Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Suggestions for tube-type general coverge rcvr, not HQ-180
Well, I am beginning to have some doubts about the likelihood of finding an excellent-quality Hammarlund HQ-180 at a price I can afford. Certainly I am going to keep looking, but meanwhile I guess I need to come up with a few alternatives that I can "settle" for if, as seems likely, the HQ-180's have priced themselves out of my reach. I need something that is all tubes, and works well on SSB. I plan to use it mostly on CW but I need decent SSB performance. AM is relatively less important (it should work on AM but doesn't need to be a spectacular performer). It does need to be general coverage 500 KHz to 30 MHz. R390's and 51J4's would be good (but of course, more expensive than the HQ-180) but none comes with a product detector and so performance on SSB is likely to be marginal at best, right? I have looked at a few Hallicrafters SX-100's (that is to say, looked at their pictures on eBay... haven't actually seen one up close in at least 30 years). How does that model and other comparable models from Hallicrafters and National stack up? Did Heathkit ever make a general-coverage communications receiver that was worthy of the name "communications receiver"? I know they had one, I think the model was AR-3. I had one when I was a kid and it wasn't much. Everything else I've seen from them seems to be ham bands only, and mostly 80-10 (no 160). Any suggestions, places where I should start looking? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Suggestions for tube-type general coverge rcvr, not HQ-180
Rick,
I'd say the best peformance for your buck would be an R-392, but it doesn't have a product detector. I've never had a problem tuning in SSB on mine though. Another rig worth checking out is a Halli SX-122. Finding a tube rig with a product detector, general coverage, and for a decent price is getting tough. A friend has asked me to look for an HQ-180 (preferably a 'C'), and prices have been astronomical. Steve |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Suggestions for tube-type general coverge rcvr, not HQ-180
The SX-100 is beautifully built and nice to look at - but it is mechanically
unstable. A friend had one and it changed frequency when he dropped his pencil - when on 20 meters cw. For cw and ssb, a crystal controlled front end is a big plus. You have the same stability on 10 meters as you do on 80. Here are a few relatively inexpensive receivers which I like: Drake 2B (you do not have complete coverage - just selcected bands. However, you can change crystals. Drake R4. Very good buy. However, you have to add crystals for full coverage. You can also use an oscillator to replace the crystal. Hallicrafters SX-117. Again, you need extra crystals - but it is a nice performer. Racal and Eddystone makes some real tube beauties. Although the early ones do not use crystal controlled front ends, they are quite stable. The SP-600 is also a favorite, although no product detector. For short wave listening, push pull audio is nice. But, that feature does not mix with product detectors or crystal controlled front end. Do like others, and buy many receivers. 73, Colin K7FM |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Suggestions for tube-type general coverge rcvr, not HQ-180
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 02:11:32 GMT, "COLIN LAMB"
wrote: The SX-100 is beautifully built and nice to look at - but it is mechanically unstable. A friend had one and it changed frequency when he dropped his pencil - when on 20 meters cw. 73, Colin K7FM I agree about the stability of the SX-100. I brought a new one home back in 1956 or 1957. The first thing I noticed was the instability of the oscillator. The SX-101 is a much better and more stable receiver (and a lot heavier.) Dick - W6CCD -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Suggestions for tube-type general coverge rcvr, not HQ-180
"Rick" wrote in message news Well, I am beginning to have some doubts about the likelihood of finding an excellent-quality Hammarlund HQ-180 at a price I can afford. Certainly I am going to keep looking, but meanwhile I guess I need to come up with a few alternatives that I can "settle" for if, as seems likely, the HQ-180's have priced themselves out of my reach. I need something that is all tubes, and works well on SSB. I plan to use it mostly on CW but I need decent SSB performance. AM is relatively less important (it should work on AM but doesn't need to be a spectacular performer). It does need to be general coverage 500 KHz to 30 MHz. R390's and 51J4's would be good (but of course, more expensive than the HQ-180) but none comes with a product detector and so performance on SSB is likely to be marginal at best, right? I have looked at a few Hallicrafters SX-100's (that is to say, looked at their pictures on eBay... haven't actually seen one up close in at least 30 years). How does that model and other comparable models from Hallicrafters and National stack up? Did Heathkit ever make a general-coverage communications receiver that was worthy of the name "communications receiver"? I know they had one, I think the model was AR-3. I had one when I was a kid and it wasn't much. Everything else I've seen from them seems to be ham bands only, and mostly 80-10 (no 160). Any suggestions, places where I should start looking? If you really want a lower limit of 500khz you will be pretty limited. If you mean just the bottom of the broadcast band (535khz) there are plenty. You might consider using a receiver with a built-in IF output and building an external product detector. Product detectors are not very complicated. It will give you superior performance for CW as well as SSB. There were a number of after market adaptors made but the good ones are very rare. A homebrew does not have to be as complicated as the commercial versions. There are circuits in old editions of the _Radio Amateur's Handbook_ and other places. Perhaps even on the web. Don't eliminate the SP-600-JX from your list, it has both IF output and an AVC tap on the back so you can connect its internal AVC to an external source. A very good external adaptor was made for these guys but its extremely rare. There is a lot of literature on the SP-600 on the web, I suggest educating yourself about the various versions if you decide to look for one. You might also check on some of the later National receivers, they, with Hammarlund and Collins were the quality brands. Hallicrafters was good at producing receivers with lots of features at relatively low prices, most of them IMO, were mediocre. -- --- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Suggestions for tube-type general coverge rcvr, not HQ-180
