On 5/26/10 01:23 , Gregg wrote:
On Apr 13, 11:06 am, "D. Peter wrote:
On 4/13/10 09:40 , sctvguy1 wrote:

bpnjensen wrote:

You could have mine. For the price, I'd rather get an HQ-145, HQ-180
or Collins. Big, ugly, and superb radios.

Bruce
I have a completely restored HQ-145. Some say it is not the best HQ, and
certainly not the equal of the HQ-180, but on AMBCDX, it is superb!

I've got a BC-794 Super Pro, one of the progenitors of the SP
line. Amazing AMBCDX. And with the variable bandwidth IF, before
NRSC II, delicious audio. In fact, the audio stage was configured to
be used as a phono amplifier when not receiving.

HQ-145 is a bit more modern than my own, but equally
representative of the attention to quality that Hammarlund was known
for. With that amazing sound.

And it will definitely keep the shack warm at night.

Peter, how often (hrs. in a week maybe) do you use that SP?

At least once a week. Sometimes much more. I don't have a precise
figure, but I'd say it averages 6-8 hours a week over a year.

More than I watch TV.


Is the SP
line really the holy grail of the Hammarlunds in your opinion.
Inquiring minds want to know.:-)

I can't say that. It's a fine rig. But I don't think of any radio
as a holy grail. That said, the SP line up to SP-400 was single
conversion. Very well done, but basic. SP-600 was dual conversion.

HQ was single conversion up to 180. The HQ-180 was triple
conversion. Better image rejection.

The SP line looked to be a VERY serious receiver. More robust
build than the HQ. But not necessarily a better performer.

What constitutes a holy grail is more likely a nostalgia
component than anything else.