Scott Dorsey wrote:



If the input power in watts is less than the weight in pounds, it's a
boatanchor.
--scott


hehehe...thats a good measure. Do you have one for receivers? I'm
wondering how an S-38 "qualifies".

-Bill

Scott Dorsey wrote:
Ed wrote:
It's a tube rig made in America by Americans. I love my 78 Toyota pickup,
but it will never be the classic a pre-70's American made vehicle is, it is
worthless to anyone but me. Same for rice box radios, after the new is worn
off, they're worthless compared to vintage American made rigs, just look on
EBay. Yes, I owned rice boxes the first time around, thousands of dollars
worth of rice boxes, and now they're worth the same amount as my 78 Toy
pickup.

No, not at all. I have used German boatanchors and Soviet boatanchors.
Never used any of the prewar or wartime Japanese boatanchors, but I have
seen a few on display now and then.

If the input power in watts is less than the weight in pounds, it's a
boatanchor.
--scott

Well, than that leaves out the R-390/390A series. They weigh about 70-80 pounds,
and draw 140W w/o ovens, and 250W w/ovens.

It also leaves out the KWM-2, TCS, and just about everything else I can
think of.

Care to try again with your definition?

-Chuck

Ed,
I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.
I think the definition of 'boatanchor' is a fluid thing,
much like the definition of 'classic car'. My
1973 Datsun 240Z is considered by most to be
a classic car. So is my 1951 MG-TD, '58 Austin-Healey
100-6, and all of the other foreign made cars in
my collection. A teenager down the street from me
has a 'tricked-out' older Datsun truck. I'm sure he
considers it a classic.

The Kenwood TS-520, and Yaesu FT-101 rigs date
back to the late 1970's. If you compare one of these rigs
on the air to the newer fancy rigs, chances are you won't
be able to tell the difference. These are indeed classic rigs
that were very well built, and were relatively inexpensive.
Quite a few remain on the air today.

Not sure what you have against 'riceboxes', but I like
mine and will continue to use it, and enjoy it every bit
as much as my Halli HT-44/R-390 and Heathkit HW-101.

Steve

"Ed" wrote in message
. com...
It's a tube rig made in America by Americans. I love my 78 Toyota pickup,
but it will never be the classic a pre-70's American made vehicle is, it
is worthless to anyone but me. Same for rice box radios, after the new is
worn off, they're worthless compared to vintage American made rigs, just
look on EBay. Yes, I owned rice boxes the first time around, thousands of
dollars worth of rice boxes, and now they're worth the same amount as my
78 Toy pickup.
I'm really not trying to be nasty, just realistic.
"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
news:9vKRf.12436$Uc2.7879@fed1read04...
From the mists of history and country legend:
ORIGINS OF BOATANCHOR

THREE VERSIONS -- Opinions From The Internet.

Version I -- During World War II, Military Radio Techs used the term
BoatAnchor as they struggled with the huge, heavy, electronic equipments
of the day -- full of transformers, tubes etc. Also the US Navy
frequently marked electronic gear with an anchor. After the war -- tons
of the equipment appeared on the surplus market and was dubbed
BoatAnchors due to the reasons above - one or both.

Version II -- After WWII a national magazine editor answered a query "As
what to do with an outdated heavy, large, surplus electronic
instrument?" and answered "Tie a line to it and use it as a BoatAnchor"

Version III To all those who expressed interest in the CQ magazine
reference to boatanchors, I found it after only an hour or two of
skimming. And I also found that some of my recollections were a bit hazy
after all those years. The original letter to the editor (not to the
"Surplus Editor" as I incorrectly recalled) appeared on page 16 of the
October 1956 issue of CQ and was as follows: Gentlemen: I recently
acquired a "Signal Corps Wireless Set. No. 19 MK II Transceiver." Are
there schematics or conversion data for this rig? Any info will be
appreciated. David J. Wilke W3LSG Pottstown, Pennsylvania The editor
replied: The only conversion we seem to have on the files here at CQ
calls for 100 feet of 1" Manila line, one end of which is to be tied
securely around the MK II Transceiver.

This then converts the unit into a fine anchor for a small boat. If any
readers have better conversions we will be glad to hear about them. Ed.
This letter apparently generated a lot of interest and in the February
1957 issue of CQ there was a follow-up from CQ's editor, another letter
from W3LSG and several pictures. If I find the time I will scan them and
post links to them here.