I used to manage operations for the military that used R-390s in vast
quantities. It was not uncommon to have over a hundred of them at a facility and thousands in our overall inventory. For what they were designed to do they did a great job. As is mentioned they did not have a product detector. I once saw a prototype sideband adapter, but before it was adopted in any number, we went to newer solid state receivers (none in the ham price category... 10K each and up.] There were a couple problems we had with R-390's. The main one was maintenance. The tuning scheme was so complicated you practically had to be a mechanical engineer to fix one. The gear trains to control the permeability tuning are a wonder to behold. They were cumbersome to tune and military intercept operators who used them all day long complained of "R-390" wrist because it took so much arm torque to change the megahertz dial. It was time consuming to get from one end of the spectrum to a different end. Some guys, particularly HF search operators got carpal tunnel from tuning them day in and day out. They consumed a lot of energy, particularly if you had a bunch of them operating at the same time. We usually had air handlers to cool the rooms they were in. The only reason they didn't drift is because ours were on all the time. I was the program manager for programs which used a bunch of these, and as such I didn't use them day in and day out (I did use them some, but not as a day-to-day operator.) I also didn't have to fix them myself, but I oversaw the programs that made sure there was someone there to fix them. The criticisms I heard were from the military ops and the maintenance guys. We reduced our maintenance overhead in personnel and spare parts considerably when we finally got rid of them. We could afford to buy 10K receivers because we didn't a ten man maintenance shop on site to keep the R-390s (among other gear) going. Of course in the end, we had to get rid of them because there just weren't parts available in the quantities we needed. They were used for long after government contracts for manufacture and for spare parts production ran out. I've been retired now seven years and the last 15 or so years of my career we didn't have any R-390's on my projects (there probably are some still in the government through, if only in depots.) I saw my last operational SP-600 series in the early 70's. The search operators loved it because you could scan a large chunk of spectrum (before automated systems) in far less them than with an R-390 or 51J receiver. The 51Js were all gone by the time I started in 1964. I don't think I ever saw one operational. Of course a ham restorer dealing with unit quantities doesn't have the maintenance management problems we had because a ham trying to fix up one or two can probably scrounge up the parts or cannibalize another like units, but we had to look at the R-390 and almost any other piece of gear the military used in terms of life cycle support, personnel costs, training tails, depot stockpiling and a host of other issues. It was a good receiver that just wasn't supportable anymore. The same could be said for the SP-600 series which was actually obsolete when I entered the profession 43 years ago, but that hasn't stopped dedicated hams from making them work in unit quantities. Jon W3JT On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 21:01:37 -0400, Rick wrote: Well, I am beginning to have some doubts about the likelihood of finding an excellent-quality Hammarlund HQ-180 at a price I can afford. Certainly I am going to keep looking, but meanwhile I guess I need to come up with a few alternatives that I can "settle" for if, as seems likely, the HQ-180's have priced themselves out of my reach. I need something that is all tubes, and works well on SSB. I plan to use it mostly on CW but I need decent SSB performance. AM is relatively less important (it should work on AM but doesn't need to be a spectacular performer). It does need to be general coverage 500 KHz to 30 MHz. R390's and 51J4's would be good (but of course, more expensive than the HQ-180) but none comes with a product detector and so performance on SSB is likely to be marginal at best, right? I have looked at a few Hallicrafters SX-100's (that is to say, looked at their pictures on eBay... haven't actually seen one up close in at least 30 years). How does that model and other comparable models from Hallicrafters and National stack up? Did Heathkit ever make a general-coverage communications receiver that was worthy of the name "communications receiver"? I know they had one, I think the model was AR-3. I had one when I was a kid and it wasn't much. Everything else I've seen from them seems to be ham bands only, and mostly 80-10 (no 160). Any suggestions, places where I should start looking? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Suggestions for tube-type general coverge rcvr, not HQ-180
Jon Teske wrote:
