# What does "DCC Friendly" mean?



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

What does "DCC Friendly" mean?
Walthers uses the phrase in their RDC BUDD series.

I'd like to have one equipped with sound, but I'm not sure if "DCC Friendly" means I can.

They offer it lettered in S.P. #10, which is prototype. It'd make a nice addition to my overall plan.

http://www.trainworld.com/manufactu...h-dcc-friendly-southern-pacific-10-920-35264/


----------



## wvgca (Jan 21, 2013)

I have no actual experience with this unit ... but their term is ambiguous ... 
if it said 'DCC Ready" , that would be more understandable ..

on the Walthers site, that model is listed as "Revised Circuit Board with NMRA 8-Pin Plug for Easy DCC Conversion ", which makes more sense .

there may be different versions, as that one is shown as a 'revised' board??


----------



## DougL (Feb 2, 2016)

*Motor is insulated from frame*

1. The motor is insulated from the frame
2. The motor's connection to the rails can be easily switched to connections to the decoder

In all DCC applications, the motor must be insulated from the frame if the frame carries rail current. The decoder is the only thing that should deliver DC voltage to the motor.

To be friendly, it is not enough for the motor to be insulated by a plastic cradle. The wires from the motor should not be soldered to the frame, there should be an easy mechanical disconnect. The mechanical connection could be strange clips on a PC board, or straightforward like a mini plug.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

Rapido's #SP-10 (w/ESU LokSound) was at Tony's Train Xchange for $285... but pre-ordering ended in April. Gone now.
It's an awesome unit. Guess I'll just have to look around for it.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

I believe you are conflating terms. I don't believe Walthers ever used that term -- it is more likely Trainworld made a mistake.

DCC Ready is usually, as above, a DC unit which needs nothing more than a plug in decoder to make it DCC.

DCC Friendly is a more nebulous marketing term. Applied to a locomotive / RDC, it probably would mean DCC ready, but I wouldn't put money on it. It is usually applied to turnouts, and generally denotes an insulated frog (which, properly wired is really no more dcc friendly than any other).

wvgca is right though, the Walther's Budd RDC units are DCC Ready.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

"DCC friendly" has pertained only to turnouts for as long as I have been in the hobby. "DCC ready" has always meant that the locomotive merely needs a suitable decoder and speaker if sound, and that both can be placed and connected easily. Often they have a light board and some other 'junk' (Bachmann a few short years ago) that was best removed entirely and the decoder allowed to manage those functions.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

You'ens are probably tired of hearing from me on
'DCC friendly' turnouts. I insist it's a marketing
gimmick. It seems to pertain to insulated or
powered frogs, the 'friendly' ones are powered.

A short wheel base loco or any loco with only
4 power pickup wheels
may have difficulty going through a turnout with an
insulated frog, It would not matter whether it was
DC or DCC.

Don


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

DonR said:


> You'ens are probably tired of hearing from me on
> 'DCC friendly' turnouts. I insist it's a marketing
> gimmick. It seems to pertain to insulated or
> powered frogs, the 'friendly' ones are powered.
> ...


I agree that it's a marketing gimmick, which is why I said above that one is no more friendly than the other. 

Walthers disagrees with you on a "friendly" frog: they say it's insulated: "Features electrically isolated frogs and points to eliminate polarity problems that may cause short circuits when decoder-equipped locos or cars with metal wheels enter the turnout."


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

CTvalley.

I don't know exactly what Walther's is saying about
the 'friendly' issue. I can read the statement you
quote as saying the frog is 'isolated'. That is what
a electrofrog is, isolated from the stock rails but
has the capability of being powered with changeable
polarity. Their copy writer needs to be a bit more
precise.

No matter, there would be the same problem whether
the loco is DC or DCC. A short is a short, or a lack
of power pickup is a lack of power pickup.

Don


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*DCC "friendly" turnouts?*



CTValleyRR said:


> I agree that it's a marketing gimmick, which is why I said above that one is no more friendly than the other.
> 
> Walthers disagrees with you on a "friendly" frog: they say it's insulated: "Features electrically isolated frogs and points to eliminate polarity problems that may cause short circuits when decoder-equipped locos or cars with metal wheels enter the turnout."


