On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:28:03 -0700, wrote:

On Jul 7, 12:45?am, "Beech Creek" wrote:
I am interested in opinions as to the best tube-type transceiver ever
produced and why?

I presume you mean "amateur HF band transceiver", and whether you
allow matched-pair receiver/transmitter setups that allow transceiving
on one or both of the VFOs.

I think it all depends on how you define "best", and whether you allow
mostly-SS hybrids like the TS-520S to be considered "tube".

I had an 820 which I liked and preferred to the 520.

For example, if the definition is best-performing-on-SSB one-box
transceiver, the KWM-2A is at the top. Yes it's mediocre on CW, has no
RIT and cost the earth in its time, but for performance on SSB it was
tops in its era.

Back in the 70s I had a KWM-2 and a 2A as well as the separate 32S3
and 75S3 and other incarnations. Although the Collins had the looks
and feel, I think my TR4C was the best of the lot as an all around
transceiver. It lacked looks and feel but it worked well.
I also had the Drake B and C line twins, but was not really fond of
them.

My favorite tube rig was the KWS1 with a 75A4 which worked well and
sounded good. You could also heat the ham shack with it in the winter.

http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/boat1.htm
http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/boat2.htm
http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/boat3.htm

I also liked the old Hallicrafters seperates SX101A although the 115
was a better receiver, HT32B transmitter, and HT33B amp. I'm
currently restoring two complete sets (A and B series) although the
photo only shows one set...
http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/boat8.htm
If you want RIT and good CW performance in one box, the Drake TR-4cw
(the latest version) is the one to have.

OTOH, if the definition is most-performance-for-your-money, it's a
close tie between the Heath SB-101 and HW-101. I do agree about the
mechanicals but consider what they cost in their time, compared to
other rigs.

If you allow matched-pair tx/rx, the Collins S-line (meatball 75S-3C/
32S-3) are at the top, followed closely by the Drake 4C twins.

Again I'd place the Drake transceiver ahead of the Collins seperates
having had both. I really didn't care for the Drake twins in the B and
C line. I will admit that was a longgg time ago and time does dim
my memory from that far back.

Roger (K8RI).

Roger (K8RI)

On Jul 10, 5:47 am, wrote:
How did they get the bezels on the DX-60 and the HW-16 so right and
the SB so wrong?

The HW-16 is a really really sweet CW transceiver. With a couple mods
the break in completely seamless - it honestly feels like I can even
hear the band with the key down!

The phenolic circuit boards are mediocre. The design is fine. Thick
FR4 glass epoxy would have made the Heath's much better.

I had many, many problems with intermittent cracked traces in HW-100's
and HW-101's. They'd be fine when cold, but when the set began to warm
up the opens could happen just about anywhere. Usual situation was
that receive signal goes away, or transmit power does, and it's
remedied by a couple sharp knocks on the chassis.

Tim.

Bryan wrote:

Irv Finkleman wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:

reseauplate wrote:

Failing that, converting the beasts to a transmitting tube of some
sort seems the only way to go,as sweep tubes are a thing of the past.
Apparently they take a lot of different internals from audio types,
which are the market today.


Yes, I grew up watching folks changing old surplus military gear to
take cheap commercial sweep tubes. Now I am watching people converting
cheap commercial gear to take surplus military sweep tubes....
--scott

I converted my old Hallicrafters SR150 from sweep tubes (6DQ6's if I
recall)
to 6146s. It is still around the local ham community and running fine.
The
nice things about the 6146's was that they are small enough to fit in
almost
any PA subchassis, and all I had to do was rewire the sockets.

Sure wish I still had it. I let it go about 25 years ago!

Irv VE6BP

TV sweep tubes don't like to be run linear. I recall seeing a 16 x 6LQ6
amplifier in the Handbook (or was it QST?) eons ago. I shudder at the
thought of the IMD3 response! 6146s are a bit better than sweep tubes. My
favorite tube in terms of linearity would be the 807/1625, albeit a bit
taller than the others.


I rebuilt an RCA TTU-25B 25 KW UHF TV transmitter about 18 years
ago. It had 17 6146 tubes in the video modulator. What a pain in the
ass to match 16 6146 tubes for the output stage.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida