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

We're already seeing it.  Preowned conventional, PS1, PS2, TMCC locomotives go for cheap as folks become enamored with the new electronic and detail features on rereleases.

 

There may be a narrow market of collectors that value the early generation electronics, but for most, the internal electronics have about as much "collector" value as a Betamax VCR.

 

Rusty

I only buy them when 'busted' for cheap and throw all the electronic crap away and run them 'post-war'. So I don't put any value on the technology which is only good when it works and judging by the comments on this forum isn't very often. 

It does for me.  As Rusty stated PS1 locomotives are basically sold for scrap; if you can get rid of them at all.  I do not buy trains with the latest and greatest electronics.  Like technology in other areas, the prevailing attitude seems to be that these are throwaway items.  Like your flat screen TV; when it breaks down, you replace it rather than fix it. With the tech changing so fast there is a lot of concern about whether parts will even be available down the road when (not if) needed.

 

Jeff Davis

IMHO, the TCA grading system does not need to be changed. A second, separate grading system could be established for the operational condition of the train.
There are still plenty of us who aren't interested in technology, and we do not need to be burdened with such a grading system.

How would such a system be defined? Would an older technology that is fully functional be graded lower than a newer technology with more features?
I think it has to be up to the buyer to know what they are buying when it comes to functionality, features, and compatibility.

If all the features work as designed, regardless of what those features are, then the item has to get a top rating.

I have the parts and know-how to fix just about anything on my trains; so I generally don't get hung up on the reliability of the technology.  However, having said that, I pretty much consider my purchases a dead-end as far as an investment is concerned.  I have no intention of selling off any of my trains; that activity I will leave to someone else to manage 5 minutes after I'm off on the next adventure.  So from my perspective, I definitely like the new technology, and it does influence my purchasing decision, I just don't worry about the long term ramifications of owning something that will be considered obsolete in short order.

For me if the engines are mechanically identical with the same detail like an MTH PS1 vs PS2/3 engine, the latter is worth more.

On the other hand an identically priced detailed command engine like a 3rd Rail Hudson is worth more to me than a Vision or PS3 Hudson.

Detail trumps electronic features in my book. 

 

Pete

Ed,

 

Great topic for some future articles.  I think there are several points....

 

1.  Grading standards.  Pre-electronic trains could easily be graded by site.  There was nothing else to go wrong except a good cleaning, some new wires.  All basic stuff which would bring the item back to life.  One could easily see if bushings were bad, gears worn etc.  You can't tell if electronics are bad.  Buying a current item today with bad electronics is tough as the engine will not work without some serious work or after market replacement parts.  I think grading standards will need to address this in the future. 

 

2. Items are being remade with newer features all the time.  That quickly kills the value of its predecessor.  Just look at the Lionel M1'a.  The originals (TMCC) can be had in the $500 range since the new legacy models are $800+  How can the older model compete price wise?

 

3. A can see a new collector niche developing.  There will be collectors who want a specific electronic version in original working order.  The early models will become more rare as people upgrade older models to get newer features without buying the new model.  I see this as a small group as most people prefer the latest and greatest.

 

4. Longevity is a serious consideration.  I have no issues running my dad's pre-war trains.  I keep them well tuned and greased.  They will last and run well past my lifetime.  My new stuff with all the electronics may not.  Operators may have more reservation to firing up an engine with electronics that are 80+ years old.  This could affect collectability in the future for said models.

 

5. Part availability affects prices to.  If someone wants to keep an item all original, they will be hard pressed to find original boards to replaced dead ones.  The various speed control boards/sound boards are not easily duplicated.  On the other hand, I can find plenty of after market castings for various postwar trains and even original parts as Lionel Corp made tons of parts.

The key is how much hardware (engines, accessories, etc) can be improved by software upgrades before the hardware itself becomes obsolete.

After being a Post War Lionel collector for years, I sold my huge collection through Stout Auctions. I really couldn't get out of the hobby so I switched tracks and went to more modern Lionel.. The first thing I see when kids come in now is where is the remote? I hand the remotes to the big eyed kids, and they play forever. when  I had the ZW's, they didn't pay much attention whats so ever. to me it's for the kids and to bring them up loving the hobby.

Ed, I am still somewhat of a collector of conventional engines such of those by Williams (Gold Edition) and Weaver, but I prefer command engines.  So I have my traditional engines retrofitted with TMCC (ERR) or PS2 as necessary. Command engines of whatever vintage allow me to wander the layout, talk with guests, and catch or service potential problems.  Of course, their is much to be said for the latest technology such as Legacy or PS3, and I enjoy their creative options.  But command functionality is my baseline.  Thanks for bringing up the topic.