The expression "boatanchor" may have originated earlier than 1956, as
Doug Hensley pointed out. I found no earlier references in amateur radio
than these CQ's, but there may be some. However, there was no reason to
call amateur gear of that era "boatanchors" since almost all of it fit
that description. It wasn't till later when smaller, lighter gear became
popular that there was reason to categorize some gear as boatanchors. And
it is also interesting to me that a word originally used to denote
something of little value, useful only to anchor a small boat, has taken
on a more affectionate meaning. We love our "boatanchors". Roger K6XQ


--
CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be !






"Bob Miller" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 09:55:22 -0600, "Cal"
wrote:

Kenwoods, Yaesus, Icoms, Sonys...sheesh!
Don't you guys with your modern rice boxes have plenty of other forums
to
fill up? I know you'd like to think your stuff is "classic" but it
isn't
and doesn't belong here.


Okay, what is a boat anchor?

bob
k5qwg

Well apply your "Classic" to these definitions - Websters

classic


1 : serving as a standard of excellence : of recognized value

2. TRADITIONAL, ENDURING characterized by simple tailored lines in
fashion year after year a classic suit

3. historically memorable

4. noted because of special literary or historical associations


--
CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be !

Here ya go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_receiver





On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:19:37 -0800, "Steve" wrote:

Ed,
I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.
I think the definition of 'boatanchor' is a fluid thing,
much like the definition of 'classic car'. My
1973 Datsun 240Z is considered by most to be
a classic car. So is my 1951 MG-TD, '58 Austin-Healey
100-6, and all of the other foreign made cars in
my collection. A teenager down the street from me
has a 'tricked-out' older Datsun truck. I'm sure he
considers it a classic.

The Kenwood TS-520, and Yaesu FT-101 rigs date
back to the late 1970's. If you compare one of these rigs
on the air to the newer fancy rigs, chances are you won't
be able to tell the difference. These are indeed classic rigs
that were very well built, and were relatively inexpensive.
Quite a few remain on the air today.

Not sure what you have against 'riceboxes', but I like
mine and will continue to use it, and enjoy it every bit
as much as my Halli HT-44/R-390 and Heathkit HW-101.

Steve

"Ed" wrote in message
.com...
It's a tube rig made in America by Americans. I love my 78 Toyota pickup,
but it will never be the classic a pre-70's American made vehicle is, it
is worthless to anyone but me. Same for rice box radios, after the new is
worn off, they're worthless compared to vintage American made rigs, just
look on EBay. Yes, I owned rice boxes the first time around, thousands of
dollars worth of rice boxes, and now they're worth the same amount as my
78 Toy pickup.
I'm really not trying to be nasty, just realistic.
"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
news:9vKRf.12436$Uc2.7879@fed1read04...
From the mists of history and country legend:
ORIGINS OF BOATANCHOR

THREE VERSIONS -- Opinions From The Internet.

Version I -- During World War II, Military Radio Techs used the term
BoatAnchor as they struggled with the huge, heavy, electronic equipments
of the day -- full of transformers, tubes etc. Also the US Navy
frequently marked electronic gear with an anchor. After the war -- tons
of the equipment appeared on the surplus market and was dubbed
BoatAnchors due to the reasons above - one or both.

Version II -- After WWII a national magazine editor answered a query "As
what to do with an outdated heavy, large, surplus electronic
instrument?" and answered "Tie a line to it and use it as a BoatAnchor"

Version III To all those who expressed interest in the CQ magazine
reference to boatanchors, I found it after only an hour or two of
skimming. And I also found that some of my recollections were a bit hazy
after all those years. The original letter to the editor (not to the
"Surplus Editor" as I incorrectly recalled) appeared on page 16 of the
October 1956 issue of CQ and was as follows: Gentlemen: I recently
acquired a "Signal Corps Wireless Set. No. 19 MK II Transceiver." Are
there schematics or conversion data for this rig? Any info will be
appreciated. David J. Wilke W3LSG Pottstown, Pennsylvania The editor
replied: The only conversion we seem to have on the files here at CQ
calls for 100 feet of 1" Manila line, one end of which is to be tied
securely around the MK II Transceiver.

This then converts the unit into a fine anchor for a small boat. If any
readers have better conversions we will be glad to hear about them. Ed.
This letter apparently generated a lot of interest and in the February
1957 issue of CQ there was a follow-up from CQ's editor, another letter
from W3LSG and several pictures. If I find the time I will scan them and
post links to them here.

