GoingUnderground

Well I've used them both, one after the other, and for me (as I clearly said earlier) there is no contest, and that was the 505/511 compared to the old monochrome ECoS. ECoS has 2 throttles on which you can select any 1 of 5 locos on each throttle at the touch of the screen. The 611 still has only 1 throttlle. ECoS has a touch screen LCD, colour on the ECoS 2, The 611 hasn't any touch screen functionality. ECoS has a track plan diagram that allows you to touch the screen to set up routes, or operate points and signals. The 611 does not have a touch screen so you have to remember the address of each point or signal. ECoS has programmable icons for the function buttons so that you can see at a glance what each button does with direct access to Functions 0 to 17. The 611 doesn't have that option, you still have to remember what each button does on each loco. ECoS has had user upgradeable firmware since the days of the ECoS 1. You can use radio throttles with ECoS, such as the ECoSControl Radio, or apps on a smartphone such as TouchCab on iPhone, or the new Mobile Control II, due 2nd quarter 2015 so I hear. ECoS has Railcom. There is no mention of Railcom on the 611 spec, strange as the Diamond range of decoders do have Railcom/ZTC Talkback. ECoS has Railcom Plus. Again the 611 spec makes no mention of Railcom Plus. ECoS has a PSU that lets you vary the input voltage so you don't have to change the PSU if you change from OO to N gauge. The 611 still relies on different PSUs to cope with the voltage difference for OO an N gauges. Need I go on?

As a user of the ZTC255 decoders, I do dip into the Taunton Controls web site occasionally. I was looking tonight and just noticed that ZTC branded products are no longer the only DCC items on sale. Surprise, surprise, they are listing ESU's ECoS 2, Loksound V4 decoders, and the Profi Prufstand Decoder Tester. The ECoS2 is priced at GBP 500, and having gone from a ZTC 505 to an ESU ECoS, and now to an ECoS 2, for me there's no contest between an ECoS2 at GBP500 and a 611 at GBP 470. The ECoS wins hands down. This is NOT knocking the 611, but the inevitable comparison just throws the shortcomings of the 611 into even sharper focus for me. Does this mean that the 611 is likely to be delayed further, and Taunton felt that they had to be able to offer a top quality DCC system until the 611 goes on sale, or an attempt to widen the product range to beyond ZTC branded items to make Taunton Controls a viable business?

In addition to serving South Harrow Gas Works, there would have been coal trains on the Met in the 1960s to Rayners Lane, Eastcote, Ruislip on the Uxbridge Branch, and to Pinner and Northwood on the Watford branch as I can remember seeing the coal staithes in use, or the remains of them, at these stations. But I cannot confirm the locos used to make the drops. When they closed most of them were turned into station car parks for us commuters. The Bo-Bos also delivered coal to the Met offices at Baker Street, served by a siding off Platform 1.

Apparently if you join the ZTC owners club, there is a 5% discount on online prices, whether that's for as long as you are a member, or just on your first order or first year of membership isn't clear. I think I've also seen somewhere that if you visit the shop and buy over the counter there is a discount on online prices. The new web site looks very smart, but there is still the same minimal information about each product. The web site needs more work as for some products you can't click on the name to see the description/additional information as the Add to Cart box pops up and gets in the way. The 257 21MTC loco decoder has resurfaced, but the 304 accessory decoder is still missing. The Customer Comments page makes for interesting reading.

Sorry, didn't mean to cause offence. I hadn't seen post 145 as i only recently came across your thread. I explained the construction in case I hadn't made myself clear. When it comes to definitions, in my experience the metal bashing industry tends calls hollow metal rod made by rolling flat material with a welded seam tube not pipe. Tube is often structural, able to support itself and items placed upon it. Pipe is the name given to anything specifically designed to carry liquids or gases. Pipe usually needs support as it is not inteded to support anything, often not even its own weight. The wall thickness of pipe is often very thin compared to the diameter, as it is simply intended to stop the material within escaping, and so the wall thickness will be governed by the internal pressure, not the external load.

Ron, If you can buy thin plasticard strips or sheet locally, then that is all you need to create the styrene tube or open ended cylinder. That's why I said tube, not pipe. Create the tube by winding the plasticard around a former, say a piece of pipe so that you end up with a laminated tube of 40mm OD, and apply your chosen styrene solvent to the ends to hold it closed. You'll find that a couple of turns of styrene sheet soon become remarkably rigid and load bearing. If you're not sure about that just roll up a piece of paper into a cylinder, stick it closed with some sellotape and then press on the ends. You'll find that it is remarkably strong. You could create an entire pier the same way, and do without the PVC pipe completely, except it might be somewhat cumbersome to make. You might be able to make it esier to fabricate by warming the styrene sheet to soften it and then bending it round the former and leaving it to cool before applying the styrene solvent. However creating the complete pier out of your fabricated styrene tubes would then solve your next problem of getting the styrene cladding to stick to the PVC. Or you could scribe the panels straight on the styrene tube, which would also help disguise the seam. No more searching for PVC to styrene bonding agent.

