# Reasons For Not Installing DCC



## HOfabricator4$sless (Jun 20, 2019)

Fri 7-5-19 5:14 p.m.

For lovers of DCC, have at it. You need not read further. Enjoy your choice. You have my respect.

However, there are some things to consider if you are on the fence about installing DCC in your locomotive.

1) I have picked up a number of DCC-retrofitted locos at toy train shows. They did not run. So I removed the DCC units and rewired the locomotives similar to what was originally there. I enjoy having locomotives which run.

2) I have seen DCC modifications where holes have been drilled in chassis and shell components. I think this degrades the model. In addition, "some" modifications are implemented with double sticky tape, masking tape on wires, glue, silicone, cold solder joints, and other Mickey Mouse materials / methods. If the models are sold and shipped, the modifications can shake loose during shipping. The military has a term, "Ruggedized" (that is, battle hardened for shake / rattle / roll environments) if I recall correctly. Few models which have been retrofitted with DCC, can motors, etc. have been ruggedized. Rarely is a can motor installed neatly with silicone on a removable brass base (fitted with fasteners) so that original open frame motor can be replaced. Personally, I think some of the original Pittman motors were better than can motors which run at lower RPMs and which have less power. 

3) It is annoying when fasteners / retaining features have been removed / broken which hold the locomotive together. The classic example is a steam loco which has been retrofitted with a smoke unit and the front end of the boiler is not secured to the chassis. 

3) When modifications are made, I want a package of information (an equipment data book) with the loco. The original design intent / design philosophy, the original DCC circuit diagram and installation instructions, repair information / installation notes and information about modifications (problems / issues and how they were solved), performance notes / troubleshooting info. / quirks, etc., and any left over / spare parts / connectors / fasteners / original open frame motor.

4) Folks install DCC units on poorly-qualified platforms (or locos). The DCC unit is installed before the bugs are shaken out of the drive train / mechanism in the loco. When the mechanism fails, the DCC unit does not do much good. Then the loco gets dumped at a train show or on ebay. 

5) Folks who install DCC units with sound like the clangs, chuffs, rumbles, and other noises. However, I am a modeler and I what to hear model noises and nothing else. I what to hear ticks, clicks, grinding, whirring, squeaks, hums, buzzes, chattering, rattles, etc. associated with model. This helps me to diagnose and repair problems with the platform. The noises are in addition to what I can see and smell when I am repairing / operating a locomotive. I have enough trouble just trying to make a locomotive run let alone take care of the DCC modifications too.

I apologize, but I do not have any fantasies about the model being the "real thing." If I want to see the real thing, I can go down to the nearest tracks and wait for the real thing to go past me. Or I can go the Chama or Durango and enjoy a trip on one of the narrow gauge railroads. There is also a nice old ATSF 2-10-4 in one of the parks in Santa Fe, New Mexico. And the old Santa Fe maintenance facility is still standing in downtown Albuquerque.


----------



## HOfabricator4$sless (Jun 20, 2019)

Fri 7-5-19 5:57 p.m.

PFM geared logging locos (Climax / Heisler / Shay) have a small insulating step bushing which is installed below the original open frame motor. Then some dill weed comes along and puts a blob of silicone on the chassis to hold an open frame motor. All is good - right?

Then the loco gets dropped and the insulating bushing shatters. What a mess it is to remove the motor and silicone to get to the insulating bushing so that it can be replaced.

So fundamentally, this is one reason that I do not like modifications to locos.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

Julius Caesar said it well: 

"Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt."

"The people gladly believe what they wish to."


----------



## gregc (Apr 25, 2015)

??? wow


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

I've never put anyone on an ignore list in any forum of which I'm a member...until now.


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

Rather proud of his opinions, I'm thinkin'.


----------



## SantaFeJim (Sep 8, 2015)

Sounds to me like you bought some locos that were retro-fitted with decoder by guys that were careless, sloppy and lacking in skills needed to do the job correctly. 