 

Keith

Absolutely, as one of my colleagues stated after seeing  my American Flyer Postwar collection on my display shelves:

 

"Wow! Look at all these dead engines".

 

I asked what do you mean they work flawlessly. And he replied " Yes, but they don't have TMCC."

Personally, I have little interest in post war items.  The latest Lionel and MTH models are more my speed because I really like all the new detail, electronics and features.  But it is a double edged sword... in another 7 years there will be another big feature or operating system addition that is a must have.  This will render the older models less valuable, sometimes below a third of their intro street price.

Technology has a major impact on the value of trains. When I purchase an engine I want to see the condition it is in but I also want to know what electronic package is in it and does it work. I will pay lower percentage below MSRP for a PS1 engine than I would pay for a PS2 engine. I also need to know that the engine runs and the sound is working. The LCCA rating is no longer adequate to assess the value of the engine. A good looking engine that has flawed electronics is not worth much. 

In popular opinion, YES Ed, I can see why it is. But I tend not to get wrapped up in that most of the time.

 

I collect mostly 1970-2000 modern Lionel and postwar Lionel, with a few more current MTH and Lionel products that have much more sophisticated gadgets inside. While they certainly do retain a higher price in comparison, they too almost always depreciate with every passing second. One MTH Premier Mikado with Proto2 from 2007 I got was only $475 - way below it's $900 price tag!

 

Sometimes you have to look at the opposite end of the spectrum, too - those engines with more intricate features are going to be more of a nightmare, at least price wise, when something goes wrong with them.

 

 

I have the Lionel LTI-era scale 700E Hudson, and has had no electronic problems whatsoever, and is still running perfectly the same way it was 25 years ago. Compared to the Vision Hudson, which has has 2 unique electronic problems in the past 4 years I've owned it, and both repairs were worth as much as a RailKing steamer! For me, reliability comes long before sophistication.

 

Not only that, but those items that do get depreciated by newer versions make them easy bargain buys for those who just want the engine. It also makes them fun to tinker with. I have a few MPC era Lionel steamers I've planned to upgrade with better parts and extra detailing. They're much more fun for me than the new, scale Legacy versions, like the Alton and Blue Comet.

 

As for the newer equipment, I give it at least a few months before its value starts going downhill, because everyone knows something better will come soon to push the once new stuff out of the spotlight. I mean, the Legacy GS-4 is even going down in value with the new GS-2 models Lionel recently rolled out! The toy train hobby in the last 20 years has become much more like the rest of the electronic world than ever, comparing to things like Playstations and HDTV's.

Firstly, thanks for asking us, Ed.

 

As far as functionality/new stuff, I go back to "why choose O-gauge?" I did because of the functions: bells, smoke, accessories, track side gadgets, etc. If not for this (and the relative "electrical ease" of having 3 rails on the track) I should probably be in a smaller gauge with more powerful glasses in the same floor space in order to have a "larger layout."

 

If one starts with the premise that O-gauge has all this functional "stuff" that adds to realism, then one must ultimately conclude that somehow, this "technological functionality" should be incorporated into a "rating" (i.e. grading) scale of trains offered for sale/resale. Technology will only continue to improve; who knows what will happen in 10 years?

 

So I would think that LCCA would want to develop a system, with the ability to incorporate as yet not thought technological advances, that grades technology/functionality somehow for those who, like me, prefer O-gauge for its gadgets/activity/"realism." For those not interested in technological functionality, it would be a detail with which they need not concern themselves (with no disrespect intended toward the conventional operators).

 

You asked....

 

Regards,

Bruce

I don't see the big deal here. In most instances the electronics can be swapped out and updated to the latest. This will be available most likely as long as there is an interest in there hobby. Most likely every 3 years the electronics will be antiquated anyway. 

 

I do no see any antique value in the electronics at all after post war era stuff. Most people would not care,they just want the loco to run.

 

I run conventional, many forward only. For that a bridge rectifier is all the electronics needed with some LEDs for lighting and RS4 stand alone boards works well if I want sound. You are looking at a bit over $100 for the whole upgrade (or downgrade in the eyes of some.  I buy locos at half MSRP or less. The cheaper the better,I don't care about the electronics because I can run anything mechanically sound as stated with a rectifier and RS4 board. 

 

In general I think investment expensive train electronics is a waste of money. They are not reliable , expensive to repair with sometimes non existent extinct replacement parts. In 3 to 5 years,whatever you buy will be obsolete. Even on newer engines,from what I have read here service is less than stellar. 