Another idea for you. Take a slice out of the PVC pipe at the point where it passes through the styrene ring, and replace with a piece of 40mm OD styrene tube to give you a PVC/Styrene/PVC sandwich. Next insert a piece of PVC into the PVC pipe so that it passes through the styrene tube and glue the PVC "inner" to the PVC pipe to reinforce your PVC/Styrene/PVC sandwich with a PVC core. Now you can glue the styrene ring to the styrene tube. This way you re not depending on glue to bond the styrene ring to the PVC pipe. You'll have bonded styrene to styrene and the styrene tube in the sandwich is held in place pyhsically by the PVC pipe above and below and the PVC core connects the two pieces of PVC pipe.

What about Deluxe's Plastic Magic, which is described as being suitable for PVC and Styrene? Of course that might be just PVC to PVC or Styrene to Styrene. It might be worth abrading the PVC slightly at the point of contact to increase the surface area, PVC can be very shiny and that might be affecting the ability of the glue to dissolve the PVC, and abraiding the surface might also help if that is the problem. Your standards of bridge building and attention to detail are astounding.

I see on the ZTC web site that the 611 is now priced at GBP470,00 but that now includes the choice of 560 or 562 transformers. The upgrade is GBP 210.00. Everything in the ZTC range, apart from the 622 slave controller and the 304 accessory decoder, is now apparently back in stock, (the Stock on order notices have gone), including the 255 decoders that I use. The 304 Accessory decoder is missing from the product lineup - an accidental omission, or a hint that there is a replacement product in the pipeline? I thought that there was also a 21MTC version of the Diamond decoder in the range, but that seems to be missing as well, or am I mistaken about their being a 21MTC version? The ZTC brand does seem to have as many lives in it as the proverbial cat: the original Robin Palmer era the Nicholson Senior ownership period the Nicholson Junior ownership period SBX, Neil Kinnison, and now Pat Jones and Graham Warner.

I never criticised the customer service, even back in the Nicholslon days. whenever I rang them, I always got an answer to my questions, often direct from David himself. It was the operating issues with the 505 that gave me problems, plus the inconvenience of not being able to run 255/4007 fitted stock on DC. The change of name is a good start, but modellers have long memories. The name change will only work if there is a new range of products that are reliable and glitch free. I hope that he changes the branding to Taunton. It would also be worth changing the model number of the "611" to something like the "Taunton 200" to break the link and mental association, but not the commitment to existing 505/511 owners, with the old company. Customer service is now in Graham's hands and I'm sure he will endeavour to meet the high expectations already created for it. He does have a head start, as the 611 is a new product, at least as far as the electronics and operating program are concerned, so it is very unlikely that it will inherit the old 505/511 issues. Much of the old/existing range is showing as out of stock on the old web site, and it remains to be seen how many of the old products will return in their present guise or will be replaced by new or updated and improved items. As I said before, I sincerely wish Graham and Pat good luck and every success.

Whilst I might be an ex-505 user, I still use the 255 decoder, and agree that they are very useful in confined spaces. However it does have one major drawback, or at least mine have, and that is that they don't work on DC. I don't know if that has ever been fixed with a later version of the firmware. They are supposed to work on "Pure" DC, which I think means using battery power, or rectified AC with a large smoothing capacitor. This isn't "knocking", just my observations as a long standing present user of 255s. I saw that they were/are out of stock in the ZTC shop, so they may no longer be a current model.

I wish Graham and Pat all the best for their new venture. Whilst they will undoubtedly start will a considerable amount of goodwill from many existing owners, they have a lot of work on their hands to repair the reputation of the ZTC brand/product range with the rest of us, including ex ZTC owners like myself.