And now you want to bash technology rather than the placing blame on the hacks that did the install.

The plane crashed because the engine fell off... lets blame the pilot.


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

HOfabricator4$sless said:


> 4) Folks install DCC units on poorly-qualified platforms (or locos). The DCC unit is installed before the bugs are shaken out of the drive train / mechanism in the loco. When the mechanism fails, the DCC unit does not do much good. Then the loco gets dumped at a train show or on ebay.



And a mechanical failure of a poor drive train is a problem of DCC how?

While I absolutely agree there are reasons and situations to use or not use DCC, all the examples you've actually given above have nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with shoddy low quality workmanship.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

cv_acr said:


> And a mechanical failure of a poor drive train is a problem of DCC how?
> 
> While I absolutely agree there are reasons and situations to use or not use DCC, all the examples you've actually given above have nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with shoddy low quality workmanship.


I could be mistaken, but I THINK he is merely parroting all the usual caveats about converting a locomotive to DCC from DC older stock. His point is that if a drive mechanism is poorly performing while on DC-powered rails, it won't be improved, except perhaps marginally, by converting the item to DCC. A bad drive is still a bad drive. It's a valid point, but hardly something new to people who have been in the hobby more than a few months, especially if they've investigated doing those types of conversions.


----------



## HOfabricator4$sless (Jun 20, 2019)

Tues 7-9-19 6:48 a.m.

I think that most technology is like a two edged-sword. The technology can be useful or it can create problems. For example, it is nice to enjoy a campfire when visiting the forest. However, forest fires can be devastating. It is distressing to hear that 45 unattended / abandoned campfires were found in my State recently. This was probably all for the sake of having fun.

Similarly, I disassembled some nice Ponderosa Pine 2 x 4's recently which had been assembled with 4-inch long, Phillips head, countersunk head screws. The screws were most likely installed with a cordless drill and Phillips head bit (hex drive).

I did not have much success removing the Phillips head screws and tore up two Phillips head bits in the process. So I decided to cut the ends of the 2 x 4's off, split the end cuttings, and recover the screws. I recovered all the screws and will use them again.

I think the choice of technology in this case was a poor one (that is, 4-inch long screws) installed through the 3-1/2 inch wide 2 x4. 

I assembled some small blocks of wood recently using similar technology. However, I chose to provide a 3/8 inch counterbore so that I could use shorter screws and disassemble the materials at the end of their service life.

My feelings are much the same when it comes to DCC units. 

I have recently started working on micro-electronic items and I think it is about time I start repairing DCC units too. I have a big container of defective DCC units I have removed from various locos, and will begin by working on those.


----------



## Dennis461 (Jan 5, 2018)

I burn wood outdoors and pick up the nails and screws with a magnet. Old technology and does not require batteries.


----------



## HOfabricator4$sless (Jun 20, 2019)

Tues 7-9-19 10:43 p.m.

Dennis461:

Think about what you are saying (even if you are just trying to be funny). If you burn the wood, the heat treated steel screws and nails will be annealed. In short, it will reduce the strength of the steel.

I was working on the repair of a 3/8" Ingersoll-Rand composite impact wrench. I dumped a greasy newspaper mat (which I put under a tool for disassembly purposes) in my wood-burning stove. Unfortunately, the anvil for the airtool was wrapped up in the newspaper. The anvil got cooked in the wood-burning stove. It lost the original hardness and changed dimensionally. That was about $30 to $40 down the drain. This was stupidity and carelessness on my part, which I hope never to repeat.

The problem with humor is that people may not clearly understand its use or meaning.

Many years ago, a nurse told me that experienced nurses would play jokes on rookie nurses by throwing petroleum ether on the rookie nurses backs. The ether would evaporate quickly and cause the rookie nurses to shiver a little bit. A "fun" practical joke right? Well this happened to one rookie nurse who was smoking a cigarette at the time. She went up in a ball of flame. The experienced nurse went to jail on manslaughter charges. 