CTValley, and DonR;

I agree with you both that an advertiser will use any term that sells the product. Concern for truth seems to be non-existent.
That said, at least as far as I'm concerned, a "DCC friendly" turnout ought to have something besides a electrically isolated frog to qualify for even such a vague description. That would be having the each point rail shorted to its adjacent stock rail.
This means they will be the same polarity as each other. If a metal wheel shorts across these two closely-spaced rails; nothing will happen to blow any circuit breaker, or stall the train.
Traditional, power routing turnouts, with electrically switched frogs, had the same two rails at opposite polarity. Electrically, the points were simply extensions of the frog. A metal wheel touching both point, and stock rails would cause a brief short circuit; but with DC control in use, not likely a problem. The circuit breaker in a DC power pack was slow-acting, and thus forgiving of brief short circuits. Generally the loco just kept on going, with maybe a tiny stutter, if that. 
Enter DCC control, with very fast-acting circuit breakers protecting expensive, possibly vulnerable, electronics. Now, the same, brief, short circuit, would be more likely to trip the faster, and more sensitive, breakers of a DCC system. More likely, but hardly inevitable. 
Since I wanted the extra protection of same polarity rails in this area, I'm now modifying my scratch built turnouts to include it.
As for the manufacturer's, or advertiser's, description you quoted CT, it could be describing just about anything, or as Don says, nothing at all! I don't see how the average modeler could tell the difference. Perhaps the guy/gal writing that advertising copy, used to write political copy. That's about as obscure, and non-committal as language gets!:laugh:

Regards;
Traction Fan

PS. Purely as an aside; I'm in the process of writing up text, with photos, of how, and why I build turnouts. The "DDC friendly term is explained ( as well as I'm able to) in my pending article; for whatever that's worth.hwell:


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

traction fan said:


> PS. Purely as an aside; I'm in the process of writing up text, with photos, of how, and why I build turnouts. The "DDC friendly term is explained ( as well as I'm able to) in my pending article; for whatever that's worth.hwell:


I was not attempting to prove Don wrong (I would have used jumbled text, random highlights and quotes, and ascerbic language to do that). Rather, I wanted to point out that the definition of DCC friendly depended a lot on who was doing the defining. Sorry if that came off wrong.

Traction fan, I'm looking forward to that article. When can we expect to see it, and in what publication?


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Tractionfan

I readily agree that with the all wheel power pickup,
thus metal wheels, it could be possible for one to
touch opposing polarity rails in a turnout and cause
a short. However, I have 20 or so Peco
Insulfrog turnouts and 9 DCC diesel locomotives. So far as
I can tell, none have ever experienced this type of
short. My controller has not gone to short indication
because of it. But, as you say, the 'short' detection
circuit in my controller may be more forgiving.
Have you actually experienced this event?

Don


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*No problem*



CTValleyRR said:


> I was not attempting to prove Don wrong (I would have used jumbled text, random highlights and quotes, and ascerbic language to do that). Rather, I wanted to point out that the definition of DCC friendly depended a lot on who was doing the defining. Sorry if that came off wrong.
> 
> Traction fan, I'm looking forward to that article. When can we expect to see it, and in what publication?


 CTValley;

If my previous reply made you think, that I thought, you were "trying to prove Don wrong", that's "My bad" as they say. I would never try to prove either of you guys wrong. Even though I haven't been on this forum nearly as long as either of you, I've been here long enough to develop enormous respect for your excellent posts. Personally, I think Your, and DonR's " collective,"wrong" posts could be inscribed on the head of a pin; using a prototype spike for a scribe! You two flat out know what you're talking about! I.M.H.O.

As for the turnout article, I intended to post it here, on the "Need all your tips, how to s Etc." Sticky thread. The "article" ( I probably used the wrong word there) Is a long, multi-page, illustrated, description of my method of scratch-building turnouts. It's So long, because I needed to start at square one, since the few people interested would be "Newbies" to turnout building, and, in some cases, relative "Newbies" to the hobby. 
I don't think a magazine would publish it, do to it's length, and the limited appeal of its subject. However, I have another article about, making conifer trees, that I plan to submit to Model Railroader, and see if they want it.

regards;

Traction Fan


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

traction fan said:


> I don't think a magazine would publish it, do to it's length, and the limited appeal of its subject. However, I have another article about, making conifer trees, that I plan to submit to Model Railroader, and see if they want it.


We can all say we knew you on MTF before you made the big time. Good luck.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Short circuits*



DonR said:


> Tractionfan
> 
> I readily agree that with the all wheel power pickup,
> thus metal wheels, it could be possible for one to
> ...


