wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

krackula wrote:

Collins is old tube stuff. Fine radios no doubt, but hardly worth the
price of a decent new rig.



- Mike KB3EIA -



maybe the value of the radio is in the beholder
or it's applications ........

for example , I have a satori / sherwood modded
, full boat, drake r-4c and a fully loaded FT1000 field ....sitting
side by side .. here in the shack and the so called " old tube
r4-c " blows the doors off my much newer
and more expensive FT1000mp v . the FT1000 receiver
is an embarrassment as compared to the drake on
weak DX in a VERY crowded CW band.

What I would like to see is some data to back that up. If the tube
stuff is better, then I'd go for it in a minute.


No problem: http://www.sherweng.com/presentation.html

This guy obviously knows what he's talking about so shaddup and pay
attenetion, you just might learn something Michael.

Thanks for the link, Brian. It is pretty interesting

no comparison
at all. people tell me that many of the collins receivers can be
tuned up to outperform even the drake r4-c receivers. maybe THAT is
why people pay more for a drake r4-c ( I have $1200 to $1400
invested in mine , so far ) or collins !!


Yeah . . I have a stock late S/N meatball S3B I just might juice up one
of these days. I also have a JRC NRD-545 you'd probably enjoy. Quirky
thing but once you get on top of it it really cooks.


certainly the value is
in the weak signal / crowded band performance to me and
looks like it is to a LOT of other people too.

obviously , for your operating needs, solid state rigs do the job

Perhaps not so obviously. I've been getting into Hollow state
technology recently. Bought a couple olde tube Heathkits


100% dumpster ballast.

Negative. Their absolute performance is not an issue. I was never
exposed to tube technology, ever. These units are simple, and I will use
them to learn about the hollow state. As long as they work, I will be
well served by them.


and their power
supplies at Dayton, and will restore them. I came into Ham radio (radio
at all) too late for tube stuff, and frankly, the tube rigs seem very
cool to me.



.... but for those of us that need competition grade cw receivers
...... some tube receivers are still doing a better job. different
strokes for different folks. I've got the best of both worlds and ,
for me, tubes still do a better job in certain applications. ( both
my amps a alpha and a henry have tubes too ) ......... I do
use my FT1000 for my transmitter / exciter tho .. ha ha ha ha ah.

It would seem that you should sell that FT1000 and go strictly tubes if
all you do is use it for transmitting. 8^)


Ouch: How do you spell clueless? I loves you dearly Michael, you're a
very nice guy and yer heart is in the right place but you have this
frustrating penchant for getting over yer head at warp speed when
discussions turn to even moderately deep-end techie sorts of topics.
You done it again.

I've made a career of it


This guy is obviously into low-band weak signal dxing on 160/80/40 etc.
Those of us take this game seriously understand what it takes in the
way of rcvr performance.


He's talking about using his modded R4-C as an
outboard RX because of it's legendary front end performance, it's
blocking dynamic range and it's third order intercept points as they
relate to successfully dealing with very difficult band conditions.
Which leaves out your Heath treasures and all members of the FT-1000
clan in this particular pursuit.

"If the tube stuff is better, then I'd go for it in a minute" eh? Welp
there ya go.

It was an interesting report to look at. I would have to say that there
is more to the game than the 2KHz dynamic range, as important as that
is, especially to CW users.

But I do appreciate the info!

- Mike KB3EIA -