I switched from ho scale to 3-rail in 1987, using a couple of post war ZW'a.
In 1998 rebuilt the layout with conventional wiring with 2 control panels but switched mainline transformer to a MTH Z-4000.

Recently aquired a remote to make it easier for the youngsters to operate the railroad. It always amazes me the enthusiasm they have for 3-rail trains.



I was wondering. Does anyone still run their layout in conventional control?

Charlie:

I'm sure you will find many who still operate in conventional mode, but with all the features of Lionel and MTH electronic remote control systems and with the features of Legacy and PS2 equipment, most of us favor the newest technology. It is similar to televisions going from black and white to color. Black and white worked, but who wouldn't want to watch in color or HDTV?

I use conventional control. Just haven't decided to spend
any extra in switching to legacy or whatever plus the fact
that I just feel confortable using the old method. Have all my switches set up
"automatically" and even then, I many times prefer to hand
operate them.

rufus

I had built a layout that was fully command control operated. I did this as I wanted to have the full experience of new electronics. I recently took down that layout and have most of the new layout in place. This one is only conventionally run at this time though it is wired to easily enable command control in the future. I have three grandchildren (more on the way) and notice that they prefer the hands on approach that conventional control allows. So, command control will be a future build for me even though I have all of the electronics required to do it now.

I run conventional with sound. I made the conscience decision to do this because of 3 limiting factors.....space for my layout, goals for what I wanted to collect and operate and budget.

I have been able to have my cake and eat it too because of these. I have traditional sized, semi scale, O-27, Toy rail running in conventional with sound, near modelling the great railroads of the mid-west.

As I have many older engines and a lot of Hornby locos who never knew what sound or electronics was, I have kept mainly to conventional running. A lot of my modern engines full of electronics seem to go bad frequently so why bother with the control system if one has these situations to contend with.

I have three now, back in the box; whether they get fixed is another matter; I have plenty more to play with.

I'm running a single track, dogbone-shaped, 0-54 layout (6x16) with a Z750, CAB-1, and PowerMaster. I have 2 locosound and 2 PS2 engines, along with an old Lionel Scout and a BEEP. I rarely run the Scout or BEEP, but the others run fine. I do primarily switching and all my engines creep along nice and slow thru turnouts and sidings.

I had removed the CAB-1/PM until a few weeks ago because I was getting good running without them. When I added an offline track for staging, I re-connected the CAB-1/PM because I have to turn away from the rest of the layout and wanted a handheld remote.

Yep, I will still run conventional locos even though the layout is set-up with TMCC and DCS. I do run the conventional stuff through my DCS set-up which gives me the freedom to walk around the layout.

Yes! Conventional control is used by the silent majority.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: David from Dearborn,

Old school here....and no plans to change any time soon.....maybe right after I win the lottery! I know.....i know...it's not THAT $$$$ but I have GOOD conventional power packs and do not feel the need for DCS or TM**.....but good for those that do!

quote:

Yes! Conventional control is the used by the silent majority.

Probably very true, I guess that is why Williams conventional locomotives sell well.

Except for my wee test layout I'm still in the planning stages, but the plan as of now is to go conventional. Several months of three-rail forums study has convinced me that I would prefer to solve conventional problems rather than deal with the nuance, or is it nuisance, of the new "sophisticated" type trains. Looks like I'm shapin' up to be a Williams/post-war toy train enthusiast.

Pete

There's sure nothing wrong with conventional control. I have both TMCC and DCS available (no Legacy yet because there's no motive power available in my preferred roadname), but 90% of the time I operate my trains in conventional mode. My layouts (two of them) are modest in size and easily operated with conventional control, which still provides me most of the features I desire, including sounds and speed control.

But, then, I'm no youngster, so I neither need nor want to focus my entire existence around things digital.

You bet it is the only way I run my trains.I use the MTH Z4000 remote all the time. Why they quit making it was really dumb.

I have TMCC and Legacy which are great but still prefer conventional.

There is something about grabbing the controls of a ZW and pushing buttons with the big L on them that command control will never top.

100 % conventional and loving it!

Decided to go conventional on 12 loops and have DCS and TMCC available on additional two isolated loops mainly to show off to visitors.Running converted MTH, Williams and Postwar steam nowadays.