Don;
Yes, I have seen such a short, but that was back when I was still using DC control. If the wheels, and the turnouts both are accurately gauged, Then the wheels shouldn't get into a short-causing position, unless one of the wheels is derailed, and "on the ground" in prototype lingo.
The problem might arise more often on turnouts that have extra room in the guard rail to stock rail gap, Or especially if the point to stock rail gap is too narrow. 
I'm a bit obsessed about trying to make trackwork as reliable as I can. No one needs to have this particular, "DCC ready" wiring set up. As long as everything is adjusted properly, shorts between the point and stock rail should be quite rare. My post was mainly intended to show that "DCC friendly" turnouts should include this feature (as some already do) AND that the description in the ad, is sorely in need of improvement! Right now, what constitutes "DCC friendly" is as clear as mud. You are probably correct that some of the turnouts using the tag line "DCC friendly" are physically, and electrically, no different than turnouts that don't. In other words, the term could well be meaningless. I know that Atlas brand, code 55, N scale turnouts have both an isolated frog, and same polarity point/stock rails. I don't know about other brands; particularly in other scales. My own turnouts either do have these features, or will be modified to include them.

regards;

Traction Fan


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

traction fan said:


> As for the turnout article, I intended to post it here, on the "Need all your tips, how to s Etc." Sticky thread. The "article" ( I probably used the wrong word there) Is a long, multi-page, illustrated, description of my method of scratch-building turnouts. It's So long, because I needed to start at square one, since the few people interested would be "Newbies" to turnout building, and, in some cases, relative "Newbies" to the hobby.
> I don't think a magazine would publish it, do to it's length, and the limited appeal of its subject. However, I have another article about, making conifer trees, that I plan to submit to Model Railroader, and see if they want it.
> 
> regards;
> ...


You might try Model Railroad Hobbyist. As an on-line only publication, they aren't nearly as finicky about length, and have no problem with multi-parters.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Thanks*



Cycleops said:


> We can all say we knew you on MTF before you made the big time. Good luck.



Cycleops:

Thanks for the traditional tongue-in cheek British humor!:laugh: 
"big time' indeed.

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Thanks CT*



CTValleyRR said:


> You might try Model Railroad Hobbyist. As an on-line only publication, they aren't nearly as finicky about length, and have no problem with multi-parters.


 CTV;

Thanks for the tip. I had not even thought about online publications.

Traction Fan


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

traction fan said:


> CTV;
> 
> Thanks for the tip. I had not even thought about online publications.
> 
> Traction Fan


If your article is as comprehensive as your typical post here, it deserves a wider audience than just us.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Lengthy article*



CTValleyRR said:


> If your article is as comprehensive as your typical post here, it deserves a wider audience than just us.


 First, thank you CTV. I'm flattered. I finished text last night; I do need to add a few more photos of things that are hard to describe verbally. The whole thing is 40 pages, but ,at least half of that length is occupied by photos, or blank portions of a page. So the actual text isn't all that long. A good editor could probably cut it down considerably, to suit a magazine format. It was written to cover everything from cost issues, to complete listings of tools and materials, and comprehensive, photo-illustrated, instructions. In short, someone who didn't know a turnout from a turnip, at the beginning, could follow the instructions and make a working turnout, by the end.
When the turnout, and conifer tree, making articles are both ready, I think I'll call Model Railroader, transmit the material, and get their opinion as to whether it is suitable for publication. If they turn them down, I'll try your online publisher, or N-Scale Magazine, which I'm told is a bit desperate for content. If possible, I still would like to post it here too.

regards;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## FreedomDoc (Aug 10, 2014)

LateStarter said:


> What does "DCC Friendly" mean?
> Walthers uses the phrase in their RDC BUDD series.
> 
> I'd like to have one equipped with sound, but I'm not sure if "DCC Friendly" means I can.
> ...


Since it can mean whatever the mfg. WANTS it to mean, it is meaningless.
(If the mfg. wants it to mean DCC ready they should just say that).


----------



## JNXT 7707 (May 5, 2013)

I'm going to go on record as declaring my entire layout "DCC hostile" :laugh:


----------



## FreedomDoc (Aug 10, 2014)

Well I have not had a working layout in 52 years (since I was 12 or 13), but now that I am close to retirement (and of the average age of a model railroader), I fully intend to get back into it. And I may just go with straight DC, as some of the prices of DCC locos are just ridiculous!