 

Dale H

Since technology is getting more sophisticated then the older systems are worth much less due to just having the electronics. Technology has changed the market from collecting to operating. Operators always want the newest and do not want old tech. As long as this is part of the hobby the bell curve in lowering values will be more pronounced. Who wants to run an old computer? No one so they are worthless. Our trains have some value as a model which dampens the curve a little.

 

Yes, the technology does affect what I would pay for trains.

 

First off, I'm an operator. I like to "collect" the items I like, regardless of roadname, but I run 'em all.

 

It would be nice to have a second or sub-class of TCA-type grading standards for the new electronics, but I really don't see any way to have significant quantifiable differences. As an example, at a meet, Joe Seller is not going to want to pull the cab/shell off a loco to prove that the boards inside are original Lionel. So basically it works or it doesn't. Perhaps have some "levels" of functionality assigned?  As in, if it's electronic with smoke whistle and bell, and all 3 work, then it's a 10. If it has smoke/whistle/bell/sounds/crew talk/whistle smoke/steamchest smoke/moving crew/directional lighting/cab lighting, if all work except the smoke out of the stack, is that a higher grade than one where everything works but the cab lighting, crew talk, and moving crew do not?  Very subjective....

 

Secondly, would anyone even *know* if the board they're seeing is a Lionel board or not (I've never really looked to see if Lionel or other brands are etched into the boards themselves)?

 

Personally, I'm thrilled that the PW and early electronics are suffering price-wise, because I still want to obtain several beloved items from my youth.  30 years ago, they were untouchable, but now are within reach.

I have to sing with the chorus here.  Technology is a big part of why I came back to the hobby.  Like others, sometimes I buy a desirable model with older electronics, or none at all, and upgrade it to the latest features.  However, even that isn't perfect, take the example of the new Lionel Legacy stuff with the IR sensor for the LCS sensor tracks.  That's not available for retrofit, so I'm looking for newer stuff that has that capability.

 

Ed,

Technology affects the value great deal to me. I don't even consider buying a train unless it has speed and command control, as well as a good sound system (PS2.0 or RS4.0 or greater). I wouldn't even pay 10% of an older train's original price ~ that is, a train with PS1 or original Railsounds. The hassle of upgrading electronics is just not worth my time. I am not a collector, so my opinion has some bias.

 

The flip-side of the above is that there is a limit I place on what I'll pay for technology in electric trains. Case in point was Lionel's Big Boy at ~ $2,000. Its state of the art features are great fun but I cannot justify that kind of cost.

Well Ed, since your talk is tomorrow night (unless you mean NEXT Wednesday), you didn't leave yourself much time here.

 

That said, to me it's kind of like adding another forum topic: If folks don't pay attention, what's the use of an additional forum.

 

Likewise, it's easy to go to a train meet or an auction site, where trains are listed as mint yet are obviously used. Or like new, and they're covered in dust. Adding another category to grading standards will not make people become any more accurate or honest about how they perceive the condition of their trains.

 

Obviously, today's trains have more electronic features, and therefore have more that can go wrong. To me, and I agree, the current grading system seems to have a visual implication first, and yet the functionality is not excluded. If something is LIKE NEW that means it not only LOOKS like new, but it also operates like new.

 

I can see where some confusion could arise with categories below "like new" on the grading scale. "Good condition" implies there are obvious signs of usage. And here I see your point, where a visual assessment differs from an operational assessment. Especially on any high end locomotive with many features. For that matter, even a regular LionChief engine. If the sound or smoke doesn't work, it's not like new, even if it appears visually to be like new.

 

I don't know how a new grading system would work, especially on the modern stuff. Parts are far more limited today as well as quantities made. Here's a real advantage of almost anything pre-modern: Production runs were larger, therefore parts are more universal and accessible (meaning repairs are more practical).

 

Mechanical e-units certainly can have their quirks, but they are totally fixable. A circuit board is another story, unless you have a degree in electronics or just a lot of attained knowledge - as there are a few on this forum.

 

To me first and foremost, it's a matter of the seller being honest - which does not always happen. So then what to do? Next, it's become more necessary for the buyer to be knowledgeable of what they are buying, to do their homework, to be cautious and ask questions before making a purchase.

 

A scenario for honestly: If a high end locomotive, for example, has been repaired with lets say a replacement sound system or an improved smoke unit - which is better than when purchased new - it is now, by the current grading standards, no longer new or like new condition. Even though operationally, it could be vastly improved.

 

Regardless of any new grading system, today the weight is more on the consumer to be in the know of what they want to buy. If a seller cannot answer a question, doesn't know, or simply won't tell you - regardless of the vintage or features of the trains - the best idea would be to pass. As they say, buyer beware, which has become more true than ever.