Boomer

Interesting to see how many on this forum are running convential. Not a scientific survey - whatever that is - but it is indicative of a strong interest in keeping things simple and nostalgic.

Food for thought - there have been about 87,000 posts on the two OGR forums dedicated entirely to electronic control systems. Virtually all are requests for help - how to set it up or how to keep it performing properly. And how many posts on the 3-rail forum are related to failures of electronic components?

But, respectfully as always, to each their own...

I may run conventional, but that doesn't mean there's nothing about command engines I don't like. The steam chuff and diesel rumble are 2 things I wish all conventional engines had. Also, my 2 locosound engines cut completely off whenever I reverse direction, the PS2 engines don't (I guess it's a capacitance discharge that keeps the sound going while changing direction). Also, the cruise control is nice.

Williams/Bachmann ought to give some thought about adding the rumble & chuff to their engines.

I run conventional,mainly because I'm in Australia, with no tech support if things go wrong. But most of my locos have sound, the new layout will have lots of sound and effects, but my narrow gauge has DCC with sounds.

quote:

Originally posted by David from Dearborn:
Yes! Conventional control is the used by the silent majority.

All conventional, all the time.

I've been running 3 rail conventional for almost 60 yrs. now. Many times there's 4 trains running plus 2 point to point interburban lines and a bump and go trolly. Just seems the natural way. Am I going to change? MAYBE.

I run conventional with a collision avoidance block system. There are things easily done with conventional that are difficult with command systems. I use Railsounds 4 for sound. I can run engines from any manufacturer and can buy motive power much cheaper and also have more reliability.

Dale H

On my new layout, a double main with 11 sidings, everything is conventional.

The command sounds don't really excite me. Ditto with wanting to run multiple trains on the same track as I don't like me trains chasing one another on my layout. The only command feature that I miss is the ability for remote uncoupling. I've tried to minimize this by placing 11 uncoupling tracks throughout the layout.

The plus side of conventional is that original scale size K-Line engines were always about $150 less than TMCC versions, you can buy nice (if somewhat sparesly detailed) older brass scale sized engines for $200 - $300 bucks, and Atlas has come out for some nice Trainman engines that can be had for under $200 bucks!

Conventional not only rocks, it's affordable!

Jim

For the way I seem to enjoy the hobby, conventional control makes more sense for me.

I ran conventionally for a number of years then purchased a DCS system as I had conventional and DCS engines with the plan to add some TMCC engines (which I later did) and I thought it would be better to purchased one system than have DCS, TMCC, and Legacy systems hooked up with all different handhelds.

I had issues with DCS, unhooked it, went conventionally and haven't been back. I still have the DCS stuff and have hooked it up twice since going conventionally. One time it was to test a repair and the other to change the chuff rate on a DCS steamer. I no longer have the TMCC equipment and I don't run the engines anymore as the boards are fried and I didn't see any point in spending money on a repair that would cost about the same price as the engine.

Conventional and loving it!

Mike

Conventional. But I own several proto 2.0 & tmcc engines.

Conventional run here. I learned about trains at a very early age from my grandfather. I still run his engines now and then. (circa 1945/1955) My layout is wired with many lockouts using switches and indicator lights. My grand kids love watching and runing them the same as I did way back when. SO its Conventional run here you can see the control panels on my page below.

quote:

Originally posted by pennsyk4:
I switched from ho scale to 3-rail in 1987, using a couple of post war ZW'a.
In 1998 rebuilt the layout with conventional wiring with 2 control panels but switched mainline transformer to a MTH Z-4000.

Recently aquired a remote to make it easier for the youngsters to operate the railroad. It always amazes me the enthusiasm they have for 3-rail trains.



I was wondering. Does anyone still run their layout in conventional control?

Explain that device. Is it a DECEPTICON??
Seriously what is it? I'm not familiar.

I run conventional mostly MTH PS2 using TPC 3 loops...love it.

The Z4000 Remote is a wireless control device for communicating directly with the Z4000 transformer. Allows the operator to move around the layout (up to about 20 feet, I believe) while still controlling transformer functions. Also requires a receiver connected to the transformer.

