove this by using ANY grease in a rail joiner, and when assembled it still conducts. There is metal to metal contact, there must be. 

When you consider it, metal to metal will be more conductive than metal to graphite to metal, since graphite is LESS conductive than metal. 

There's just so many ludicrous parts to those paragraphs, I just have to guffaw out loud. 

Every year someone comes on the forum and makes a big deal that they have conductive grease, because the LGB tube says so. 

For any scientist to believe the paragraphs above, they would have to be high on crack. 

(there are actually conductive greases, and they are normally infused with gold, silver, copper, or nickle) (and they are nasty when they get where they should not be) 

Bottom line, the LGB grease is just fine, and so is basically any other grease in this application, it's NOT magic grease. Not everything LGB does is sacred. (all) Grease keeps out air, stops oxidation, displaces moisture. 

Buy a large tub lithium based wheel bearing grease with moly in it, and you will be miles ahead, and save a ton of money.

Regards, Greg


----------



## Tom Bray (Jan 20, 2009)

I was originally under the impression that the graphite was more a long term lubricant than anything else. My biggest concern was the screws becoming part of the track and not being able to remove them. Ditto for the rail clamps. I think it is called galling. That and the grease assists in making a gas tight connection which is what is required to keep the connection conductive and not corroding or oxidizing. 

A friend of mine recommended a grease (I can get the name if someone wants) that is available in auto stores and is recommended for protecting electrical contacts. It seems to work fine but it does a better job of collecting dirt though and since it is clear, it is harder to see where it is. For me the big advantage is that I can see where it is or isn't. 

One tube of the "magic" grease lasts a very long time so buying a huge container of another grease might be cheaper, you won't use it up joining the track. 

Tom


----------



## Jerrys RR (Jun 28, 2010)

For me there are two different issues.

1. keeping the brass rail to brass joiner contact area clean and free from corrosion
2. lubricating the connection so that the thermal expansion and contraction of the rails is enabled without losing electrical conductivity. 

This is somewhat different between LGB and Aristo in that brass LGB joiners have much better memory and retain their grip on the rails while the brass Aristo joiners are less flexible, tend to be brittle and can snap in two. Since LGB depends on friction and Aristo depends on screws both methods work.

There may be better or cheaper ways of accomplishing this but in the overall scheme of things the cost (to me) of the LGB Conductive Paste is relatively insignificant. Once I have gone to the expense of buying LGB brass track it simply makes me more comfortable using the material LGB recommends to seal the joint.

Some things I give a lot of thought to while other things I simply so whatever the manufacturer recommends. I don't question or debate anything Greg has said. I just find that for me following LGB's recommendations leaves me with fewer decisions to make or even give any major effort at figuring out why they did or did not do something.

Its the same thought process for why I buy John Deere oil and transmission fluid for my old John Deere tractor and Mercury oil for my boat motors. I KNOW there have to be other lubricants as good or better and certainly cheaper but I just don't want to put the effort into researching what they are. 
On the other hand I would not tell other John Deere and Mercury owners which lubricants they should be using because I just do whatever I find in the instruction manuals.


Jerry


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

And I DO have a tube of LGB grease. It's not a bad grease. If I needed more though, I would buy something better. 

It obviously works well enough for most people. Is there a better grease that can be used in more applications, yes, I believe so. 

Can you buy something just as good or better for a lot less? Yes, I know so. 

Nothing wrong with the LGB grease, my point was it's not magic, the "crushing balls of graphite" is BS, and there are alternatives. 

I prefer grease with moly, which is slipperier and handles higher temps. Then I can use this grease in more applications. 

Regards, Greg


----------