I laugh about practical jokes from years ago, but those kinds of jokes have been slowly falling out of favor in the workplace and at home, etc. - and with good reason.


----------



## HOfabricator4$sless (Jun 20, 2019)

Tues 7-9-19 10:57 p.m.

Dennis461:

Perhaps you were not trying to be funny, but planned to discard the screws and nails.

You have to understand that I am a repairer / repurposer. It is always my intent to use materials again if I can. Therefore, I wanted to salvage the hardened screws in original condition if possible.

I have cooked some pieces of wood myself in my wood burning stove. I tend to sift the ash from the ash pit through a coarse screen mesh to capture any metal scrap. So we are on the same trajectory - magnets or screens for separation / recovery purposes.


----------



## Cab1 (Jul 26, 2009)

That's why I don't do conversions anymore. Most DC locos are not good candidates for a DCC retrofit. They were not designed for it. The biggest problem you'll have to deal with is finding enough space for all the components - especially with speaker enclosures for sound. Sometimes you get lucky and can stuff everything into the boiler or fuel tank; but most of the time it involves cutting a lot off the cab or back head. In which case you'll be sacrificing detail. In some cases your only option is to mill the frame or set everything up in a dedicated piece of rolling stock behind the loco. Not enough of a return for me to justify all the work. You won't be saving any money either.


----------



## Chet (Aug 15, 2014)

I personally don't need DCC on my home layout. It was built mainly for switching plus I am a lone operator. If I were to try to run two trains at a time on my single track main line, it wouldn't take long before I would have a wreck. 

I do have a couple of DCC locomotives that I use at my club, but I leave them there and don't run them at home. 

I agree with Cab1 about trying to convert DC locomotives to DCC. The majority of my locomotives are the original Atlas RS units with the Kato drive. There is no room under the shell to install DCC without major work being done to the weight. 

DCC locomotives for the most part also can't pull as many cars on a grade as they are lighter. At my club, and at home I have a two and a half percent grade to deal with. I have an Atlas RS-1 (DCC) that can only handle at the most 10 cars on the grades. My DC Atlas RS-1 can pull 16 cars on the grades. 

It's all up to what the modeler wants. I don't need to run multiple trains on my home layout and don't need sound. 

Ay my club, it is part of a museum at the old Northern Pacific Depot in Livingston, MT and operating sessions are open to the public. We usually have half a dozen trains running at andy time, if not more and this would be impossible without DCC>


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

I see nothing funny about what Dennis461 said.....a perfectly viable, and easy, way to get metal items out of scrap wood....don"t know where the humour would be in that......


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 25, 2019)

I agree on some of the points regarding DCC, especially installations in older, steam locomotives. 

Prior to installing DCC in a locomotive, the locomotive must run slow and smooth at all speeds, DCC will not improve a locomotive's operation. No amount of improvement will help many low priced locomotives' performance. 

Many of the new Atlas, Rapido, Athearn and others are great performers and run perfect out of the box. Many are DCC ready and merely need a decoder plugged into the provided pin or manufactures have decoders designed for specific locomotives and its just a case of opening the shell and an installing the decoder of choice. For some locomotives, the new decoders can replace the exiting light boards.

Some soldering skills maybe required for a neat installation.

For many simply purchasing locomotives will DCC installed is the the answer for them.

I know myself I have as many as least 50 older decoders that will need to be installed in locomotives and the wiring soldered. Some of decoders were design for the specific locomotive and others not so lucky, but will fit and still have a neat installation, using Taplon tape, soldered wiring and new LED lighting.

Do I want to convince the many DC operators to switch to DCC....NO!

There is likely as many DC locomotives in the parts box as there are DCC locomotives.

Enjoy the hobby.

Greg

PS: I often wonder if John Allen would of installed DCC on his G&D layout if DCC was available.