 

 

I think Joe's point #3 is interesting. While I agree that, currently, trains with the older electronics (TMCC, PS1) generally are not particularly valuable, I wonder if there may be a market down the road for certain fully-functioning examples in good shape. There is a collectors market for old computers and video game systems and games nowadays (at least for specific ones that are rare or historically significant), so outdated electronics are not necessarily a death sentence when it comes to value. Whether the same dynamics can apply to trains is a question, though.

 

Derek

quote:

Obviously, today's trains have more electronic features, and therefore have more that can go wrong. To me, and I agree, the current grading system seems to have a visual implication first, and yet the functionality is not excluded. If something is LIKE NEW that means it not only LOOKS like new, but it also operates like new.

 

The TCA standards, which have been just about universal adopted, specifically exclude operating condition.

 

 

Technology is what brought me into this hobby.  My brother was into pre-WWII Marx and my father-in-law enjoyed conventional O gauge trains.  However, while it was fun to play with these trains with them, I had no interest until Lionel came out with RS.  I bought a couple of RS engines and ran the engines when I visited them.  Then came command control, and I was hooked.  I built my first layout centered around the advantages of TMCC.  The only conventional trains I have are trains I inherited, and they are in storage.  My layout has no transformer "throttle" handles; if I should run conventional it will be through the Power Masters.

 

All my engines (even B-units) have command (TMCC or DCS), sound, and if a steamer 4-chuffs per revolution.  To get this in my older engines, I had the old electronics either upgraded or replaced.  Initially it was TAS or PS2, now its ERR stuff.  I have a couple of engines where I have upgraded them twice, and another one where I'm going to remove a poor TMCC/Odyssey system and install a full ERR system. 

 

I would like to see a grading system for functionality.  This would be important to me if it is a recent issue with the latest electronics.  But mostly I would use a grading system to make sure the motor(s) are good and the running gear works well; the mechanical parts of the engine.  I will more than likely upgrade or replace the electronics in the engine after I buy it.

 

I will probably always be looking for better electronics that make the engine run as realistically as possible for a model.  At this point I do not plan on buying many more engines, but continuing the upgrade of my current ones.  If Legacy were to be offered as an upgrade kit, I would replace my older TMCC stuff with it in a heartbeat.  I may keep the old stuff for parts, or just throw them away.

I agree that level of  tech changes desirability to many operators and thus their worth on the market. You can see it on any forum (like Ebay) where the older tech-equipped models command (pun intended) less money.

 

Old, reliable postwar models are, of course, an exception and have a different set of metrics to measure their worth.

"The TCA standards, which have been just about universal adopted, specifically exclude operating condition."

 

Thanks CW, I was unaware of that. I'd always just assumed that if something is like new, it not only looks like new, but operates the same. Or maybe it's just the way I read the descriptions. As in the following C-7 and 8 descriptions, I read the mention of parts as mechanical. But I can see how that could mean just visual pasts (and not mechanical), such as a snap-on dynamic brake, or a brake wheel or decorative horn or bell.

 

C-8 Like New—Complete all original: no rust, no missing parts; may show effects of being on display and/or age; may have been run.

 

C-7 Excellent—all original: minute scratches and paint nicks; no rust and no missing parts; no distortion of component parts. 

 

So I guess it makes Ed's idea even more justified, especially in this day and age.

Dale H said "In general I think investment expensive train electronics is a waste of money. They are not reliable , expensive to repair with sometimes non existent extinct replacement parts. In 3 to 5 years,whatever you buy will be obsolete. Even on newer engines,from what I have read here service is less than stellar." I tend to agree with this statement.  I think grading electronics is fraught with problems, apart from them either working or not, they will eventually fail, even if not used. This must have a generally negative effect on long term valuation compared to classic pre and post war trains, and I'm including European and British in this, where they retain or in some rare cases, increase in their values.

Like many others here I gradually abandoned my post war trains in favor of the newer scale models with good sounds and control. Initially I was happy with much of the Lionel and MTH Premiere stuff from the early 2000s but as I became more knowledgable I could see and hear the difference in the improved detailing and better sound of the more recent items. 2 chuffs per sounded bad and the older smoke units didn't sync with the chuffs.

Even so, I would probably concur with Norton above that detail will trump electronics in most cases - electronics theoretically can be upgraded.