I used to manage operations for the military that used R-390s in vast quantities. It was not uncommon to have over a hundred of them at a facility and thousands in our overall inventory. For what they were designed to do they did a great job. As is mentioned they did not have a product detector. I once saw a prototype sideband adapter, but before it was adopted in any number, we went to newer solid state receivers (none in the ham price category... 10K each and up.] There was a military sideband adaptor available using sheet-beam tubes, although I forget the nomenclature. There also were a lot of civilian models that will work as well. There were a couple problems we had with R-390's. The main one was maintenance. The tuning scheme was so complicated you practically had to be a mechanical engineer to fix one. The gear trains to control the permeability tuning are a wonder to behold. They were cumbersome to tune and military intercept operators who used them all day long complained of "R-390" wrist because it took so much arm torque to change the megahertz dial. It was time consuming to get from one end of the spectrum to a different end. Some guys, particularly HF search operators got carpal tunnel from tuning them day in and day out. They consumed a lot of energy, particularly if you had a bunch of them operating at the same time. We usually had air handlers to cool the rooms they were in. The only reason they didn't drift is because ours were on all the time. They are phenomenally stable by the standards of the day, and the short term stability is actually better than some PLL receivers today. The audio quality is pretty bad, though, and the mechanical filters on the 390A that are a godsend for pulling signals out of the noise floor also contribute to severe ear fatigue because of the enormous group delay. I get a headache listening day in and day out. Of course a ham restorer dealing with unit quantities doesn't have the maintenance management problems we had because a ham trying to fix up one or two can probably scrounge up the parts or cannibalize another like units, but we had to look at the R-390 and almost any other piece of gear the military used in terms of life cycle support, personnel costs, training tails, depot stockpiling and a host of other issues. It was a good receiver that just wasn't supportable anymore. The same could be said for the SP-600 series which was actually obsolete when I entered the profession 43 years ago, but that hasn't stopped dedicated hams from making them work in unit quantities. The good news is that Chuck Rippel's shop down in Chesapeake looks like the Ft. Devens radio refit facility did thirty years back. He has racks and racks of 390s in for repair, and he has all the special tooling and jigs for module testing. So you still have the depot level support that the military provided, it's just that Chuck is providing it now. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Suggestions for tube-type general coverge rcvr, not HQ-180
The good news is that Chuck Rippel's shop down in Chesapeake looks like the Ft. Devens radio refit facility did thirty years back. He has racks and racks of 390s in for repair, and he has all the special tooling and jigs for module testing. So you still have the depot level support that the military provided, it's just that Chuck is providing it now. I remember hearing about the Ft. Deven facility. I was never there, but most of the Army GI's who worked for me trained there. As I worked with all of the services, I got guys who came from all the schools, Devens, Pensacola, Goodfellow and others. They seemed to have different syllabi for training, often contradictory. I was the Program Manager for the overall project and I didn't have specific responsibility for the guys who actually worked in the maintenance shops. My job was really to see that there WAS a maintenance shop and that someone had responsibilty to train the folks and staff the facilities, so it was far more political than practical. Since I had a ham ticket and the guys in the shop knew that I knew which end of a soldering iron was hot, they cut me a lot more slack than they would with the average "suit" who came in from Washington. I tried not to say "We're from HQs, we're here to help you." Is Chuck Rippel in Chesapeake VA???? Jon W3JT --scott |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Suggestions for tube-type general coverge rcvr, not HQ-180
Jon Teske wrote:
Is Chuck Rippel in Chesapeake VA???? Yes. It's like a 1960s military supply depot in his backyard. It's wonderful. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Suggestions for tube-type general coverge rcvr, not HQ-180
Rick,
Owning not a few receivers in my current collection, including all those spoken of, so far, let me first agree with many of the comments, including those about the SX-100. Its a beautiful looking receiver but not without its foibles. A truly nice R-392, SP-600, R-388/51J, et al currently appear to demand what an HQ-180 would, or more. I'd like to add to your list the Hammarlund HQ-160. Its not a selectable sideband receiver, per se, but it is double conversion, general-coverage and, arguably, a less expensive substitute for the HQ-180. I have a late, raised-lettering version that works quite well with one of my vintage operating positions. I have tried several outboard product detectors with this receiver, to include the Hammarlund HC-10, the CE Sideband Slicer, and the kit detector from that Canadian fellow. They all work, although the price of an HC-10 approaches the base price of an HQ-180A!!! I'd also bet money that you might find yourself liking the HQ-145A, also a general-coverage, double-conversion receiver with very respectable performance. Nice thing about later Hammarlund receivers is that they didn't use many (if at all) paper capacitors. Finally, FYI, Heath never made an upscale general coverage receiver. Good hunting. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FA: $10> GENERAL RADIO TYPE No. 1803-B VACUUM TUBE VOLTMETER NR | Equipment | |||
FA: Amplex Model "C" Tube Type Radio - Antique Type - Quite Old | Swap | |||
FA=GENERAL RADIO type 722-DS9 VARIABLE CAP-NEW are $11K? | Equipment | |||
General Coverage Attic Antenna Suggestions ? | Shortwave | |||
General Coverage Attic Antenna Suggestions ? | Antenna |