" The SX-88 is the holy grail of Hallicrafters communications
receivers. It
is the rarest, and most desirable to collectors, and there are a great many
" just how rare is this?
Pete
KQ5I

Other receivers just as rare but not nearly as expensive. The
wonderful Icom R9000 will run circles around the SX88 in every
parameter used and only costs $3000- 3500 on the used market and 2500
were made, selling new for $7000+. Buy the Mosley Receiver that used
all the same tubes, rare, produced only 1 1/2 years but a dud on
receive. So, anyone buying this has an expensive rare receiver and
pays for it to just sit there. The SX73 was just as good. I have one
SX88 that I paid $1500 for about 2 years ago and it is excellent. The
SX115 is bringing $2000-2500 and is ham band only with same basic
design plan. Go figure. Bottom line, if you have always wanted an SX88
and will at least plug it in and use it some, knowing that it will
remain rare, $4000 seems reasonable. But, note the reserve has been
met, far below the $4000 figure. I wud buy 2 Drake R8Bs and 2 JRC
535Ds with money to spare and hear a lot more!
My SX88 sits, not plugged in. Looks a lot better than the one on eBay
but NOT for sale.. San

hamman wrote:

" The SX-88 is the holy grail of Hallicrafters communications
receivers. It
is the rarest, and most desirable to collectors, and there are a great many
" just how rare is this?
Pete
KQ5I

Other receivers just as rare but not nearly as expensive. The
wonderful Icom R9000 will run circles around the SX88 in every
parameter used and only costs $3000- 3500 on the used market and 2500
were made, selling new for $7000+. Buy the Mosley Receiver that used
all the same tubes, rare, produced only 1 1/2 years but a dud on
receive.

I have a mint Mosley CM-1/CMS-1 and have restored 4 others for friends. Hardly
consider it a dud on receive. Unlike many of its more expensive counterparts, the
CM-1 has the same calibration on 10M as 80M- not all bunched up as in most RX of
that era. I am, as I said in an earlier post, completely resotring an 88 and find
it to be a clunky uninteresting receiver. For my $$, the 115 is far "sexier" and
more interesting. In the end, I play with my little CM-1 more than any other here
except perhaps the 2B/2BQ.

Dale W4OP