Hi guys,

I am wondering what exactly is a "FX" decoder?

Is it the same as the 6090x series decoders?
Is it a lokpilot?
What features does it have? (and what DOESNT it have?)

And -most importantly- is it oneSPECIFIC decoder, or does "FX" just refer to anything that is NOT MFX?

Thanks in advance.

From the Marklin website.

FX,

Digital decoder with additional, digitally controlled functions (f1, f2, f3 or f4) when operated with the with the 6021 Control Unit. The functions present depend on how the locomotive is equipped. Standard function (function) active during conventional operation.

Additional doubt/question;

Is the FX inferior to the 6090x style decos? (in regard to speedsteps, prgramability to handle more than 80 addresses, etc.)

Just checked, they become 6092X.
You can buy 6090X motor parts and then use an ESU 61600.

Several M* locos have been sold with 6090x and PIC decoders, some even with mfx decoders. So fx in the catalog doesn't tell which decoder the loco has.
It only shows the loco doesn't have a 6090 or earlier decoder.

I would say it's the later criteria - the decoder is not mfx capable. It has even been used in the catalogue for locos with 6090x decoders (probably they are all sold out now), but never for Delta locos. So I would say that a minimum requirement is that it can handle addresses 1-80 and has adjustment possibilities of speed and acceleration/braking. Functions depend on the loco as well, some of the starter locos don't have lights, and the decoder in them lacks output for functions - but is still "fx".

For a while I thought the 36xxx item numbers would be used for "fx" equipped locos and 37xxx for "mfx". But some 36xxx locos have mfx decoder...

I refer you all to Davy's contribution to this topic. By Marklin's definition (you can look this up on the back inside cover of most Marklin catalogues), FX means that the decoder will recognise functions F1 to F4. This was brought into use when Marklin introduced the Motorola II format. It has nothing to do with MFX.

Ray

Thanks to all of you who have answered! It is slowly coming together for me now...

I will risk to opiniate a bit already, because my "fears" seems to be reality; The "FX" description is practically useless for the end-client. In certain situations we will end up with a worse product than older 6090x types, where at least you KNEW what you were getting. Now it can be anything!

I am not an expert with Märklin Digital. (Actually the totally opossite! ;-) -But the worst of this IMHO seems to be only 14 speedsteps if you use 6021/IB. If I were using digital I would take that as an insult!!!

If anyboy else is in the know about FX oficial (or unoficial) specifications, please speak. I would LOVE to have my opinion proved wrong! :-/

BTW: When people learned about those special models, they almost went crazy to catch one of them.

This could be one of many reasons. I think it is legal and understandable (actually an objective for product changes in almost every company!).

With respect to the topic (fx function) and in comparison of new vs. old products (i.e. 60901-60904 vs. 60921-60924) I think that customers received improved functionality with:

- automatic decoder addressing and function symbol allocation (mfx)
- extensive mapping feature
- way more function output features than before, like dimming (saves for example replacement of bulbs) and other special effects.

PS: Already the old C-Sine was produced by another company.

Also, as an analogic user, I have now no way of setting the max speed and acceleration, as I had with 6090x types! :-(
I have SOME understanding for not being fully supported -running only analog-, but if even fully digital users are seeing a degrading of the products...?

My statement was explicitly related to the fx functionality, regardless of the decoder type(s), since this was/is the thread topic/question.

IMHO Märklin has never stated support for Uhlenbrock digital products.

That was not the point - some people may want or like to discuss in one single thread about "god and the world", with the potential of complete defocus - I really don't mind.

My answer was stating a clear improvement of features for the "fx" functionality of decoders (actually regardless whether they support mfx, Motorola or DCC). Anyways, when choosing Systems (i.e. mfx), Märklin customers get as well more features than they got with previous generation decoders. Just normal.



That's your own personal decision (and maybe problem). If you change the wording of your sentence slightly, it comes probably closer to reality: "so compatibility of Uhlenbrock, ESU, Lenz, etc. are very important to me".



Again, the reality is: "Märklin cannot be held responsible for compatibility of 3rd parties products..."

Actually they even always made and still make clear to everyone where and how they see their "field of responsibility".



Yes, too - if deemed suitable or helpful from my viewpoint - about a specific topic or part thereof; which might well be different from yours and your "desired answers". Different views can help. I spend probably more time analyzing and comparing other supplier's products (including own purchase) with those of Märklin than you might assume.

From my own experience I can say that those new "fx" functionalities, for example also provided with mfx decoders today help me alot to implement and operate certain train "features" easier. After the ESU announcement of their LokPilot fx decoder (#52600/52601) it might well be possible that Märklin and/or ESU will come up in the near future even with a specific mfx function decoder (preferrable with more than 6 outputs).

Why do so many of these topics degenerate into arguments over who is in favour of Marklin or against?

The topic is "What is an FX decoder?" While I welcome the extra insight offered by forum members who explain the background to this issue, I am fed up of reading the same old arguments about what Marklin should or should not be doing![xx(]

Could we have a seperate section for these arguments, maybe titled something like "Personal non-Marklin preferences", or "Third party compatible equipment", so that we can contain the arguing? Please??

I would then know never to read those posts!!!

Ray

Dear Lutz,

so what is "Systems" then? I have CU6021, IB, and Mobile Station.
I cannot change the speed curves, I cannot remap functions, I cannot use 128 speed steps (except with DCC locos).
If you have a CS and convert locos with mfx decoders then you can make use of the improvements you mention (switching rear lights separately without extra hardware). But you don't get this with most M* digital locos (eg V90: f1 through f3 are unused and rear lights are always on when front lights are on).

For the price of one CS I can buy 20 MM/DCC decoders with 21-pin plug. And that's what I intend to do in the near future.

A few years ago M* offered locos as Delta and fx versions. In the '90s they even offered up to 4 versions of the same loco: analog 3-pole, analog 5-pole, Delta, Digital.
If they would simply offer two versions, one with mfx decoder and one with MM/DCC/SX decoder (Trix), then I'd be much more happy; I could change the speed curves with my IB, use 28 or 128 speed steps, and I'd have more addresses available than I'll ever need.

Sorry - I should have been more precise - I meant Systems with CS since this gives you all possible capabilities, including for example the change of speed curves, function icons and numerous other options (IMHO I had also just understood that you were using an IB).

It should as well be obvious that neither the MS was designed to be a full blown Systems/mfx programming tool nor have "older generation" products like a 6021 or IB ever been designed for that purpose or will support all functional features of the new Systems controller, namely the CS.

Lutz,

Help, Help

Right, Sir! And - welcome back, Mario

Mario,
MFX Decoders have a Unique Identification, Something like Computer Network Cards, So they are clearly identified by the CS and MS even if they have the same address.
There will be no clashing of MFX addresses. You do not have to set them
Nev