I don't know if the device is still being offered.

quote:

I don't know if the device is still being offered.

No, it is not offered but should be. See I follow the hobby Allan. This is one item Mike should reissue.

Al

TMCC convention al rocks. and if i get a command loco, I am ready

I am happy with conventional but do have TMCC but it is still in the box, someday I will get around to hooking it up. When I do I'm sure I will kick myself for not doing it sooner.

Paul

I have TMCC and I run conventional about 50% of the time and in command control the other 50%. I love it because I get the best of both worlds. I like the modern electronics and really enjoy the sounds but there are times I just like to run good old ozone producing post-war lionels and take that trip back in time.

I run 3 loops with 3 small packs and no sound, just smoke and whistles and have a ball. I have ordered DCS hardware to go remote and am excited about that.
I guess it also depends on what you run. Sometimes basic other times premier.


Have a safe 4th

Brent

We still run convential here...where new and working with kids, so its just better for newbies to work with the budget constraints of conventional. You can focus more on the trains than on the controls.

-LV

quote:

I was wondering. Does anyone still run their layout in conventional control?

Happy Rails to you
Charlie

I still do with that remote device too! I also bought a back-up since they are not being made anymore!

Still rebuilding my layout, 2 lines, 2 engines with trains, Lionel NASCAR engine and train powered by Lionel CW-80, MTH Railking PS2 Pennsylvania 2-8-0 engine with Passenger train powered by MTH Z-1000, 100% conventional control.
No plans to go command control at all.

Sincerely, Gary P

Yes I run only conventional control for a modest size layout (with 7 separate independent tracks). I'm very happy with conventional, and have no plans to change.

John
TCA

Hi Charley, I have both DCS and TMCC but I too have that remote controler for my Z4K and it dose work great. It is the best way in the world to run "conventional".

quote:

Charlie:

I'm sure you will find many who still operate in conventional mode, but with all the features of Lionel and MTH electronic remote control systems and with the features of Legacy and PS2 equipment, most of us favor the newest technology.

Reading up to this point seems like conventional has an edge. I run both conventional and command control. depends on my mood and what my son and I want to run ...

coventional. 90% williams equipment. no problems. just fun!

quote:

Food for thought - there have been about 87,000 posts on the two OGR forums dedicated entirely to electronic control systems. Virtually all are requests for help - how to set it up or how to keep it performing properly. And how many posts on the 3-rail forum are related to failures of electronic components?

You forgot those "Runaway Accidents" with $1000,00 engines!

And lets not kid ourselves here, TMCC and DCS are not compatable with conventional control because those systems require 18=20V across the tracks constantly.

Furthurmore, with conventional control, there is no such thing as "outdated and/or ioncompatable electronics" to keep the trains running!

Oh heck YES. I run conventional all the time. Except if I have visitors then TMCC allows me to chit-chat and keep an eye on the trains. I have two controllers so others can play too.

Im only interested in conventional running. I see the advantage in DCS and TMCC, But it doesn't interest me.
Rob

I'm essentially all DCS now . . . although i still have the ability to run conventional (an ability i valued when installing, but don't seem to use).

I find it very difficult to mentally switch between conventional and DCS. The absolute worst is mixed operations with multi-train. Inevitably a conventional engine will find its way onto a DCS block, hit the 18 volts and off-to-the-races.

Command -- wherein you directly control engines, irrespective of locations -- is just such a much more natural control model for me.

I say all this as someone that rejected command in 2002 when i built the layout and didn't install it until two years ago. Go figure. I'm slow to learn.

Such systems are more fiddly though, and the engines -- with their electronics pack -- more delicate. Ironically though, the only engine issues i have had are NOT associated with the electronics (yet!)

-- gary ray

I collect and run mostly prewar Lionel with some postwar for the grand kids. Conventional is the best for me.

For those that use the Z4000 Remote, is it easier to use the thumb wheel than it is using the big red knob on my CAB-1? Is the "window" at the top of the remote a scale MPH readout screen?

The one thing I don't like about the CAB-1 is there's no positive stop position. I've gotten use to the free-spinnning knob, but I'd still prefer a solid stop although a readout would give me a visual indication of when I'm about to come to a halt or at least close to 0 mph.