The expression "boatanchor" may have originated earlier than 1956, as
Doug Hensley pointed out. I found no earlier references in amateur radio
than these CQ's, but there may be some. However, there was no reason to
call amateur gear of that era "boatanchors" since almost all of it fit
that description. It wasn't till later when smaller, lighter gear became
popular that there was reason to categorize some gear as boatanchors. And
it is also interesting to me that a word originally used to denote
something of little value, useful only to anchor a small boat, has taken
on a more affectionate meaning. We love our "boatanchors". Roger K6XQ


--
CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be !






"Bob Miller" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 09:55:22 -0600, "Cal"
wrote:

Kenwoods, Yaesus, Icoms, Sonys...sheesh!
Don't you guys with your modern rice boxes have plenty of other forums
to
fill up? I know you'd like to think your stuff is "classic" but it
isn't
and doesn't belong here.


Okay, what is a boat anchor?

bob
k5qwg

Bob Miller wrote:
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 09:55:22 -0600, "Cal"
wrote:


Kenwoods, Yaesus, Icoms, Sonys...sheesh!
Don't you guys with your modern rice boxes have plenty of other forums to
fill up? I know you'd like to think your stuff is "classic" but it isn't
and doesn't belong here.



Okay, what is a boat anchor?


Since we are dealing in exact definitions here - its that thingy on a
boat that is supposed to keep it in one place. Kind of a hooked cross on
a big chain.

When did old time radios become "boatanchors"? hehe ;^)

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Cal wrote:
Kenwoods, Yaesus, Icoms, Sonys...sheesh!
Don't you guys with your modern rice boxes have plenty of other forums to
fill up? I know you'd like to think your stuff is "classic" but it isn't
and doesn't belong here.

As time marches on, that boatanchor definition will inevitably expand
to include tube radios of all sorts.

And why shouldn't it? Those early "rice boxes" have a lot in common
with the "true boat anchors".

They are all vintage radios, and of a design not made any more.

Don't sweat it - it's all good...

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

............. Those early "rice boxes" have a lot in common
with the "true boat anchors".

I rebuilt a K'wood 520 for Gary KM6A. It had tubes (6146)so it is BA for
me...perhaps the end of BA but BA just the same. Crap sakes! If you look
the other way, as in back, before tubes there were crystal sets...proto
solid state....so our beloved tube sets were perhaps a short lived
transitional stage....~8^* OOOOH but I like them anyway.

EdZ

Ed Zeranski wrote:
............ Those early "rice boxes" have a lot in common
with the "true boat anchors".

I rebuilt a K'wood 520 for Gary KM6A. It had tubes (6146)so it is BA for
me...perhaps the end of BA but BA just the same. Crap sakes! If you look
the other way, as in back, before tubes there were crystal sets...proto
solid state....so our beloved tube sets were perhaps a short lived
transitional stage....~8^* OOOOH but I like them anyway.

I came in late to the game, having been weaned on transistorized
radios. And am happy to have discovered hollow state technology at this
late stage of the game. The glow, the sound, the look and the smell too,
for cryin' out loud. All awesome.

To put it another way, perhaps more understandable today...

TUBEZ RULEZ!


- 73 de mike KB3EIA -

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 09:55:22 -0600, "Cal"
wrote:

Kenwoods, Yaesus, Icoms, Sonys...sheesh!
Don't you guys with your modern rice boxes have plenty of other forums to
fill up? I know you'd like to think your stuff is "classic" but it isn't
and doesn't belong here.

I've wondered if some American-made tube radios could really be
called boatanchors, such as the S-38. It's small, line-powered and
thus NO power transformer, and light enough that even if it doesn't
float, I wouldn't feel confident using it to anchor the smallest boat
that would hold me.

I recall my father's NC-300. He used it for a short while with his
SB-400, then when he got and assembled an SB-301, he put the NC-300 on
a separate table for SWL. That thing has double conversion, lots of
tubes including one for current regulation, a VR-150 for voltage
regulation, a 100kHz crystal calibrator w/oscillator tube, and of
course a power transformer to run them all that by itself must weigh
many times more than an S-38. It's got the mass of a boatanchor, and
so in a pinch (when you don't mind destroying a perfectly good radio)
it would work well to hold a boat in one place.