Does Technology Affect the Value of the Trains We Own? Help Me with Your Insights!

Absolutely!  Look at postwar train values.  Unless a piece is like new with a crisp box it is worth far less then in the past.  Folks can get the same piece with up to date technology rather then get a post war  VG or even E condition item

Years ago, at one of my auctions, we were selling a number of very nice MTH engines.  I noticed that the selling prices were much lower than we  had gotten at previous auctions.  I asked one of the buyers why that was.  He told me  "They just announced PS2"  So, that quickly, the price dropped 25-40%!

Al

Post War trains are what got me collecting, modern era trains are what got me operating. 

I love my post war. My collection is far from huge and I have nothing rare, but I have what I like. Will I continue collecting? Yes. There are still some common items I want to own. 

I enjoy the newer TMCC/Legacy equipment for their capabilities and the rolling stock for its great graphics and detail. The track is realistic. The MTH and Woodland Scenics buildings are fantastic. And I'm doing scenery, and kit bashing building flats, and LED lighting. 

I have seen the good deals on the older TMCC but have made the decision to purchase new or almost new where electronics are concerned. All technology becomes obsolete soon enough - why buy something older that is already out dated? 

It definitely affects the value.  If it wasn't for the technology and the advancements this hobby has made over the last decade or so, I wouldn't have any interest in the hobby. For me the "collecting" aspect is non-existent.  And really not exciting.  I never look at a model train and think "wow this is a true collectors piece". They may be nice now, but in 10 years we'll be lucky if we can keep them in good running order. Like others have said.  I run everything I have.  And with the internal electronics and the way they change....... yeah definitely like a Beta-Max....

I had trains since I was a child, but I was focused on postwar; it was what I had.  

I can still remember when I first encountered TMCC. Dumbstruck. 

For me, technology adds tremendous value, in part, because it makes so many things possible and accessible. 

Ask anyone who bought a newly released MTH Proto Sound engine what their worth today.....there's your answer.

Yes, the technology does affect what I would pay for trains too. Some Trains like the Lionel VL Centipedes IMHO are Overpriced at $2100.00  esp when an MTH version is a LOT cheaper and performs just as well.

I NEVER had ANY good Luck with a Loco priced over $1800.00 so that IS my Threshold.

As of Now HEnnings Trains and the Gunrunnner are updating my Weaver Models PRR C1 0-8-0 with the latest and greatest electronics and LED's. Since this was a former Mason Loco split off from the set and redecaled to PRR, I feel the electronic upgrades on this loco will drive up it's current value.

Jim, I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. I buy some items just on a hunch and hope to make a profit to help my other train purchases. Sometimes I'm right on, sometimes I'm not.

My point is I enjoy buying trains to keep for various reasons and have all manufacturers well represented. But I'm also interested in flipping an unwanted item to help the cause and Eds Collectors Corner is always an interesting read.

Paul

New technology that does not work well or proves not successful is also not worth very much even if it is new. . In model railroading we have competing technologies : DCS,Legacy TMCC and DCC.  Not to bust anyone's bubble but none of these technologies are exactly state of the art IMO. There are other approaches also.  O gauge is a fractional subset of the model railroading market which as a whole is not that big. Improvements have been slow and sometimes non existent because it is a small proprietary market. Customers use systems that have been plagued with problems,some of them are masochists. . DCS had problems from its onset with a lot of excuses made for it's shortcomings. The usual suspects,brand loyalists have and will defend the indefensible. . TMCC was simple and useful,Legacy,pretty complicated..  It is not unthinkable that one of the 2 big companies could go belly up. It may even be the one with the best technology. Those invested in that one may be unhappy customers if that occurs. Or a company can simply abandoned the technology for the next,newest fad. PS1 comes to mind with some people once heavily invested. PS1 really was not a strictly conventional system. It was actually a throttle based command system with an eye on expansion. It was never developed to its potential.  The throttle manipulations could be automated,theoretically and sound made much better. Only time will tell.

Vacuum tubes are old Edison era technology and many high end sound systems still use them. New technology is sometimes used because it is cheaper,not because it is better. Some "improvements" are subjective.

MY new neighbor is an audio engineer with 30 + years experience. He builds his own audio systems and uses such old technology.