I think you are going to see 2 distinct camps here with possibly a sub set in one class.  There will be the pure conventional (post war, WBB) folks who enjoy the trains and could not be bothered with the technology.  They are actually in a great place because the technology is driving the price of those items down making the hobby far less expensive.  Then there is the technology driven folks, the ones who look for smoke, sound, lights, working bathrooms, the works and are willing to pay on the order of a grand or more for that tech.  It is hard to say how much of a market share that customer bases provides.  Perhaps the folks at Lionel and MTH could share the number of units sold of some selected high end units.  The subset may well be folks like me, first generation command or conventional.  All of those items have certainly lost value.  In some cases I would be luck to recover 1/3 of the purchase price for what I paid new.  In other cases I have been fortunate to pick up some very nice pieces at much less than the original probably because the original owner is upgrading.  So the answer is the high end stuff has a higher purchase price and will likely maintain value because there is no replacement.  The stuff prior to Legacy and PS3 will all lose value to a point.   I would frame the talk as "it depends".

 

quote:

Thanks CW, I was unaware of that. I'd always just assumed that if something is like new, it not only looks like new, but operates the same. Or maybe it's just the way I read the descriptions. As in the following C-7 and 8 descriptions, I read the mention of parts as mechanical. But I can see how that could mean just visual pasts (and not mechanical), such as a snap-on dynamic brake, or a brake wheel or decorative horn or bell.

 

In the second half of the 1970's I obtained an absolutely brand new Modern era Lionel locomotive (current model) that I am positive had never been removed from the box before I did.
The engine was not functional because the e-unit had fallen to pieces inside the locomotive.

 

 

 "I think grading electronics is fraught with problems, apart from them either working or not, they will eventually fail, even if not used. This must have a generally negative effect on long term valuation compared to classic pre and post war trains"

 

   Collector value is determined by supply and demand which is a function of number made and attrition due to time it's been since they were made.Small production numbers and no one saving them as collectibles along with sufficient demand to drive up the price is a necessary condition and I don't see that happening with today's production numbers and number of buyers who buy them as collectibles, the scarcity per person wanting the item will not be there in 50 years if all the production is collected for that purpose. Bottom line is run them as toys if you want and don't worry about what the TCA or any other group thinks about their worth, and best way to get value from the stuff is learn how to keep it running yourself so you are not dependent on distant resources. ....DaveB

 

 

I suspect operators have always felt the technology was the major driving force behind their interest. First it was the novelty of an invisible force causing a train to go around a track. Later it was the innovative-for-the-time accessories that could light, make noise or perform a task without manual assistance. Now it is blowdown or whistle steam, track sensors, etc. Will these features significantly influence the long term collectabilty or associated value of an item? I doubt it. I still think it will be the traditional factors like nostalgia, rarity and beauty that influence what collectors are willing to pay. 

My 2 cents...

I think that the first train club that establishes some kind of grading for operation will set itself apart from the others.  

Here's a quick stab at how operating condition could be graded as follows (regardless of generation):  5) fully functional  4) some functions work, some don't  3) doesn't work, but all parts are present, 2) doesn't work, parts missing, 1) inoperable, R) restored/modified operations

 

I see this as a separate rating, much like TCA's paper/box scale.

I think the collectible aspect of the hobby is over.

romiller

Ed,

    There are 2 different kinds of technology minded owners you might want to consider.  The conventional technology that a lot of collectors like and the modern technology that all the younger generation loves.  For engineers like myself I like modern technology on Tin Plate Trains kid of combination of both worlds, now I am not about to change my Fathers original 263E Tin Plate Lionel work train for any one, however I am having Guns (Gunrunnerjohn) up grade the smaller 249 version of this Tin Plate Train with ERR controls adding the new technology to my Tin Plate.  I love being able to run all the different trains with my DCS hand held remote control technology, dreamed of doing so even as a kid, combining the old ZW & KW transformers, with the DCS and Legacy technology is great engineering to me, adding the new Z4K's & ZW-L's for modern power technology improves everything, no doubt about it.  For me it's about combining the old and new technology of our hobby that makes everything so special.  

PCRR/Dave:

 

:

On my RR, I have upgraded all my early NYC MPC, Williams engines to TMCC so they are not shelf queens, my PS 1 engines are now PS 2 and have joined the DCS world. The exceptions for me are early brass NYC Williams engines and my ROW engines, the collector in me wont let me touch them. I am not in this great hobby as an investment but for pleasure, the value will be gain for those I leave behind in this life. None of this takes into consideration the custom work I have done thru the years for my pleasure and others as well. A grading system for the technology upgrades interests me (eg for conversation, a MPC 783 Hudson bought new at say 695.00 at the time is worth today 350.00 now if I add TMCC to the old engine its worth ????? Food for thought. To me priceless. Ed great topic!!

I can't stand diesel locos without prime mover sounds and reliable, slow-speed operation.

 

I also wish that the PS2 locos I own were PS3 so I could run them on DCC.  

 

Yes I need tech in my trains.

everyone on here repeats " buy trains because you like them"- not for an investment or value purpose. yet this magazine still has a collectors corner column advocating whats valueable and whats not,whats rare, etc. i guess i keep getting two different messages here . -Jim

The older the technology, the less it's worth.

