Steve:
You are most welcome, and Thank you for the kind credit.  As I was reading the first paragraph I thought "hmm, haven't I read this someplace"  LOL.

Your post is an encouragement to me to continue helping others whenever I can.

"Yampa" means "Bear" in Ute Indian.  I sign either way depending on my mood at the time.

Bob

Might have been "Details West" or "Details Associates".

Bob

Sheldon: Good points, and I agree.  I'm beginning to see why layouts, small or large use visual barriers to give the illusion of time like park a train in a tunnel or blind, then have it reappear later. I plan to use natural barriers like mountains, dense trees and such.

Someone mentioned "speed matching" which brings up another scenario I am working through with both DC and DCC.

I like to run 2  UP or Rio Grande diesels with 10  RG, UP, and BNSF coal cars.  The real ones are usually 3 front, 4 in the middle back to back,  and 2 reversed at the rear, with 100 cars between. (empty 2 front, loaded 3 front)  I just run one leading, another rear.  Never mind turning the rear one around for now, this is a speed, not a proto, concern.

I put just the locos on the track 1/2 lap from each other and run full throttle.  Fairly well matched, but after about 20 or 30 laps, one catches up to the other. In my mind, I'm thinking there is no way to match them precisely in a consist. 

If I put the faster one up front, it's dragging the rear one and couplers are tight. Put the slow one front, and the rear is pushing, and all the couplers are slack.  The latter actually caused one car to uncouple on a curve and derail.  Even the more precise Kadee has more slop than a real coupler, right?

In a real consist, the engineer has control of all the locos with rpm and load sensors so all engines are balanced. Hit a steep grade and maybe the rear unit increases as needed.  I don't know hoot about real trains, I'm speaking theory and with some reading.  Please don't go off on a tangeant on this, like to stick to the main issue.

Ok, with DC I'm just stuck with a little speed difference.  I usually just put the faster one up front, causes no damage to the rear, the front unit may be a bit noisier with the load and run a little warmer, but at least the couplers are tight. Easy, hook up and run them, forget any slight mismatch.

The only way I can see doing better with DCC is to put the locos on the track and fiddle around matching the speeds (if I can adjust CVs) so they will run several laps and maintain exact interval at the same exact throttle setting.  This requires having each loco on a separate address, then when consisted having them both on the same address.  There is still no guarantee of precise matching in the final consist under all load conditions.  Is this really worth the effort?   

Bob

Sir Richie
I was describing the same thing you did in your second paragraph, but didn't know those fancy words like "risers" and "footer".  LOL

Thanks to some years in the precision optics business, and a jeweler friend, I have very teensy weensy screws, bolts and nuts.  All accessories such as snow plows, hopper extensions, etc gets bolted or screwed.  This comes from many years of attaching cowlings, nacelles and canopies on scale RC planes.  I never glue on what I can screw on.  Oh my , no matter how I phrase that it's bad LMAO...

I better shut up while I'm ahead.  I'm having one of those "open mouth insert foot" days....

Bob

HO:  I remember your post, and yes at the time I was seriously considering the DCC turnout.  I am just having second thoughts which is very normal for me. 

I intend to buy a good book on wiring, just haven't decided which one.  Atlas has some, Carstens has others as you mentioned. I want an advanced book, not one that starts out with 2 chapters on electrical theory, how to solder and wire gauge ampacities.  Due to vision problems, I want lots of diagrams with as little text as possible.  In other words, "Don't tell me, show me".  Schematics rule, text drools.

Gene: I'm starting small with the intention of expanding. (it's a matter of age and expected longevity )  I don't, as yet have the length needed for "pass and meet" sidings.  I don't really want double tracks, I figure if one train looks dumb going in circles, 2 loops just doubles the dumbness, right?

My goal will be a mainline from Denver through the Moffat Tunnel, to Grand Junction, with the branch line I now have serving several towns and our ranch.  I'm remodeling my office/shop in the garage, and that will give me a 12' X 20' room.  That will be the point where I have to make some hard decisions. I don't like "shoulda, coulda" so I plan my projects years in advance.  Of course the older one gets, the more urgent the project.

I have a few more questions and comments but will stop here and add later. I'm pasting all these great comments into a pdf when I get the software.

Bob

Only in America, wow, if that doesn't give you goosebumps better call the undertaker.
Thanks
Bob

I'm getting some great advice, making notes along the way. I appreciate everyone's courteous candor.