For Peter's benefit, I was referring to his comment "sad to lose a service facility if I should need one.", and I will clarify my points. For Point 1, if ZTC does fail, there may be someone, like Graham, who would set up shop to undertake repairs. So it may not be essential that ZTC continues as far as servicing/repairs are concerned. For Point 2, new owners of businesses sometimes do not want the hassle of servicing, or even meeting guarantees, on equipment not sold by them, and sales of businesses can leave those obligations with the existing owners. If that were to happen, the existing owners may not want to offer a servicing/repair facility for old equipment in which they no longer have a current interest. Existing users of ZTC kit would then need someone else to offer a servicing/repair facility as per Point 1. For point 3, the design of the 511 motherboard must now be at least 15 years old if not more, and in the electronics world that is a very, very long time. Items can only be repaired for as long as spares are available. Whilst substituting some components for newer equivalents may be possible, that may not be an option indefinitely. Sooner or later one of these literally irreplaceable components will fail, and that will be the end of that particular 505 or 511. This will apply no matter who offers a servicing/repair facility, and is the fate awaiting all modern electronics no matter who makes it. But most modern consumer electronics are probably replaced/thrown away before that becomes an issue.

Sorry to be a wet blanket, but you are assuming that: ZTC will continue in business; The new owner if the sale goes ahead will offer to service/repair old equipment not sold by them: and The component parts are still available irrespective of the status of the ZTC company itself.

Well, 8 weeks has passed since Waverley West posted. Anyone got an update? There was no news on the ZTC web site when I looked earlier today. I sincerely hope you're right about the priority to be given to Customer Service for the sake of all the 505 and 511 owners wanting upgrades. I've no doubt that Graham is sincere, but good customer service needs people and is time consuming and therefore expensive to provide. Even well established successful companies have problems with it at times. Also the new owners will not want to be bogged down with service issues relating to products sold by the previous owners. At the moment the only new items in stock at ZTC seem to be loco decoders. If they have sold out of 511s then any 511s in for repair/repaired awaiting return should be very easy to identify as they should be the only 511s in the place.

Is there any further news of the 611 or the future of ZTC? I was looking at the ZTC web site and noticed that the 511 and the PSU for it are now out of stock, not too surprising if the 611 is on its way.

Chris, As I thought that I had made clear previously, I totally agree with you, that is exactly what many folks will do. As I said before it's their layout and they can do what they want with it.

ESU have now released the "official" version of firmware 4.0.0. The upgrade process is the same as described in post 1.

You mean that you cannot get me to change my view to agree with you. I will quote you again "....please allow others the space to express their views and interests." even if they disagree with yours, or anyone else's. Dialogue closed.

Ian, It doesn't matter if I have seen the examples you gave or not of their "...consistently high standard of RTR modelling...". The ones that I have seen are not "excellent" and hence I challenge your description of their current models as being of a "consistent excellence" when by your own admission the Woodhead electrics cannot be described as such. I think that PaulRhB put it rather well when he said in post 68 "..Heljan are a bit erratic, some of the best and some howlers too..".

I haven't missed the models that you quote as they are of absolutely no interest to me as they never ran on the London Underground. I am interested in the EM1s and EM2s and can only speak from my experience of these models.

I think excellence is in the eye of the beholder. It just takes one glaring mistake to ruin a model, such as the pantographs on the EM1s and EM2s, or the cab windows on the EM2. Replacing the pans can be done, but many won't do it. Changing the cab windows on the EM2 is, IMHO, not practicable. These are my only Heljan models, and I wouldn't describe them as excellent because of these faults, reasonable but disappointing because of the faults, but not excellent. So I personally don't think it is appropriate to describe their current models as consistently excellent. People will buy the MetroVic and run it on their non-electrified layouts with the Bachmann LT wagon set, (which was hardly a frequent event), much the same way as people have bought OHLE locos and run them without any catenary. It is their layouts, and they are free to do what they want, but it may well damage genuine LT modellers by reducing availability of LT items as kits which haven't been "cherry picked". You cannot say that about other unusual or antique british outline locos or rolling stock. The LMS twins or the Co-Bo Class 28 won't have any effect on the availability of LMS or BR rolling stock, the ranges will continue as before, but the Haljan MetroVic may on LT may. That's my gripe. Heljan may get richer, and some LT modellers may indeed be happier with an RTR model being available, but LT modelling may end up poorer overall. I hope I'm proved wrong.