Dale H

The thing about most electronic packages these days is this, anyone can be replaced with an upgrade kit.  If your TMCC guts fail you can replaced them with PS2 or 3, if your PS2 or 3 guts fail, replace them with ERR guts.  Or like I've done, replace them with Battery-Powered Remote Control (BPRC) (although none of my PS2 or TMCC guts have failed).  There's no excuse for having a shelf queen these days unless it's a mechanical failure.

I would really like to see the makers offer their engines "Command Control Ready", where they would offer an engine with CC electronics or the same engine without.  A DC can motor with a "Plug-N-Play" FNR board that could be easily pulled out and a CC unit plugged in.

Just look at what a newbie is facing when they're trying to get into O scale.

First the engines cost $300+, then you have to get a transformer that can cost from $100-$900, THEN you have to get the CC system to operate it, another $300-$500.

Folks, that's approaching $2000 without even having a layout to run a single engine on.  Then you have the concern that that $300 engine may not work when you fire it up.

You wouldn't even need a FNR unit, DC could be run to the center rail and one outside rail and all that would be needed to move the engine would be a DC transformer.

IMO electronics should not affect the value in a positive way, it's just a means of moving an engine from point A to point B.

Hi Ed.

     • My concern is twenty years out, when Mike's Train House and Lionel have long stop the manufacturing of MTH / DCS Remote Control and Lionel Legacy is long out of production.  Conventional locomotives are always going to work. All you need is track and a transformer.

     • No Mike's TIU or Lionel TMCC, will be around.

     • No Lionel LCS, Layout Control System & Mike's Command Control for your Smart Phone.

     • The only technology that is going to still work twenty years out is Conventional & maybe LionChief Plus, with the equipment we have now. 

Good Luck

With you seminar at the convention.

Gary

• Cheers from The Detroit & Mackinac Railway

Much like many of these comments, I agree tech hugely impacts the value of trains, often in a negative way. I appreciate the modern tech, and the command-control systems, but I am far from an electronics guy and it all confuses me (I'm in my lower 20s, so imagine how an old guy with even less tech experience feels). I just want to run trains, so I run postwar. That isn't to say that the new stuff isn't exciting, it just isn't for me. However, with postwar it has an inherent collector's value because of what it is, whereas modern command engines lack that. As their tech gets surpassed, they really cannot hold value in the same way a currently-spec'd engine or a classic item can.

I wonder, is it just the technology built into modern trains that affects their value, or does the technology used to build them also affect their value?

The short answer is yes, but in ways that vary for us all (as evidenced by many of the above posts).

To me a engine that doesn't work is not worth anything(especially a very recent one that has everything packed in so tight that you can't even look for obvious loose wires without cutting open a huge wire bundle to look).  I'm not looking to go to the effort (or expense if I was to pay someone to do it) of gutting an engine and buying an upgrade (or downgrade, depending what failed) kit just to get it working.

I've bought a fair number of relatively modern items (Legacy, probably a small number of PS3 as well, many PS2 and many of the various eras of TMCC and a handful of PS1).

As stated by at least one or 2 members above, the reliability has gone too far down with the introduction of all the new features (or different manufacturing methods, factories used, etc  - my personal belief is the noticeable change started around 2009 or so). 

While I have newer items, I realize I better make sure they work when I buy them or risk finding out it's dead when I eventually get around to doing so.  It floors me when I hear someone discuss a very new train that they left it in the box for 6 months (or longer!) before trying it out.  It's not a bottle of wine that gets better with age!

I have more confidence in some of the older electronics, and while not necessarily easy to repair at at the board level, it's a heck of a lot easier to deal with some of the dis-assembly of older trains, and the electronics seem to be robust enough that  they can take some mild abuse before totally dying.  I'm starting to feel comfortable with trading that simplicity for the latest big detailing achievement.

Several years ago (maybe 4 or 5 now?) I voluntarily purchased a MTH West Virginia Pulp and Paper Shay from 1997 (which has PS1).  I was always a fan of that engine(and to the best of my knowledge, it has never been re-released with newer electronics), but it came out right when I was fresh out of school, so I was not buying too many (any) $1000+ engines at the time. 

I was plenty nervous about the electronics knowing it was PS1, but I lucked out and they have worked flawlessly since I bought it.  I probably paid just about half of original retail, which to hear the PS1 malaise tossed around here, I will be called a fool right away. 

