Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hey, my SX-42 has been fully restored and has the correct speaker as well as
a cabinet. And it has been touched by Phil Nelson :-) Maybe I should put it on eBay with a BIN price of $2000+ ! http://www.antiqueradio.org/halli07.htm Phil |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On Fri, 24 Oct 2008, Phil Nelson wrote: Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:05:04 -0700 From: Phil Nelson Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors Subject: SX-42 for $2250.00 how did I miss it? Hey, my SX-42 has been fully restored and has the correct speaker as well as a cabinet. And it has been touched by Phil Nelson :-) Maybe I should put it on eBay with a BIN price of $2000+ ! http://www.antiqueradio.org/halli07.htm Phil At prices like that, I'd seriously consider building reproductions from new materials and use NOS tubes. ;-) |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Can any one explain the rationale behind using both octal and loctal tubes in
the SX-42? 73 Tony I0JX |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Antonio Vernucci wrote:
Can any one explain the rationale behind using both octal and loctal tubes in the SX-42? Loctal tubes were really cheap on the surplus market at the time? --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
... Antonio Vernucci wrote: Can any one explain the rationale behind using both octal and loctal tubes in the SX-42? Loctal tubes were really cheap on the surplus market at the time? I believe the lone Loctal tube was a 7F8; at least this the tube used in my SX-43. If you want to read more about this particular tube, check out the volume on components from the MIT Radiation Laboratory series. If memory serves, this dual triode was rated to much higher frequencies than any dual triode that had an octal base. These tubes are still available NOS. However, if you are willing to make an adapter or rewire the receiver, I believe a 12AT7 can be used. Of course, if you want "museum quality", which I think is rather foolish, use the 7F8. 73, Dr. Barry L. Ornitz WA4VZQ |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
NoSPAM wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Antonio Vernucci wrote: Can any one explain the rationale behind using both octal and loctal tubes in the SX-42? Loctal tubes were really cheap on the surplus market at the time? I believe the lone Loctal tube was a 7F8; at least this the tube used in my SX-43. If you want to read more about this particular tube, check out the volume on components from the MIT Radiation Laboratory series. If memory serves, this dual triode was rated to much higher frequencies than any dual triode that had an octal base. These tubes are still available NOS. However, if you are willing to make an adapter or rewire the receiver, I believe a 12AT7 can be used. Of course, if you want "museum quality", which I think is rather foolish, use the 7F8. 73, Dr. Barry L. Ornitz WA4VZQ This is true, it was a very high performance tube. But it's also true that after the war a lot of equipment came out using surplus loctal tubes; I have a Philco table radio that is all-loctal. Incidentally, Barry.... welcome back. I don't think I have seen your name on Usenet for more than fifteen years and it's great to see you here again. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... NoSPAM wrote: "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Antonio Vernucci wrote: Can any one explain the rationale behind using both octal and loctal tubes in the SX-42? Loctal tubes were really cheap on the surplus market at the time? I believe the lone Loctal tube was a 7F8; at least this the tube used in my SX-43. If you want to read more about this particular tube, check out the volume on components from the MIT Radiation Laboratory series. If memory serves, this dual triode was rated to much higher frequencies than any dual triode that had an octal base. These tubes are still available NOS. However, if you are willing to make an adapter or rewire the receiver, I believe a 12AT7 can be used. Of course, if you want "museum quality", which I think is rather foolish, use the 7F8. 73, Dr. Barry L. Ornitz WA4VZQ This is true, it was a very high performance tube. But it's also true that after the war a lot of equipment came out using surplus loctal tubes; I have a Philco table radio that is all-loctal. Incidentally, Barry.... welcome back. I don't think I have seen your name on Usenet for more than fifteen years and it's great to see you here again. --scott I am not quite sure of the origin of the loctal base but I think it was Philco. At any rate they made and used them very widely in their radio sets. Philco was a large supplier of automobile radios, I think for Ford. Loctal tubes were supposed to be resistant to shaking loose when subject to vibration. -- -- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles WB6KBL |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Antonio Vernucci" wrote in message ... Can any one explain the rationale behind using both octal and loctal tubes in the SX-42? 73 Tony I0JX Some locktal tubes had quite low interelectrode capacitance compared to their octal equvalents due to the stem seal base with shorter leads than octals. They were also quite rugged since they were originally intended for automobile receivers and some had less microphonics. Remember, locktals predated miniature tubes but had some of the advantages of miniatures due to the method of bringing the leads out. Good engineering practice is to use as few variations of parts as possible but Hallicrafters never seems to have been concerned with it. I rather think their philosophy was that people would use a piece of their equipment until the new model came out. One can find a lot of advanced technology in Hallicrafters stuff, like the use of acorn tubes, beam switching tubes, pentode RF power tubes, etc, but often not applied very well. -- -- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles WB6KBL |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 25, 10:28*am, "Antonio Vernucci" wrote:
Can any one explain the rationale behind using both octal and loctal tubes in the SX-42? 73 Tony I0JX I don't think there was an obvious rationale behind some Hallicrafters tube lineup choices. The SX-110 was introduced in 1959 and made through the 60's, but was using metal octal tubes - reminiscent of the 1930's - when the rest of the world (and other Hallicrafters models) had switched to miniatures. Tim. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FS Spare parts for Plessey PR-2250 receiver | Swap | |||
FS Spare parts for Plessey PR-2250 receiver | Shortwave | |||
FS Spare parts for Plessey PR-2250 receiver | Equipment | |||
FS Spare parts for Plessey PR-2250 receiver | Equipment | |||
FS Spare parts for Plessey PR-2250 receiver | Equipment |