This may have been asked before, but I was wondering if you can combine the two systems. My thought process is to have Ecos as the main system with CS3 being primarily running and programming and Trix models I have.

The answer is more nuanced than that. You cannot connect them over the CAN bus and use them fully integrated or use the output of both, but if the ecos is the main device you can connect the CS to the sniffer input. You will have to use motorola or dcc protocol (not mfx afaik) on the cs for the things you want to control on the ecos. Just lookup 'sniffer' in the ecos manual.

Hi Jean, Jay,

Your reply sure is biased towards Marklin, you must have stock options :-). Just wanted to note that I am a Marklin user that has happily been using Ecos(1) for a long while now (since 2008). I choose the system because of the openess compared to Marklins, and you get a lot more value for the money. Also check decoder prices of 3rd party suppliers. The ecos comes with a powersupply, with Marklin you have to purchase that seperately, and the current rating is higher.

Again, with the sniffer functionality the CS3 (or any device) can be a slave to the Ecos, but with limitations (no bidirectional communications). So that counts as some kind of compatibility. But the CS3 ecosystem is better with more connectivity options I admit (albeit very expensive because you need dedicated equipment/wiring each time).

I don't understand your 'not fully MFX and needing DCC' comment. I can still use the MFX GUI interface with the latest locos/decoders. Sure there have been issues at some points where an update from ESU was needed, but these were always released timely. BTW I think Marklin had similar issues too. The main MFX thing that ecos does not support is the cab view controls and the resources simulation (mfx+). But I wonder whether that makes it worth it? Or am I forgetting something? Can the CSxs do all protocols at the same time (Motorola/MFX/DCC/Railcom) or are certain combinations unsupported?

You are also right about needing the ESU programmer for sound decoders, but you do get a better sound library as well. For regular decoders (non sound) programming works without programmer as well for me.

There is definitely one pro on Ecos for the true, classical Marklinist that you did not mention: the speed dial is a potentiometer with an end stop and reversing mechanism like on the old analog controllers. If you are a marklin purist I think that is a big pro. So no endless turning to set the speed like on CSx.

Having said all that I am thinking of purchasing a new controller (my old ecos1 still has a monochrome screen), and I am unsure what system I would pick now. A CS3 (that is also starting to get dated), an Ecos2 (also dated, but with a recent screen refresh and output boost), or something else? I would actually prefer a new CS4 or Ecos3 I think.

Sorry, did not want to hijack the topic.

Jay, if you already own both controllers I would try the sniffing, otherwise if budget is not an issue go for Marklin only like Jean recommends. But don't be afraid of running an Ecos, it is a good system that gives good value for money.

What I would not do is buy an additional main controller (CS3 or Ecos2) if I already had one (again CS3 or Ecos2). In that case I would try to make the one I have work for all setups/systems/layouts.

BR,
Bert




Bert

I cannot confirm your experiences to be honest. No need to bash ESU or hype Marklin like that.

Let's just agree to disagree.

Just curious what direction Jay will go now.

Bert

I agree David. Just as a CS 3 doesn't auto recognize a Zimo decoder for example. Is it the railcom? However, a CS 3 does auto recognize an ESU M4 sound decoder.
I too considered an ECOS for the throttle toggle feature, but having owned Marklin digital since the late 90s, and a few new mfx locos, the CS 3 won me over. The full touch screen vs. the buttons as the CS 2 and ECOS as well.

Not my Roco Goofy. It's a few years old though. To change the address, it must be on the CS 3 programming track.