"Upgrading" this particular engine would destroy the PS1 lumber yard sound effects/operational package.  I am fine running it as designed without TMCC or DCS remote control. (I do not believe you will see too many functional models of this particular engine go for "pennies on the dollar" like people keep claiming is normal).

Another example is I recently purchased a PWC Canadian Pacific passenger set that I have always admired, being a modern representation of the post war original.  This is a 1999 era TMCC engine in this set (no cruise control, no 200 speed steps, etc).  I paid probably 2/3 of original list price for a unit with a sealed inner box (master carton had been opened, but plastic was still around the set box).   I can hear the cries now of what an idiot I must be because I could have bought a Conventional Classics set and added 3rd party TMCC board and spent probably a few hundred less.  That's not what I was interested in though.

After opening the set and it's inner boxes, I am confident I am the first to do so.  While I have not done a 100% visual inspection yet, I have pretty good confidence the condition will be acceptable to me in terms of not being significantly defective.  I obviously will have to do some minor dis assembly to re-lube gears and such, but I am confident I will be able to do so without risking any damage to the unit.  My confidence in this relatively early TMCC package is also relatively high that it will probably function right with no serious issues.  On both fronts, my confidence in a newer item would not be as high.

I like the idea of grading for operation, but it brings challenges as many have mentioned above.  I' don't believe it's possible to grade on each specific item since the features are so diverse (and growing every once in a while) and not the same for each engine/manufacturer.

So in summary, yes on electronics, but I'm not terribly concerned about them being the latest versions.  I still am OK with even having a conventional item run around my tracks sometimes (like MPC units that I would not bother upgrading).  So it's not "all or nothing" for me with Command Control.  I don't do Post War though, primarily because I am very fussy on condition and PW trains are obviously still not affordable when they are flawless physically(if a flawless model can even be found).

-Dave

The modern technology is the reason I got back into the hobby a few years ago when I retired. The selection compared to years ago is just amazing as well. As the technology (and detail) improves or upgrades are offered, I think the value of all the older items will fall. Personally, I have very little interest in any of the older items, I like the new ones the best, although cost is a consideration. From the beginning I chose to stay with diesels only, which is more within my comfort zone for new engine expenses.

I like the electronics as well as I like the trains. I have had a few problems, but really very few for the number of trains I have so far and nothing all that serious. There is a learning curve to all the electronic devices, but that's part of the fun. This forum also makes things a lot easier in the learning and problem solving departments. 

I like the hand held remotes, not sure I will switch to full control with a smart device, but I may be forced to someday? I do think that the younger crowd that is and hopefully will be entering the hobby will prefer the train and system control they can have using their smart devices. I think the manufacturers have this figured out too.

I am more worried about parts other than electronics being available in the future, although 3D printing may someday eliminate those fears. I am not at all worried about the availability of electronic parts or upgrade or replacement boards. I think all the manufacturers have done a good job with those so far and I would bet it only gets better.

IMO, the demand for pre and post war items will continue to drop off, as will their values. May not happen for a while yet, but I think it's coming one of these days as the younger folks start to become the main O gauge hobbyists. I am not expecting any of my trains to

increase in value, I am expecting just the opposite.

I believe that technology has always been important to the model train hobby.  Model trains were the high tech toy when I was growing up the post war era.  It was the only toy that could be remotely controlled with speed, direction (electric switches), lights, etc.  The accessories such as operating milk cars, cattle loaders, speaker bill boards, etc. were high tech for time.  Operations were important to me and my friends.

The only other item that was high tech was the chemistry set, the erector set and a gas powered air plane which ran in circles on the end of a control string.  

Today's electronics have saved the hobby in my view.  I would not be in O gauge unless I could remotely control trains.  I see the technology attracting new people to the hobby.  We see many people happy to control a modern train on the G&O Garden Railroad.

 I have never been to York but I have a friend who has been there many times.  He says that in the years past he saw the majority of sales in the member halls.  Today, he sees the vast majority of sales being made in the dealer halls.  There are far more posts on this forum about a new VL or PS-3 engine purchase than a post war find.  Most forum member's have a high tech York wish list.  