----------



## Severn (May 13, 2016)

I'm mainly in it for the sounds ... although a Walters I bought recently has great sounds in dc only operation... its still using the dcc sound decoder for that... I've another European engine. put an esu decoder in that. rather old vintage esu but lots of fun sounds and I can select them at will ...
other positives like motor control aspects are probably more under the hood kind of stuff but still nice.
finally the entry price can be lowered somewhat by building the dcc++ base station and using jmri as the controller. assuming you have an pc to run it. still no dcc decoders inocos means acquiring one and installing it ... perhaps many...
or selling it all off and starting afresh ... a steep hill to climb maybe.
so maybe it's not worth it to you. for sounds stick a recording of engine sounds in a sound playing device ... play in background. problem solved!


----------



## ggnlars (Aug 6, 2013)

It has nothing to do with DCC. It has to do with the quality of the upgrade. I've seen many DCC engine lash ups that had wires strung outside of the units, so they were somehow in sync. The person doing it did not take the time to do it right. It may have started out as an experiment that never was made permanent. Whatever, it was ugly. Not something that would satisfy most people today. A little planning, the proper time and the right tools and supplies can make any upgrade only noticeable in the performance where it is supposed to be. I do it all the time.
Larry
www.llxlocomotives.com


----------



## sid (Mar 26, 2018)

hahahahahahahahaha melt the dann things and make new ones.. fire is good man needs fire. must melt things to make more things.. bahahahahahahahah stir , stir ,stir , stir :cheeky4: :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

I'm happy with DC, and I don't salvage used screws. Both of those are my choice.
Reading between the lines it would appear perhaps the OP is or was buying budget priced "converted" equipment, and pretty well getting what he's paying for.

I deal in used trains, and it's not rare to find stuff that is hot glued, or even melted together, along with myriad other horrors. Why would converted locomotives be any different?
As was mentioned, a poor install doesn't indict the technology.


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

time warp said:


> Reading between the lines it would appear perhaps the OP is or was buying budget priced "converted" equipment, and pretty well getting what he's paying for.
> ...
> As was mentioned, a poor install doesn't indict the technology.


I tend to think you are right.


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

After a 40-year break from the hobby, when it was time to build a new layout dcc was a "no-brainer" for me.

I didn't really have many engines "from the past", so just about everything I picked up was "dcc ready". Only a few with dcc pre-installed (either at the factory or by a previous owner). Most of the "previous owner" engines I found that I had to rip out the existing install and start over, anyway.

At first I was reluctant to really "open up" the engines and break them down into their component parts, then clean them up and get them running again. But now it's a little easier (still work, though!).

As far as the dcc setup itself -- after looking around, I decided to "do it right from the start" and got a Roco z21 setup. For an older guy, getting it up-and-running, getting engines programmed, etc., couldn't be easier. I would be tearing my gray hair out with one of those "pushbutton" controllers !!


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

time warp said:


> I'm happy with DC, and I don't salvage used screws. Both of those are my choice.
> Reading between the lines it would appear perhaps the OP is or was buying budget priced "converted" equipment, and pretty well getting what he's paying for.
> 
> I deal in used trains, and it's not rare to find stuff that is hot glued, or even melted together, along with myriad other horrors. Why would converted locomotives be any different?
> As was mentioned, a poor install doesn't indict the technology.


Reading even further between the lines (and many of his other posts), it appears that the OP was an egocentric troll who posted whatever he thought would make him sound knowlegeable, thrifty and impressive (a 21st 
Century McGuiver in HO scale), regardless of whether it passed the sniff test or not.

Were it not for the complete difference in writing styles, I would suspect another sequel in that horror show called "The Return of ED-RRR". And in a similar fashion, he has managed to get himself banned, though I have been unable to find out why.


----------



## highvoltage (Apr 6, 2014)

CTValleyRR said:


> ...And in a similar fashion, he has managed to get himself banned, though I have been unable to find out why.


I just saw that under his username, interesting.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

highvoltage said:


> I just saw that under his username, interesting.


It happened at about the same time as the "Birthday Wishes" kerfuffle.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

The McGuiver of HO. I really like that!