At this point I'm glad I can't adjust CVs.

Here's the scenario:  Guy gets a brand new DCC loco, starts it up and it has a little surge at slow speeds, maybe some roughness at mid throttle, a few groans or growls, so he immediately starts messing with the CVs or takes it completly apart  before even breaking the thing in.

The longer I run my locos, the quieter they become.  So far the only benefit I've gleaned is the ability to adjust startup voltage with DCC, and run multiple locos. I think the maximum I could handle on my layout is maybe 2 at the most, and then only when I have 2 separate loops to run on. Of course I do like the "park one run another" benefit.   I have 8 active  locos, (4 in the "shed") would be nice to have them all available without having to isolate sidings and using switches.   

The next question is a bit "off the wall", but I'm curious.

What about the voltage and amperage characteristics of DCC?  With DC, it's a walk in the park, but measuring Digital requires a scope.  It's not AC but rather a "clock signal" square wave.  So I'm only concerned about such practical things as smoothness,  linearity,  and  I suppose overall efficiency.  I've read the features, but like to know the benefits toward realistic railroading.

So far I can't see any difference in these aspects, between DC and DCC.  Overall, I'm probably giving a very tiny edge toward the DCC. (almost a photo finish at the line) I'm referring to the EZ I have, I don't foresee any windfall in the near future to justify upgrading to a higher end unit. 

Perhaps when (I should say "if") my wife ever lets me DCC her Roaring Ridge, I might store the Magnum. I keep suggesting, she just says leave it alone.   

Bob

Unless there is something really wrong out of the box, I don't adjust anything until running the loco for about an hour, forward and back, at varying speeds.  They all need a break in period.

My motto is, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Bob

The more I run my GP40s, the quieter they become.   When I get a new one, I run it for about an hour, forward and backward, varying the speeds at intervals.

Bob

My biggest concern is the current technology explosion.  We buy something today, tomorrow it's obsolete.  That's ok for the manufacturers, they just keep pumping out new stuff, and we end up with yesterday's garbage. 

This is the age of expendability.  You don't repair a computer, just trash it and get a new one.  This craziness is spilling over to the young people.   

Think about this: Millions of years from now, when the Earth is a barren lump, archaeologists from other planets will land here.  Imagine what they will think about the "treasures" they dig up.  Someone should put a Bachmann train set in a time capsule.

Bob

Yes sir, coming right up Sir Richie,

Where was I?  Oh yeah, I notice  some modelers make stirrups for a boxcar with .015 or .020 PB wire, then stick them up underneath the box.  But to be authenic, shouldn't they "bolted" to the side of the box? 

Usually the box comes off, so I drill 2 holes on the side, a tad above the bottom, poke them through and "clinch" them down on the inside. They still look a bit odd, but at least they don't fall off.

Real stirrups are wider but flat.  I've never tried this, but I'm thinking, use a piece of thin brass about 1/32" wide, long enough to bend for the  step, then twist the tops to bolt to the sides, using scale rivets. 

We used to make them that way for farm wagons, using steel strap 2" wide X 1/4" thick, heat with a torch and twist for a mounting base.   

Anyone tried this?

Bob

I sometimes wish I had made the transition to trains earlier, say 15 years ago, more years to enjoy the hobby.

But then I think, well suppose I had started earlier?  I would now have a bunch of worn out locos, poorly detailed rolling stock, horn couplers, obsolete track and turnouts.  At least I'm starting with what I consider state of the art, including DCC equipped and well made locos.   

I'm satisfied with the timing,  I'm probably farther ahead now than I would be if I did start many years ago.  I got my son and grandson into the hobby recently.  They are building a large layout that will have both trains and slot cars.  Someday all my stuff will be shipped to them.

Bob

Yeah I could, picked up some Midwest basswood lapboard in two widths.  The sheets are all curled up so I have to wet them and weight them down first.   Just like real lumber, can't buy good stuff anymore.

The hardest part will be the metal roofs.  Evergreen's so called metal is just a flat sheet with lots of grooves, you have to glue in  tiny strips and doesn't look real

Bob

Since you say it is not the track, then it must the CV or some other problem.

Read the manual again and adjust the CV.

If you didn't like the responses on the other thread, you should remove it and start a new one, instead of having 2 threads on the same subject. 

Yampa

Yup, we kicked the last one out in 1776.  Guess what, we now have a "King George"
(country music or politics,take your choice)

Bob