I'm ready to program a consist with my NCE PowerCab and TCS AZL4 equipped loco's. Reading the manual it would seem the Advanced style is the way to go since I have the equipment for it. A half hour searching didn't turn up a forum discussion about it so I thought I would ask you all before diving into programming.
I think the reason you haven't seen much of a discussion is that it was settled nearly 2 decades ago. Search https://groups.io/g/z-scale around 2002-5. As pg 25 of the Powercab manual points out, the Old method really is just for the early decoders. I don't think you'll find a Z scale decoder today that doesn't support Advanced. The difference is whether the cab or decoders hold the consist information. If you use the Old, your consist exists only with your cab. With Advanced you can move and maintain the consist. I've never considered the Old myself. Mark
I prefer the Old (1). I can Add or Delete a loco at will or, change the direction of one. And, you can Kill (Clear) that Consist right then and there. Using the Advanced changes CV29 to not use the 'actual' address instead use the 'Consist' address. You will choose a Consist number 1-127 (starting at 127 and lower). You can choose any one, you don't have to use the 'first' one (127, if none have been used). Once you have created the Consist, it will show the Lead loco, not the Consist. so it is sorta simple. It also makes these Locos a 'set' that you can take to another layout and run loco 1234 and all of them will follow. However . . . If you made and Old School (1) consist, only your Power Cab knows it. if you take them to another layout, you will have to create a new Consist there. Locos in a Advanced Consist, you can't just take a poor running loco out and place it on the track and run it with that loco's number. Need to delete a poor running loco? Gotta know the Consist number (e.g 123). Sometimes, you will have to The (near) ENTIRE purpose of the Advanced Consist was to reduce data packets on the rails. Each DCC Command is broadcast at least 3 times. Now, consider a Layout (not your dinky loop or even our BAZ BoyZ layout). All those locos, Accessories, Transponding (if used), etc. *really* clogs up the very low data rate of DCC. So . . . hence the Advanced Consist where it only sends (essentially) 1 command to all the locos. The Forward loco knows it is going forward (and in a Consist configuration) so turns the Forward light on (by itself) and turns it off (by itself) when the train is reversed. Same with the last loco. In an 'Old School" Consist, it has to send all those packets to each loco independently so more data on the rails but also one loco gets its command, then the next (but not always the 'next in line' data packets), then the next loco (but not always the 'next in line' data packets), etc. Sometimes, you can see this when accelerating or decelerating. But you don't have anywhere near that many locos so it's pretty quick and easy to set up an Old Consist. (the Power Cab will only let you do 4 loco in 1 Consist. You make several Consists though). It's just easier for me to do the Old School.
OK then. Two sides to every coin. I guess the good news is with my little oval and very few loco's I can learn both styles of consist control without investing a lot of time and energy as both are viable and currently in use.
I found that my consist ran poorly, jerking, hesitating, and even freezing altogether when using the "Old (brute Force)" style. I tried a few times with different orientations and reprogramming but when it froze and I noticed the cable from the PowerCab got warm I quit trying! Luckily no damage. Then I tried "Advanced" style and it ran great. So for me a good solution. Observations: My loco's are not well matched in speed, to run the same speed fast loco needs speed step 12 and slow loco needs speed step 16, fwd or rev. BEMF CV's are off. Maybe this is why "Old" did not work. But "Advanced" works great and after over an hour of running in both directions neither loco or cable showed any signs of heat or distress. Question: Should I still pursue speed matching of the AZL4 equipped loco's? Mark and Jeff have both said that it is not generally necessary with normal running loco's but I don't know if that difference in speed between mine is acceptable.
I did try to speed match my two loco's but got inconclusive results. I watched a few how to videos online and made a chart, then started changing CV's 2-5-6. I realize that 2 is slow, 6 is mid and 5 is top speed. I could not get consistent results. I got wildly different CV values. I started to think or observe that the two loco's might be influencing how they each ran when both were on the track together (which goes against what DCC is all about) when trying to get them to move around the track at the same speed. In the end one loco has CV values 12, 72, and 162 and the other 23,90, and 232. Obviously one loco is much stronger than the other. This was the bast match I could get on my little test loop. But transferring them to my larger track they were obviously not matched well. After all that effort. So, do Z scale trains have trouble getting repeatable results? Maybe due to their small size or power? Or should I re-motor the slow loco? Again, running them alone against a stop watch they seem pretty consistent, except for the slow one at slow speed, but both on track while changing CV's was very difficult.
Looks like I will have to jump in the speed matching game. I have a "free spirited" U30c that wants to runaway from my SD45's. Does anyone have any tips for getting MTL and AZL to play nice together?
Not me! I ended up going back to standard same CV's for my two AZL loco's and even though they would not run together disconnected they run in a consist very well. Remember with different "speed matched" CV's they would fight each other and visibly stutter and shut down sometimes. Maybe just let them run together without changing CV's for a few minutes and see if they get hot or act up?