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

I think he came perilously close to qualifying as spamming the forums. IMHO.


----------



## Andreash (Dec 30, 2018)

There are a lot of reasons to not do anything. The advantages of dcc far outnumber any disadvantages. I agree that sound can be a bit much at times (and that’s something that can be easily muted), but my guests love it when there over..cheers


----------



## sid (Mar 26, 2018)

I love dcc. i think its a great addition to any model rail road. though the expense is sure up there, but once thats done its pretty good to play with.


----------



## Genetk44 (Feb 26, 2016)

3) It is annoying when fasteners / retaining features have been removed / broken which hold the locomotive together. The classic example is a steam loco which has been retrofitted with a smoke unit and the front end of the boiler is not secured to the chassis. “

Not sure what smoke units have to do with DCC in particular.


----------



## Lemonhawk (Sep 24, 2013)

TW started this discussion, so I'll add my 2 cents. DCC adds a layer of technology between you and the running locomotives that may not appeal to everyone. If you running a single locomotive it just may not be worth the complication of DCC. I built my first layout when I was in High School and it was at the period that CTC (I think that was the acronym) was just being discussed in Model Railroader. I was on my way to becoming an Electrical Engineer and CTC fascinated me. I had a dual Cab DC only dogbone layout with on locomotive (a Varney Dockside). That 60's layout was the last Layout until the 90's, when I restarted the hobby with the intent to try DCC with a small layout that I've used to test construction techniques and DCC implementation. For me, DCC has been great, but then I like the technology! For me the fun is the electrical end of the hobby.


----------



## Diesel Fuel (Apr 10, 2018)

I don't dislike DCC, it sounds cool. BUT... I have all old vintage engines and stock and don't want to convert it, guess I'm old school


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Diesel Fuel said:


> I don't dislike DCC, it sounds cool. BUT... I have all old vintage engines and stock and don't want to convert it, guess I'm old school


Well, it's really a matter of personal choice; no one has to do DCC. I would not, however, let the age of your locomotive fleet be the ONLY reason that you don't adopt it. Yes, it's more work to install a decoder in an older model, but it's far from impossible. 

I have done 4 myself, and if I can do it, anyone can (I can barely spell solder, let alone do it). I did have to punt on a 5th, but that was an issue of the other parts of the drive train falling apart, not the difficulty of the install. 

If you only ever operate one loco at a time, and you have lots of electrically-isolated tracks on which to park the rest of your fleet, then there's really nothing to be gained by converting. Otherwise, it's definitely worth a look.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

Since this thread is still going and not much else happening during the Summer, I thought I'd take time to read through it. One thing stands out to me that a lot of people seem to have repeated over and over -- "Adding DCC will not improve a poorly running motor."

I beg to differ, but it most certainly WILL, up to a point. I have some old steam locos, a Bachmann from the 90's and a Tyco from the 70's which I have installed cheap DCC decoders in. In both cases these locos would never run at a crawl under DC and usually needed 1/4 to 1/3 throttle to even start moving. But after installing DCC, both of these locos can run at a snail's pace, even pulling a load. Technology has been installed which overcomes the limitations of slow speeds on DC motors, and it makes all the difference in the performance.

Also please don't say you can get the same results with newer PWM powerpacks and such. Of course you can, because once again you are installing technology to overcome the problem (just in a different location). In fact you are using exactly the same method that DCC uses to makes those motors crawl with torque. If you want to talk about pure DC, then check how well your loco runs with an old-style power pack that uses a simple variable resistor to change the amount of voltage applied to the track. That is my apples-to apples comparison between DC and DCC performance, and DC will lose out every time.

Maybe I'm just ranting but it seems unfair to dismiss the advantages of DCC when a lot of DC enthusiasts are actually using exactly the same technology in their power packs to gain the same advantages in locomotive performance. Sure there are always going to be situations where DC is all you need, but please don't try to justify DC as being 'better' when you're actually using a limited version of the same thing found in DCC.


----------