----------



## FreedomDoc (Aug 10, 2014)

FreedomDoc said:


> Well I have not had a working layout in 52 years (since I was 12 or 13), but now that I am close to retirement (and of the average age of a model railroader), I fully intend to get back into it. And I may just go with straight DC, as some of the prices of DCC locos are just ridiculous!


Maybe instead of griping about these prices, we could do something about them. I am well versed in computer programming in C and in C++, and could (with some study) write DCC code. Perhaps (with some help) we could create our own DCC2 and make it cheaper! Historically, though, I have been good at the software interfacing, but not so great with dealing with the hardware itself. But that is where the 'help' would come in!


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

Starting out in DCC has never been cheaper and no one could reasonably claim they prohibitively expensive. A DCC ready loco is the same as a DC one. A decoder is about $20 to convert it. A DCC controller is about twice the price of a conventional one. If you want sound of course it's going to be more.


----------



## FreedomDoc (Aug 10, 2014)

Cycleops said:


> Starting out in DCC has never been cheaper and no one could reasonably claim they prohibitively expensive. A DCC ready loco is the same as a DC one. A decoder is about $20 to convert it. A DCC controller is about twice the price of a conventional one. If you want sound of course it's going to be more.


When I went to Whistle Stop (the only model RR place in the Okla City metro AFAICT), he said a DCC ready loco is like $200 while a DC loco was 40 or 50.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Doc

I have 9 DCC locomotives, the average price
I paid for them is around 60.00.

I bought 2 Bachmann GP30 locos at train
shows for 25.00, installed a less than 20.00
decoder in each.

If you shop around, including the For Sale or trade
section right here on the Forum, you can have
the easier to wire, easier to run, and more
exciting DCC layout for hardly more than what
you'd spend for tired old DC.

Don


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

All HO scale trains from the major manufacturers produced in the last 10/15 years will be "DCC ready", that is to say they will readily convert to DCC by having a blanking plug removed and a decoder plugged in. By the same token they can be run as they are on DC circuitry so are "DC". I don't know what locos your local shop was offering you but he's way off base. Perhaps he has some old Athearn blue box which won't have a DCC plug. Sure you can spend $200 on a top end loco but you don't need to. In the last few months I have bought a Walthers and Bachmann switchers, both of which are DCC ready and around $60 each. Both excellent performers.


----------



## JNXT 7707 (May 5, 2013)

FreedomDoc said:


> .......he said a DCC ready loco is like $200 while a DC loco was 40 or 50.


Hmm....would be interested in seeing what locos he is talking about. 
I'm not into DCC at all - and I rarely buy anything new so maybe I'm a little out of touch, but I think you can find plenty of new DCC ready locos lower than $200 if you do some shopping around - more like $100 if you catch a special. Most any brand new loco is "DCC Ready", aren't they? 

Don't know what you could get for $40-$50 these days!


----------



## FreedomDoc (Aug 10, 2014)

Cycleops said:


> All HO scale trains from the major manufacturers produced in the last 10/15 years will be "DCC ready", that is to say they will readily convert to DCC by having a blanking plug removed and a decoder plugged in. By the same token they can be run as they are on DC circuitry so are "DC". I don't know what locos your local shop was offering you but he's way off base. Perhaps he has some old Athearn blue box which won't have a DCC plug. Sure you can spend $200 on a top end loco but you don't need to. In the last few months I have bought a Walthers and Bachmann switchers, both of which are DCC ready and around $60 each. Both excellent performers.


He definitely does have some old Athearn blue box DC stuff with no DCC plug, that is why I kinda liked the idea of going straight DC. But the DCC stuff sure is tempting with all it can do. Now I was thinking of a 5x9 layout, perhaps something along the lines of

http://www.layoutvision.com/gallery/id53.html

This could go either way, DC or DCC I like the idea of buying some cheap old Athearn stuff and converting it to DCC. If nothing else I could reverse engineer a DCC loco and figure out how to do it. But sounds like if you look hard and get some good deals, one could find DCC locos for not that much.


----------



## Genetk44 (Feb 26, 2016)

Seems to me that the term "DCC Friendly" has almost become archaic and should be consigned to the dustbin of history.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

FreedomDoc said:


> Well I have not had a working layout in 52 years (since I was 12 or 13), but now that I am close to retirement (and of the average age of a model railroader), I fully intend to get back into it. And I may just go with straight DC, as some of the prices of DCC locos are just ridiculous!


I don't think locos today, relative to the purchasing power of a dollar, are much if any more expensive in real terms.