We are starting to see post war trains being converted to modern tech.  This is a picture of a post war train converted to TMCC using Electric Railroad products.  The owner did the conversion because he wanted to enjoy remote control not to enhance the value of the set.  In fact, he was told that adding electronics to this set would destroy any collector value.  The lead engine is powered.  The B unit has a sound system.  The observation car has LED marker lights and constant lighting.  The rest of the train will eventually get constant lighting using LEDs.

NH Joe

Without oversimplifying things... technology becomes important only when the technology treadmill is operating.   In fact, it's pretty much a requirement that the technology treadmill operates so importers/sellers can generate demand and stir up consumer excitement for new products.  After all, there's gotta be a reason to BUY! 

If ALL the importers stopped producing trains tomorrow (unlikely but let's just hypothesize for a minute), then the value associated with "n-1" technology would most certainly increase -- perhaps even with "n-2" or "n-3" products as well... because the demand for product could easily outstrip supply.  That's something we haven't seen in decades!!!

Think about it... if there were ONLY "n-1" generation products remaining in the secondary marketplace and nothing new being produced going forward in the primary marketplace, we would expect prices of older items to increase somewhat as long as there's demand for them.   OTOH, we can't deny the changing demographics and aging population of toy train enthusiasts.  Neither of those components will be easy to ignore in another 10 years or so.  And in another 15-20 years, we may not be able to give any of this stuff away. 

Until then, we'll just have to enjoy this "golden age" of toy trains that we find ourselves living in right now... technology and all... while the importers grin ear-to-ear all the way to the bank. 

David

I like widgets and doodads on my trains and this makes them more expensive and then as they make newer and cooler widgets and doodads the old ones just aren't as cool and makes them less desirable to people who like widgets too. So yes technology does effect the value of trains

Now for those who don't get Model Railroading and are no apart of the OGR Forum, they have never heard about any manufacturers of smoke, Buildings or anything else. Heck a lot of people do not know that Menard's sells trains for cheaper prices than Lionel, MTH and Bauchmann. I really think that the evolution of technology has provided us with great info and products to enhance all of our model railroading. We have met people online and we would know who they are unless you know other members in your clubs and there always helping you out.

Guess I am in the minority here, but for me, the less modern technology the better! The more extra gee-wiz stuff the more likely it will break, be it cars, washing machines or toy/model trains.

All the extra doodads just jack up the price to purchase and eventually repair.

I got into O gauge partially for the technology. The old school AC power system and electromechanical E-units. Anything else just cuts the value.

In my younger years I had S gauge for awhile then went to H O. I got out of the hobby for 15 plus years. A few years ago I bought a used O gauge set at a yard sale, Lionel 0-4-0. It was a cheap plastic engine, I put together the track to see if the engine worked. The engine ran fine, I was greatly surprised to hear locomotive sound along with decent smoke. This was new to me, I was hooked!! Because of new electronics I invested in a operating O gauge layout running Lionel Legacy system.

Bob  

I know this is a late observation, I am not a collector, I like Running my Trains, therefore, my reason for coming back to the Train Hobby is Command CONTROL...I Love the Legacy System, The Hi Tech VisionLine Locomotives are FANTASTIC. Yes, Hi Tech can cause values to drop in there Post War counterpart. Even, TMCC versus LEGACY, can cause value losses. There are So Many Many Trains on the Market Today, and that to can cause Values to go Down.  In Short, it's a fun hobby, and I am not in it for the money, just having a Lot of Fun....Mr. Boyle, You have many opinions, many observations and speculations, so put it in a cup, shake it up, and let's see what comes up....Thants for Asking.

Being a sound guy, I have to have realistic sounds for my locomotives. It has gotten to the point that I won't buy an engine that doesn't have command, sounds and cruise control. A few years back Lionel offered the Heisler and I didn't buy one because they didn't put in cruise control in the model--yes that was shortsighted on my part but it was that important to me. At York I purchased a sharknose diesel that had command, cruse control, smoke and sounds. The smoke unit didn't work so I ordered a new one---well the problem is with the command board not the smoke unit. I don't run it because the smoke unit doesn't work.

     I expect all the technology without it I'll pass.

Scott Smith

I think the obvious answer is yes for most of the toy train market. I generally consider the money spent whenever I buy anything, trains or other items. If some value remains should I decide I don't want it anymore. Great. If not, no regrets.

