[Gordon H]

QUOTE (Howzatt @ 14 May 2007, 23:24) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>This definitely goes against the well-tested "remove capacitor" logic, but I'm happy

, it works.
There is no well-tested logic about removing capacitors, just a simplistic, increasingly pervasive dogma that removing them is the easy way out.
Each individual combination of decoder and loco/motor type ought be taken on its own merits by technical and/or practical means. The components were originally there for a reason, and a decoder does not necessarily replicate their actions, especially when you consider that most decoders are a considerable length of wire away from the motor.

 

[Gordon H]

QUOTE (Howzatt @ 15 May 2007, 22:21) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for the replies everyone, I think I've read somewhere a theory that decoders should take care of any voltage spikes that suppression caps normally soak up. Size for size, how any component on a tiny decoder board can do this same job beats me. Perhaps I am thinking too "analogue" here.
The problem with this theory is that the components on the decoder are usually a lot further away from the motor brushes than the directly mounted capacitors were, and what fills that gap is a piece of wire which can act as a transmitting antenna. It is most definitely an 'analogue' problem, with many variables, which is why most people choose the easy route of capacitor removal regardless of the potential side effects.