 

Simple really.

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.

 

BlueComet400,

     I agree about the switch technology, I love the new Lionel FasTrack wireless Command Control Switches, being able to use 99 of them on a wireless basis, controlled from with a Legacy Cab2 or TMCC Cab1 is one great technological advancement.  

PCRR/Dave

Dave,

Thanks again for your help with my switch dilemma. You had suggested RMT switches as they are truly tinplate-compatible. I'm now the proud owner of 11 brand-new RMT O-72 switches and can't wait to get the trains rolling!!

i basically agree with what rOdnEy had to say. 

 

The value for me is in the play factor.  If a proto one engine gives me great enjoyment then  thats all that is needed ... for me.  Some of my postwar locos give me a fantastic train running/watching experience ...  and the only sound they make is a whistle or horn ( and a bicycle horn at that )  Lately I have bought a fair amount of Williams by Bachman and I'm thrilled when running and watching these locos pull my trains, even with their cheesey ( IMHO ) sounding horns and bells.... they still look great!!  

 

For me the value is in the experience I have when running and watching a locomotive regardless of the technology.  Heck my 2005 Lionel scale J 611 looks fabulous and pulls and runs great ... but the crew talk is so off the wall ridiculously non realistic that I rarely use it.  I'm not going to upgrade to the lasted version  of the Lionel scale J just to get the latest tech features ... the one I own now is just fine and I let my imagination do the rest when running it .... heck thats what I did when I was a kid ( and still do ) with my Lionel 2065 steamer anyway   Imagination has great value!!

 

 

 

Well, there is some prewar Standard gauge, prewar Maerklin, and  .... 

 

As a speculation, there may come a time in the future when vintage American-made trains may come back into renewed vogue (in the USA). Some would claim that they have never gone entirely out of fashion. It depends on what part of the greater train hobby community one poses the question to. I believe that, driven by both the evolving international situation and the lack of spare parts, Chinese-built trains, in general, are going to meet greater secondary and retail market resistance down the line.

 

I enjoy the new ones with all of the latest features, too.

 

YMMV.

 

Bob

Bob,

I couldn't agree with you more. Everything I own was manufactured from 1906 to 1934 by Lionel.

BlueComet400,

   Congrats on the purchase of your new RMT (K-Line) type switches, definitely some real nice switches you should be very happy with them in your layout.  When ever you get your layout up and running with your switches operating, please post some pictures or video for us to see here on the OGR.

PCRR/Dave

Great post, David! 

 

David spoke about the importers / consumers / features side of the equation.  I'll hit the technology side.

 

Most of us as users (operators) of toy trains find our comfort zone with technology and stay with it.  Many like conventional control. Conventional offers a centralized panel, multiple (possibly) locomotive control with blocks, and some distributed turnout and accessory aspects (pushbuttons on fascia).

 

Others have embraced command control.  But command control is a spectrum. 

 

A first generation command control system like DCC (although individual manufacturers offer enhancements) or TMCC (my preference) has enough basic technological capabilities to run trains (horn/whistle, bell, front/rear couplers, smoke, sound, speed control) and accessories (turnouts, accessories, lights, etc.).  It's in my comfort zone, reliable, and more than enough for what I need.  That ties me and users like me to TMCC generation locomotives or to those conventional ones that I can upgrade.  I'm not likely to buy a Legacy engine to run it with TMCC.

 

Second generation command control systems like DCS and Legacy offer advanced technological features.  Some of these features work well, some do not.  But as David noted, they provide a way for manufacturers to lure users to the next generation.  I imagine that most users will not migrate to newer systems or trains unless the features are really worth the cost or the rework needed to retrofit them into our layouts.  Each of us has to make that judgment call as to the importance of the new feature(s).

 

As David mentioned, money and demographics are important decision points.  At this point in my life (61), I need to get the layout operating on a regular basis so that the grandchild and any future grandchildren can play with it.  Changing technologies is not in the plan because it causes delays.  God willing, I'd like a few more decades to play with this myself.

 

George

 

I think you've hit on the essence of the model/toy train experience…Imagination!  When we were kids, the movement, the color, the smoke, the lights all combined to give flight to the image that we were somewhere else & in control. The fact that the technology was so reliable & creative in those postwar toys lent foundation to the illusions our imaginations fostered. Todays technology is indeed wondrous but hardly reliable. Now when you see smoke, you can never be sure if it's coming from the smokestack or the electronics frying.  I feel our imagination loses something in the desire to have the latest technological gadget, which, of course, will soon be superseded by the next technological gadget. Kinda makes me dizzy trying to keep up, not to mention financially stressed.  In the end it's still all about having fun…it's certainly not about monetary gain.  The inflation of train prices seen in the 80's & 90's will surely never come again so run'em & let'em smoke!!!