Given the trend toward folks residing more in the "operators camp" vs. "collectors camp", I think there's lots of merit in identifying a product's operational status -- particularly for the secondary market where no warranties are common. 

The big challenge with this approach, however, is even brand new products straight from the factory could easily fall into categories 3, 4 and 5 in this rating scale.    Of course, we'd expect brand new products to sit squarely in category 5, but that's not always the case.  Worst case scenario is DOA, which would be category 3. 

It's not uncommon to see folks offer NOS that has been stored for years, never run or never even removed from the shipping box.  And for those scenarios, it's tough to accurately assess the operating status.  At that point, it's the same risk as buying a brand new product -- except, of course, the factory warranty has expired long ago.

David

Most everything in this thread is going to be anecdotal and reflect the impossibly diverse desires of the target audience, but I'll throw in.  I probably buy one locomotive a month.

I collect/operate by road name, whether it be postwar or modern. Postwar/MPC is easy to find and inexpensive to purchase, which is terrific. I buy modern stuff used and preferably, not working, so I can have my guy gut it for conventional running. I'm willing to pay about the same amount for modern as I am for postwar.

So in direct answer to the original question... as a buyer of trains on the secondary market, I won't pay more for technology.  I'd shell out a max of about $200 for a very nice PW diesel, and a max of about $200 for a cosmetically sound (working or not) modern diesel.

After reading these posts I'm beginning to think its not the technology driving prices up or down, but that the engine has been reissued putting more of them on the market.  As mentioned above, while generally the circuit boards are replaced not repaired (gunrunnerjohn did repair a bad trace in my TAS board, so it can be done), you can always gut the electronics and but whatever you want back in.  So I don't think tech plays a part in future value.

I do believe when an engine that was previously released is released again, it will drive down the price of the older engine because there are now more on the market.  I remember back in the 80s when Lionel reissued some 50s engines like the GS4, the price of the 50s engines drop dramatically. You add some additional goodies (tech) or detail to the new engine, and the value of the older engines drops even more.  I believe that is a major driver of value, especially for those engines released since the late 90s.  That is why I like my Lionel PRR T1; it looks like that will never be reissued so I like to think the value will go up someday because of that, not because I've upgraded the tech.

I also think that releasing a reissue engine does not really affect the value of the 50s engines.  That is a separate market.  As those who buy these engines to "relive their childhood" die off, the few true "post war" collectors will have an abundant number of products to choose from, so I believe value here will decline over time.

If I'm going to buy anything in the model train market that I look at as a potential investment (and I use the word investment lightly) or for potential collecting, it would be something along the lines of the MTH Coors train set or some other unique, oddball accessory. Some stuff does hold its value over time, but that's more related to the supply and demand of that one particular item. So things are out there for collectors, but main stream everyday items like the engines that litter our catalogs, I just don't see the value in keeping them pristine and on the shelf. Besides I ruin all my stuff by weathering it.   

IMO, For some its like spending extra for high performance in a car to reach 200 MPH knowing there's no chance you'll ever drive it to its full potential.  And worse, after spending the extra money knowing the car itself was never designed for that speed.. The same could be said about the VL BB.   Its exactly the same model as the JLC BB at twice the current price with features some may never use. Plus, the Legacy controller was never designed as user friendly as the DCS controller with screen prompts to guide through all the many new add on's.  One month away from the BB and forgetful folks need two big hands to operate it. One with the manual as a refresher to remind folks how to activate features the other holding the over sized Legacy controller.  Let's not forget 4 thirsty smoke chambers of different sizes to worry about. Some dry up before others...

Sometimes, high tech at a price is not all its cracked up to be..

Joe

So Ed,

How did the talk go? What did your audience think? What are your insights? 

Regards,

Bruce

It hasn't happened yet. The date is NEXT Wednesday...

Technology obviously does affect the value of the trains with the exception of Pre-war, postwar, and MPC era.

The type of tech effects it as well as if its working.

Protosound (these locomotives took a big hit in value and can be scooped up because many people don't want them or deal with the clanks of death and the limit of conventional only)

Locosounds (doesn't have the protosound 1.0 issues ,but it has decent sound people liked)

Protosounds II and III

TMCC

Legacy

Lionchief

Lioncheif plus

All the above are still in demand and very popular with many of my friends and club members.  Of course the non-high tech stuff is also popular and probably always will be.

