cmdr buzz corey wrote:
On Apr 19, 9:28 am, (Michael Black) wrote:

IN the sixties (and early seventies), it was common for the hobby
electronic magazines to treat CB as a hobby. This was especially so
for "Electronics Illustrated" that had quite a few construction articles,
going from simple to quite sophisticated.

In the early sixties I ordered one of those cb kits from an
electronics magazine. It consisted of a crudely punched chassis, a bag
of parts and a schematic. I never did get it to work.

I thought building a kit CB transceiver was illegal due to the type
acceptance issue?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey ) writes:
cmdr buzz corey wrote:
On Apr 19, 9:28 am, (Michael Black) wrote:

IN the sixties (and early seventies), it was common for the hobby
electronic magazines to treat CB as a hobby. This was especially so
for "Electronics Illustrated" that had quite a few construction articles,
going from simple to quite sophisticated.

In the early sixties I ordered one of those cb kits from an
electronics magazine. It consisted of a crudely punched chassis, a bag
of parts and a schematic. I never did get it to work.

I thought building a kit CB transceiver was illegal due to the type
acceptance issue?

Certainly Heathkit got around the issue with their full blown CB set(s)
by having the transmitter arrive as a preassembled module.

But I thought there was a CB "Benton Harbor Lunchbox" for a while,
and I can't imagine they would have a module for such a low end
unit.

So perhaps the type acceptance came a bit later? I can't remember (not
that I was aware of such things at the time, but I have read lots
of back issues of magazines).

In the very early days, there was equipment being made out of people's
garages. So either the rules were more lax then, or from the outside
there were companies selling things that weren't legal.

Michael VE2BVW

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:38:55 +0000, Michael Black wrote:
I thought building a kit CB transceiver was illegal due to the type
acceptance issue?
....
So perhaps the type acceptance came a bit later? I can't remember (not
that I was aware of such things at the time, but I have read lots of
back issues of magazines).

ISTR:

- Heath equipment was acceptable contingent on being assembled
according to the instructions. There was a notice in some of the manuals
about that - ISTR some devices where one part was a Part 15 label which
the builder was to sign & date & stick to the completed kit certifying
they'd followed the instructions.

- It was legal to homebrew CB gear in the early days of the service, but
that rule was changed - well before the 1960s. (I'm not sure it was
*ever* legal to homebrew 27MHz CB gear, it may have only been legal for
the old 470MHz stuff)

Hi,

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 04:34:00 +0000, Doug Smith W9WI wrote:

- It was legal to homebrew CB gear in the early days of the service, but
that rule was changed - well before the 1960s. (I'm not sure it was
*ever* legal to homebrew 27MHz CB gear, it may have only been legal for
the old 470MHz stuff)

It may not have been in the US, but before regulation and since
deregulation, one can build up to 5 CB's and call them prototypes in .ca
land, as long as they meet Industry Canada (then the Department of
Communications) specifications.

Maybe it's a Canuck rig?

Cheers,

__
Gregg

Just for clarification on my last post, info can be found in RSS210,
section 5.14 of Industry Canada's regulations. Home built for personal
use, not prototypes. My err.

Cheers,
__
Gregg

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
cmdr buzz corey wrote:
On Apr 19, 9:28 am, (Michael Black) wrote:

IN the sixties (and early seventies), it was common for the hobby
electronic magazines to treat CB as a hobby. This was especially so
for "Electronics Illustrated" that had quite a few construction
articles,
going from simple to quite sophisticated.

In the early sixties I ordered one of those cb kits from an
electronics magazine. It consisted of a crudely punched chassis, a bag
of parts and a schematic. I never did get it to work.

I thought building a kit CB transceiver was illegal due to the type
acceptance issue?
--scott
--


It may be now, I don't know. At one time Heathkit put out a kit called a
CB-1. This was a simple CB and not at all like the one being talked about.
There may have been others, but this is one I know of for sure.

(Scott Dorsey) writes:

I thought building a kit CB transceiver was illegal due to the type
acceptance issue?
--scott

There was a period, long, long ago, when CB was young, and I was not
yet but a leering glance, that building CB gear was okay.

It stopped being okay before the explosion of the mid-70s.

--
Lawrence Statton - m s/aba/c/g
Computer software consists of only two components: ones and
zeros, in roughly equal proportions. All that is required is to
place them into the correct order.

Lawrence Statton wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) writes:
I thought building a kit CB transceiver was illegal due to the type
acceptance issue?
--scott

There was a period, long, long ago, when CB was young, and I was not
yet but a leering glance, that building CB gear was okay.

It stopped being okay before the explosion of the mid-70s.

There were a number of kits as I remember. Heath had several, as did
Allied (Knight Kits). These could be at least as sophisticated as the
mid-range factory units of the day.

jak

Many years ago I worked in a Motorola service shop. One
day a gentleman came in with a Heath CB kit he had built
and wanted to know if we could fix it for him. I explained
our minimum charge and hourly rate and he agreed to an
hours work to see if we could get it running. Several days
later we had a lull in the important work so I pulled the
CB off the shelf and opened it up. I was astonished! All
component leads were full length! He hadn't trimmed a one!
It must have taken him hours of carefully bending leads so
he could get it into the case without shorting anything.
Needless to say, virtually every stage in the RX was
oscillating. I did a bunch of cutting and resoldering and
finally got it working. I wish I had a picture of my face
when I pulled it out of the case!

73, Roger


--
Remove tilde (~) to reply

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

Roger D Johnson wrote:


It must have taken him hours of carefully bending leads so
he could get it into the case without shorting anything.
Needless to say, virtually every stage in the RX was
oscillating. I did a bunch of cutting and resoldering and
finally got it working. I wish I had a picture of my face
when I pulled it out of the case!

an artificial rats nest... what a hoot!
best regards...
--
randy guttery

A Tender Tale - a page dedicated to those Ships and Crews
so vital to the United States Silent Service:
http://tendertale.com