That said, what I do is buy DC locomotives and convert them to DCC myself. It's a relatively straightforward process that takes less than an hour for a non-DCC ready loco (a DCC-ready one takes longer to get the shell off than it does to add the decoder). Sound can be a little trickier, depending on the loco, but you can still save $50-100 on the price of a loco (even accounting for the cost of the decoder) by doing your own.


----------



## FreedomDoc (Aug 10, 2014)

CTValleyRR said:


> I don't think locos today, relative to the purchasing power of a dollar, are much if any more expensive in real terms.
> 
> That said, what I do is buy DC locomotives and convert them to DCC myself. It's a relatively straightforward process that takes less than an hour for a non-DCC ready loco (a DCC-ready one takes longer to get the shell off than it does to add the decoder). Sound can be a little trickier, depending on the loco, but you can still save $50-100 on the price of a loco (even accounting for the cost of the decoder) by doing your own.


I hope you are right, and that buying DCC isn't so bad. That said, I do miss the days when (and I did this) I could buy an Athearn GP-35 UP loco kit for $7.95 and put it together and have a great time with it. Seems like another thing missing from today -- locomotive kits! Where have they gone?


----------



## JNXT 7707 (May 5, 2013)

FreedomDoc said:


> ...........I do miss the days when (and I did this) I could buy an Athearn GP-35 UP loco kit for $7.95 and put it together and have a great time with it. Seems like another thing missing from today -- locomotive kits! Where have they gone?


Hey you can still do that, more or less. I get a lot of my locomotives as used Athearn BBs from ebay and train shows. Being used and having some age, they all need to be taken apart, cleaned/lubricated and put back together, maybe a small repair here and there. And I usually strip the shells and repaint and decal.
So it's still a "kit" :laugh:
An average used BB loco will set you back around $20-$30, if you are patient. Not a bad deal!


----------



## FreedomDoc (Aug 10, 2014)

JNXT 7707 said:


> Hey you can still do that, more or less. I get a lot of my locomotives as used Athearn BBs from ebay and train shows. Being used and having some age, they all need to be taken apart, cleaned/lubricated and put back together, maybe a small repair here and there. And I usually strip the shells and repaint and decal.
> So it's still a "kit" :laugh:
> An average used BB loco will set you back around $20-$30, if you are patient. Not a bad deal!


That is a very good point, and I am sure I will be doing some of that too (taking them apart and fixing them up).

One thing about the hobby today vs. years past -- I believe years ago the people who made all the stuff we like were largely MR types (hobbyists) themselves, but today maybe not so much.(When I say 'made' I mean the people who determined what things were made and provided for us). I think today, the makers of MR stuff think of us model railroaders like a bunch of kids who like to watch trains go round and round and are not interested in 'complex' things like kit building. They are just wrong about that!


----------



## JNXT 7707 (May 5, 2013)

FreedomDoc said:


> ...... I think today, the makers of MR stuff think of us model railroaders like a bunch of kids who like to watch trains go round and round and are not interested in 'complex' things like kit building. They are just wrong about that!


Well doc..I like to think they are wrong about that too, but sometimes I don't know. RTR is big these days!

Sadly I missed the age of locomotive kits. That's what I call the Golden Age of model railroading. 

In any case, I'm not the market that the manufacturers are building for - because I can't afford to give them business. So my manufacturers are ebay and train shows.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Not all of us want our locomotives in kits. I'd rather not. Car kits I can live with, but really, i'd rather RUN the trains and work the little details on structures and scenery.

FWIW, I have found NEW (although shelf worn) BB kits for $20, both on eBay and at Tom's Trains of CT (a LHS).


----------



## JNXT 7707 (May 5, 2013)

CTValleyRR said:


> Not all of us want our locomotives in kits. I'd rather not. Car kits I can live with, but really, i'd rather RUN the trains and work the little details on structures and scenery.
> 
> FWIW, I have found NEW (although shelf worn) BB kits for $20, both on eBay and at Tom's Trains of CT (a LHS).


Well to be clear I appreciate a RTR loco as much as anyone, but I think it would be cool to see a selection of 'reasonably inexpensive' loco kits too. Wishful thinking for my 'perfect world' 

A new BB loco kit would be cool (I've never even seen one!), but I think I'd really like to put together a new Hobbytown kit - or something of that nature. A little more involved but not requiring me to fabricate parts 
They do come up on ebay here and there but at the prices they go for? "Not at this time" :laugh:


----------