I think there should be a new category for high tech with options like N/A, original not working, original working, modified/added not working, modified/added working

and one more category to tell you what tech is like: None (it was removed), N/A, TMCC, Protosound 2, Legacy, or ERR with sound commander, etc.

The above could be turned into TCA codes and that would give you a good picture of the state of the electronics along with the other TCA categories.

When the next Big boy is made to celebrate the running of the rebuilt 4014 what happens to the VL big boys price? Does it go down? Stay the same? 

Will the the new big boy have new state of the art improvements that then devalues the VL BB? Where does it stop? 

Imo I don't care, I will buy what I like and can afford. I'm not concerned at all about what may go wrong with our hi-tech trains. If they break or the boards blow up, fix it, gut it, sell it. Me, I'm going to keep running trains no matter what happens.

Excellent example of how new releases of the Daylight GS4 (and even the GS2) with command-control, cruise control, slow-speed operation and Legacy Railsounds have affected the MPC version of the Daylight (whose sounds and detail level were primitive by today's standards).  Back in the 80's and 90's, the Lionel GS4 rode quite a roller coster ride -- approaching the price-tag of today's VL BigBoy, if you can believe it.  Absurdity, but it happened! 

Today, I don't think anyone who still owns the MPC version of Lionel's Daylight GS4 can even give the poor thing away.  I think that's the essence of Ed's original post, if I understood it correctly.

David

JC642

Your post reminded me of a time I was doing a train show in Maitland FL.  I had a beautiful Weaver 4-4-4-4 at a very reasonable price.  One guy kept coming back to look at maybe 6 times.  Finally I said to him why not buy it since it is so reasonable.  He asked if it had sound.  I said no.  He did not want it.  I mentioned that if you run a lot of engines at one time sound can be a bother.  He replied that he NEVER ran his trains, still it had to have sound.  Go figure!

"He replied that he NEVER ran his trains,"

   Well in that case it DOES have sound :> .....DaveB

Hmmm, well I guess I am in the minority. I like things simple and find the crew talk and speakered chuffing and diesel engine sounds annoying. I do like the idea of smoking engines and remote control. Remote controls are great and they allow me to get around the layout to see the operations from different angles. Still, I like things simple and overall prefer conventional. Maybe I'll graduate up one day. 

Windows: XP, 7, 8, 10,.....99.  Planned obsolescense...Dixie Cup technology...use it once and throw it away...and the old stuff won't work with the new?  The new won't

work with the old?  What?  It broke in a week?  No problem, buy another one....Uh, no.

I kept my PW with minor additions (3) over 40 years; however, I purchased a Kline Hudson in 2004 and I have not looked back.  I purchased 54 command engines solely on features (regardless of the Vendor or control system). I purchase them at list to support my LHS and I did not care about their value after I am pushing up daisies. Because I had to tear down my layout to fix some ceiling water pipes (pin hole leaks) and my wife wanted solar panels, my layout came down (capability to have 35 + trains simultaneously on 4 levels). The redesigned layout will have less space for trains so I offered my engines at 50% off retail. 7 Steamers, 3 electrics, and one Heritage diesel sold for that price which I considered reasonable. I gave my PW engines and cars to my son plus he has one MTH starter set I gave him two years ago.  I do not consider my model trains as an investment. I agree that the PS1 engines are worthless and I would not purchase one even at one cent.  That said, I spent $500 + to make my Kline RDG F3 functional this spring because of segmental value (trailing A failed and I upgraded with PS2 master and slave).  They are less expensive than my C172 and Bonanza both of which when eventually sold will not approach the cost of their maintenance.

I really have absolutely no idea, I just like toy trains, new , old in between, whatever, all of them.

But , I do also like Ron's reply.

After reading these posts I'm beginning to think its not the technology driving prices up or down, but that the engine has been reissued putting more of them on the market.

Larry

Oh well, still having lots of fun either way

I'm with handyandy on this one: less is more. I'll take my 763e any day over something new. It may be 75 years old, but when I put it on the track, I know it's going to run, and if by chance it doesn't, I can most likely fix it right on my own workbench. My trains and my garden tractor are just about the only toys I have left that aren't overloaded with electronics.

The one exception to this is the track. I love the technology in the new switches made by Ross and RMT, and I believe they enhance the performance of our trains, whatever vintage we operate.