I am a conventional running guy. PW is my thing and, combined with PW remakes constitutes the majority of my roster. I do have other, modern (non-PW) renditions, but when I buy a new engine with command control, Legacy, etc., it is in SPITE of the tech features and not BECAUSE of them. I dislike paying all that extra money for features I do not care about and cannot use. However, occasionally an item will be so attractive to me that I will buy it despite the expensive tech features. Silly, I admit.

 

I do like the new sounds -- whistles and horns -- but could do without the chatter.

 

I'm quite happy and content with this scenario and enjoy both collecting and running my Lionels.

 

 

 

 

Technology sure does affect value.  In some instances it destroys it.  Best examples are the beautiful brass Right of Way locomotives that sold for $1300 to $2100 back in the early 1990s.  Now you can get them for $300 - $500 LN in the box.  I have 6 of them, fortunately bought relatively recently--not in the 1990s.

 

Hope to see you at Marty Fitzhenry's Sunday.

 

Lew Schneider

Ed:  On new trains, made during the "age of technology", does the conventional grading system regarding visual condition apply as it does to vintage trains?  If anything, the standards are tighter because ANY flaw on a new locomotive, made some time in the last 20 years, greatly affects it's value.  You simply assume that the previous owner was an enthusiast and took proper care of the item.  You don't anticipate kid's handling these new trains.

 

And, as to the value of operable technology, I have found that trains made only slightly before the popular advent of our various Command Control systems, or are not so equipped, are really "dogs" on the market.  An average engine without TMCC or DCS, might be worth 1/3 or less than a similar engine with a system.  And, of course, the system must work properly.  Any buyer of a new engine should "test drive" the engine to be sure that all technology is working well, and sellers must guarantee that the system works.  Lot's of room for arguments, here.

 

Paul Fischer

 

 

Ed, I loved OSI Proto sound when it first came out but having second thoughts now. How many Proto one systems are still running? How many parts are available? For me paying over $2000 for an engine is something like buying an Apple watch. Next year the watch will be old news and not worth much because of new technology. On the other hand a fine old mechanical watch can increase in value. Buying these new engines is like buy a computer. Every few years you need to replace it as the technology fails. As for this little baby, it will run forever. Don

For me it is a simple decision of price/function/RELIABILITY.  Having all the control and features would be nice, but above all I want it to run and be reliable.  I can't imagine having the reliability and compatibility issues I read on this forum, especially at those prices.  I like the electronic sounds, but I don't want any reliability issues with the engine.  So personally, I am thrilled with the price drops.  I "lost" money on my postwar and MPC stuff, but I can now buy things I could never justify before.
    I have worked in high end (almost can't fail) electronics most of my career. We actually do MRI type xrays on every solder joint/board we make.  That data is kept indefinitely for an "autopsy" on any units that do fail.  I know that these train electronics could be made very reliable but that evolution will take time, money and customer demand. I am fairly impressed with what they have accomplished so far.
As for gradong system, I don't think the grading system should change.  The description of what's being sold should evolve to adequately describe what is for sale including: what is not original;  what has been modified; and what features don't work, etc.  It is the description/explanation that is now longer and more complicated.  If you put new fancy electronics in a 1950 773 you should disclose that just as you should on any modifications on the newer electronic engines.
The bigger problem I see is with an item that was working and doesn't work for the new owner.  Or a feature that the owner never used and the second owner expected it.  You need to be able to demo what you are selling or provide a warranty (or no warranty).
Buying used electronic trains is now more like buying a used car or computer.  During certain conditions or certain software it locks up or fails.  The seller may or may not have known.  Or like a car it could just be poorly designed.  So the electronic train market is more buyer beware more than ever.
And like cell phones, computers, TVs, etc, the technology advances will kill the resale value of previous generations of electronic trains.  The reissues of postwar and prewar trains in various forms has already taken a huge toll on the prices in that market.
Stocks, land, and real estate are better overall investments than trains.  You may be able to resell a train at a higher price or you may have no buyers (as in the previous posts references on PS-1 trains).  You should buy to own it and be happy if you can resell it later.  The goal in any industry is to sustain or grow by creating new demand or replacement demand.  MPC, LTI and the current Lionel have done repeated remakes of past engines as well as new items.  Their job is to create new demand for their products which may need to kill the demand for the previous products.  Similar to the first iPhone 1 up to iPhone 6 or 10 or wherever they are at.  If you cannot create market growth with new customers, then you have to develop new product features that your current customers will want. Luckily with trains it is normal to have several different ones.  With cell phones, one is enough for most people.

