C. J. Clegg wrote:
Looking for the best all-tube general-coverage (0.5-30) receiver I can
get.

Need good operation on SSB and CW and capability on AM, along with
sensitivity, stability, ruggedness, and availability of replacement parts
e.g. tubes (that last one might be difficult...).

I'm thinking Collins 51Jx or R-390, although I remember that I really
liked an old Hammarlund I had once...

Would like to stay under $1000 but if I had to I suppose I could go as
high as $2000 for something that's really mint.

What do you guys recommend I look for?


Virtually all of the high end military vacuum tube boat anchors were
designed before SSB became common. They require an external converter
or the addition of a product detector and AGC mods to work properly.
The only receivers I can think of that meet your requirements are the
Hammarlund HQ-180 and the National NC-400. The 180 is quite common but
the 400 is very rare and pricey.

Regards, Roger

--
Remove tilde (~) to reply

Remember the USS Liberty (AGTR-5)
http://ussliberty.org/

On Sun, 07 Jan 2007 09:26:41 -0500, Roger D Johnson wrote:

Virtually all of the high end military vacuum tube boat anchors were
designed before SSB became common. They require an external converter
or the addition of a product detector and AGC mods to work properly.

My Racal RA-17 works fine on SSB, you just have to remember to adjust the
attenuator and/or IF gain to stop the detector overloading. Agc is
switchable for short/long time constant. There are external ssb and isb
adapters, the set has connectors for one, but I've not found one yet...

--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb .at. dial .dot. pipex .dot. com
(Remove any digits from the addresses when mailing me.)

The future was never like this!

Stan Barr wrote:
On Sun, 07 Jan 2007 09:26:41 -0500, Roger D Johnson wrote:

Virtually all of the high end military vacuum tube boat anchors were
designed before SSB became common. They require an external converter
or the addition of a product detector and AGC mods to work properly.

My Racal RA-17 works fine on SSB, you just have to remember to adjust the
attenuator and/or IF gain to stop the detector overloading. Agc is
switchable for short/long time constant. There are external ssb and isb
adapters, the set has connectors for one, but I've not found one yet...

I'll put a good word in for the RA-17 as well. Ergonomically I think it's
a little better than the R-390A, and it's a lot easier to work on, though
I don't think the RF performance as good.

On the other hand, it's a lot better than the newer solid-state Racal
receivers. I was really shocked to compare the R-17 with an R-1750
on a marine install... CW stuff that was easy to copy on the R-17 was
down in the noise floor on the newer receiver.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 7 Jan 2007 13:43:22 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote:

I'll put a good word in for the RA-17 as well. Ergonomically I think it's
a little better than the R-390A, and it's a lot easier to work on, though
I don't think the RF performance as good.

There's no doubt the 390 has better if filters than the Racal.


On the other hand, it's a lot better than the newer solid-state Racal
receivers. I was really shocked to compare the R-17 with an R-1750
on a marine install... CW stuff that was easy to copy on the R-17 was
down in the noise floor on the newer receiver.

My RA-17 is racked up with a RA-1792, (synthesised solid-state, mine has
provision for remote control and modified eproms to allow tuning down to
0Hz!) the 1792 has better performance than the 17 but I still prefer
the older rx for general tuning around.

--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb .at. dial .dot. pipex .dot. com
(Remove any digits from the addresses when mailing me.)

The future was never like this!

Stan Barr wrote:

My RA-17 is racked up with a RA-1792, (synthesised solid-state, mine has
provision for remote control and modified eproms to allow tuning down to
0Hz!) the 1792 has better performance than the 17 but I still prefer
the older rx for general tuning around.

Try working one channel while an adjacent transmitter is operating a
few hundred KC away and you'll see why the RA-17 beats the RA-1792
for full-duplex radiotelephone service hands down.

The filters on the RA-1792 sure are nicer than on the RA-17, though,
and consequently audio quality on SSB is a whole lot better with less
noise.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 7 Jan 2007 19:28:36 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Stan Barr wrote:

My RA-17 is racked up with a RA-1792, (synthesised solid-state, mine has
provision for remote control and modified eproms to allow tuning down to
0Hz!) the 1792 has better performance than the 17 but I still prefer
the older rx for general tuning around.

Try working one channel while an adjacent transmitter is operating a
few hundred KC away and you'll see why the RA-17 beats the RA-1792
for full-duplex radiotelephone service hands down.

Yeah, true. I regularly transmit on, say, 3.5MHz while one of the receivers
is tuned to Shanwick AT control on 5.599 without any problem, but then
that's a bigger separation and I'm only running a few watts normally.

--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb .at. dial .dot. pipex .dot. com
(Remove any digits from the addresses when mailing me.)

The future was never like this!

Stan Barr wrote:

Yeah, true. I regularly transmit on, say, 3.5MHz while one of the receivers
is tuned to Shanwick AT control on 5.599 without any problem, but then
that's a bigger separation and I'm only running a few watts normally.

That brings to mind... I have been listening to Shanwick weather recently,
just below 80M. Do they welcome reception reports?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."