On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:56:49 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
wrote:

Why use a balanced tuner when a less expensive, easier to operate,
unbalanced tuner, in conjunction with a simple choke-balun, will do
just as well?

Insert the 2-wire choke-balun between the unbalanced tuner and the
balanced transmission line.
----
Reg.


My link coupled tuner (Johnson Matchbox) cost me less than 60 USD, I
can tuner faster than a T-type tuner, doesn't need nor use a balun.
(Read one less component and its associated loss). So why would I want
to replace it with something that works almost as good?

Danny,
K6MHE



email: k6mheatarrldotnet
http://www.k6mhe.com/

Dan Richardson wrote
My link coupled tuner (Johnson Matchbox) cost me less than 60 USD, I
can tuner faster than a T-type tuner, doesn't need nor use a balun.
(Read one less component and its associated loss). So why would I
want
to replace it with something that works almost as good?

Danny,
K6MHE
==========================================
Danny Boy,

If you are happy with your link-coupled tuner, which can be either
balanced or unbalanced, then by all means stick with it. I must admit
it is something I forgot about.

Many years back I had a similar commercial tuner. It didn't cover
enough bands for me. So I dismantled it. The only parts worth
recovering were the slow-motion variable capacitor drives and the nice
skirted tuning knobs. Which I still have. They are of sentimental
value.

Ever since then I have used only home-brewed tuners with coils and
capacitors connected with universal alligator clips. But never of the
balanced variety.

I wish you the very best of DX for 2006.
----
Reg, G4FGQ.

On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 10:20:30 -0800, Dan Richardson wrote:

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:56:49 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
wrote:

Why use a balanced tuner when a less expensive, easier to operate,
unbalanced tuner, in conjunction with a simple choke-balun, will do
just as well?

Insert the 2-wire choke-balun between the unbalanced tuner and the
balanced transmission line.
----
Reg.


My link coupled tuner (Johnson Matchbox) cost me less than 60 USD, I
can tuner faster than a T-type tuner, doesn't need nor use a balun.
(Read one less component and its associated loss). So why would I want
to replace it with something that works almost as good?

I use my 500+ foot horizontal loop on 6 and 2 meters with homebrew
balanced tuners from the '63 ARRL Handbook. On HF a balanced double-L
tuner does the trick. The balanced-L tuner does use a balun but it is
between the rig and the matching device. The only problem with using
the Johnson Matchbox is 30M

73 de n4jvp
Fritz

Put a 500-pF variable capacitor in series with the link inside or, outside
the enclosure in series with the center conductor of the coax line feeding
the JMBox. Gives you an extra degree of freedom in tuning.
73, Dave, N3HE

SNIP
between the rig and the matching device. The only problem with using
the Johnson Matchbox is 30M

73 de n4jvp
Fritz