Well, I am waiting for the 1-700E price to drop, so I can 2-rail one.  I am not yet seeing the drop.

 

Same with the scale GS-4 - I am ready, right after I finish the tires on this gorgeous FEF.

We all know that prewar and postwar trains still run almost as new as they were pulled out of the box back then. As for the newer equipment, it could be a hit or miss but most times, it is a hit. I've had very few issues with everything I've purchased in the past 25 years.

 

However, I have stopped buying anything pre-ordered and/or new out of anyone's catalogs for almost 10 years now. Pricing from some companies is way out there for newer electronics when the same piece with still desirable features can be had for a much more affordable price.

 

I'm quite happy buying PS1 or TMCC engines at pricing that stills allows me to pay my monthly mortgage. $2,000 for any engine is what I call ....!

 

I am into this hobby because of a love for trains that was sparked as a kid by real coal carrying trains run by C&O in WV in the 50's. That was enhanced by my Christmas toys of Lionel trains in 1954 which I still have. I have found myself playing more with my Legacy and TMCC engines because of the new sounds and great looks. I will upgrade my old 2-8-4 to TMCC myself both to get it into command control and also the love of "fooling" with the engineering aspects of toy trains.

I personally value based on looks, accurate detail of what the real engine looked like, and functionality, how easy is it to run.

The kids all like the functionality, they expect toys today to work realistically. Fancy sound boards attract them to play with the toys. They quickly can see an imaginary RR where they can control the trains, switches and accessories with this remote control that has become second nature to them in these days of hand held electronics.

Down the road, the kids of today will be putting a value on these trains, and I suspect that the capability of the electronics will make the difference, along with realistic looks.

And I find myself thinking the same way. I really enjoy running 3 trains on my 3 loops of track with 18 switches that I can control from my high stool overlooking my RR empire that I have created with my own hands.

In my opinion, technology has affected the value of the trains today and will definitely effect the value into the future. Running my old steam engine with just smoke and a tender whistle gets boring to this old man.

Ed......I'm hoping the LCCA records your talk for those of us not able to go the Boston.

 

After a 10 year hiatus 1970-80, I have been operating and collecting continuously since. I have embraced the new technology. I still love my PostWar and MPC trains, but for the most part, they sit on the shelf. If I am buying a new or used train, the electronics package must work....because I am not skilled to do the repair work myself....and the repair could be very costly.

 

Peter

 

 

 

 A feature dropped, may one day be coveted regardless of age, and new tech can die off for many reasons making it worthless.

 

So its not the tech directly. Its the desire for "whatever" that sets values.

 

 I'd say grade 8-10, no operations should come into play.

 

 Graded any lower, an optional, complimentary operations grade, could be added.

I think that it would work well without screwing with the collectors grading by putting much pressure on sellers to put it on the track to be run.

  If that pressure did arise, and it overtook the pressure to keep a grade 8+ off track, the functionality of that piece would be the new true measure of its value at 7-8 anyhow, raising value of the higher un-run grades in turn.

 

The more I think about it, that's how it should be done. Let the market decide which is of more value, "mint" or "operating grade 7+".

 

As far as new tech in an older train? Much like a repaint, that can be its own operations grade, value to be determined more individually. e.g  7+ op rt tmccV1.5 (grade 7+, operating, re-tech to tmcc version 1.5 [v1.5? I made that up])

Technology makes me NOT buy some locomotives.

 

I am a scale, conventional, operator who has recently purchased (although it is still in the box) a Legacy Command Set.  I have purchased Legacy as more than half of my current 12 engine fleet have TMCC (3rd Rail, Atlas, K-Line). As I move into the command area, I find that if I want to run multiple engines, there are definitely limitations. 

 

Apparently Legacy engines do not run great with TMCC engines.  DCS does not run with TMCC.  Thus, if I want to run Legacy its Legacy engine with Legacy engine, or TMCC engine with TMCC engine, or DCS engine with DCS.  This has caused me NOT to purchase specific engines as they do not play nice with others.  Yes, I could change electronics, but why should I have to spend $150+ to do so?

 

Jim

 

p.s. I also agree with the posts that for modern trains, the classic TCA grading standard only tells half the story.  There needs to be a dual standard established that also takes into account operating condition.

Jim:  All the systems are compatible.  Can't do MU type operations (some call that "lash-up") between engines of different systems, but you certainly can run any of those engines on the same layout, the same track all at the same time.  Further, your Legacy controller will also control the old TMCC, and, I understand that DCS can also be made to control TMCC engines.

 

Paul Fischer