If I were an RTR manufacturer, I would not like to invest in tooling for models, such as Metropolitan locomotive hauled passenger stock, that depended on another manufacturer's product, in this case the Heljan Metrovic, to support sales of my product, too much of a hostage to fortune. If sales of the other manufacturer's product are poor then I've wasted my money in the tooling for the models to support it, especially if the loco and rolling stock were unique to one route. This doesn't apply to Heljan/Olivia's Class 76/EM1s or EM2/77s as whilst the locos were unique to the Woodhead route, the rolling stock they hauled wasn't. Heljan's choice of the MetroVic on its own just looks bizarre to me. It's too late for the 150th celebrations, needs as a minimum a layout with 3rd rail, and suitable rolling stock. But how many layouts have 3rd rail, let alone 4th rail, and has been pointed out already in this thread, there is no RTR Metropolitan/LT stock, unless Heljan plan to release that later once they see how sales of the loco go. If the kit manufacturers do wait, as you suggest, and hold off producing more kits in fear of what Bachmann might be about to announce, it just further damages the availability of LT models. But it is the sensible thing for the kit makers to do to avoid potentially unsaleable stock. We are seeing Hornby and Bachmann producing less common models in a search to find new sales from models not already/previously produced, or produced many years ago. Heljan are obviously prepared to go down this route as well with so many of the mainsteam locos and stock covered already by Hornby and Bachmann. So I would not be surprised to learn that they are all looking at LT/LU items. If there are further LT releases the possibility/hope of release of other LT items will damage the kit makers. However, looking is not the same as releasing, and there is a precedent. Bachmann did announce about 10-12 years ago that they would produce UK trams in 4mm, and I think got as far as producing sample products, but then pulled the plug on the project. I cannot remember which trams, but the source of my information is David Voice's 3rd edition of "How to Tram & Tramway Modelling". I'm not a happy bunny, but fortunately I have most of the historic LT models that I want, and the ones that I don't yet have are on order with John Polley.

It is good to see London Transport/London Underground come in out of the cold after being totally ignored by mainstream manufacturers since the demise of the Hornby (Meccano) O gauge tinplate models of the MetroVic and "matching" coaches from the 1920s and 1930s, and the 1950/60s Every Ready tube train, which looked more like a cross between the 1950s Waterloo & City stock and Standard Stock. I will probably get one of the Heljan models, but it will be with regret as Phil Radley was telling me that Heljan's announcement totally killed off sales of his MetroVic kits. I will readily agree that Phil's isn't the best model, I'm currently bashing one of them to remedy most of the errors. However the Harrow Model Shop/Poulner Models/Radley Models kits were for many, many years all that was available for LT modellers. And cherry picking models like this will damage Phil's business, and may actually end up reducing the total number of LT/LU models around. The only compensation is that John Polley's Metromodels, the other supplier of LT models in 4mm whose range complimented Phil's kits are looking to produce new models themselves of much of the LT stock, including some that have never been offered as kits or RTR before. Heljan might be able to rebody the MetroVic motor/chassis to produce the Metropolitan BTH loco, one of which was actually converted to be the first MetroVic loco, No 17 "Florence Nightingale". The London Underground section of the Forum also has information on the BTH loco, which is also currently available as a Radley Models kit. On the licensing issue, it does matter in the case of commercial models. The London Transport and London Underground names and the roundel logos are all registered trademarks, as I believe are all the logos and trademarks of the predecessor companies that were amalgamated to formed the LPTB in 1933. I am reasonably confident that this includes the Metropolitan line logo which was last seen on rolling stock in normal revenue service as recently as 2012, on the A60 stock, next to the drivers door below the cantrail. Trademarks cannot be used without permission of the trademark holder, or the holder will sue. If they don't sue then the trademark holder risks losing the rights as it may be considered to have passed into the public domain if they stop enforcing their rights over it. TfL do not chase individual modellers as they are not benefitting financially from their hobby, but commercial organisations are. The best example in the case of LT/TfL is probably Modelmaster Jackson Evans who did license their transfers for LT/LU models from TfL. If you're a Londoner like me, you may not think of the roundel as a trademark, it just seems to be an integral part of the city, so it is easy to overlook the legal niceties about its commercial use, but they do matter.

Country, Suburban or City, they ran from Liverpool Street to Rickmansworth in leafy Hertfordshire, and for a very brief period to Chesham in Buckinghamshire. They also hauled GWR passenger stock to Moorgate, picking it up at Bishops Road, Paddington. If you're interested in the loco visit the London Underground section of the forum. There's plenty of information on there about them and what they hauled. For those of you that are interested, you need to add 3rd rail as a minimum, and ideally 4th rail. Only No 12, Sarah Siddons was ever modified for 3rd rail operation, and that was in 1983, 20 years after the locos were withdrawn from revenue service. At least they appear to have made a better job of it than they did with the Class 76/EM1 and Class 77/EM2. But the roof/body seam doesn't look quite right. Here's the real thing. Possible Livery variants are Metropolitan Railway (as per the photo), LPTB livery, Grey and Red (sometimes called the wartime livery), and finally London Transport livery.