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 !

I like the term "classic". It certainly describes the equipment more
accurately and adds a touch of dignity... unlike the term B/A!! Hi!!

My first connection with the term-in-question would have been in 1959.
Having just traded a WRL DSB-100 double-sideband rig even for a
BC-610E/BC-614/JB-70 from an AF Sgt, just returning from Guam, my local
(sage)ham radio dealer informed me that "Nobody uses those old
boatanchors, anymore!" Sounds like he picked up on that CQ mag article,
maybe?


Caveat Lector wrote:
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

IMOHO, if it don't keep you warm on a long winters night it ain't a
boatanchor.








On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 18:20:54 -0500, K3HVG wrote:

I like the term "classic". It certainly describes the equipment more
accurately and adds a touch of dignity... unlike the term B/A!! Hi!!

My first connection with the term-in-question would have been in 1959.
Having just traded a WRL DSB-100 double-sideband rig even for a
BC-610E/BC-614/JB-70 from an AF Sgt, just returning from Guam, my local
(sage)ham radio dealer informed me that "Nobody uses those old
boatanchors, anymore!" Sounds like he picked up on that CQ mag article,
maybe?


Caveat Lector wrote:
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

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

So what exactly is a 'Wiki' anyways?

A tiny Wookie?

A smaller wok?






"Bricktop" wrote in message
...
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
y.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

From URL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki

A wiki (IPA: ['wi?.ki?] wee-kee or ['w?.ki?] wick-ey or Wik-EE[1]) is a
type of website that allows users to add and edit content easily and is
especially suited for collaborative writing.

The name is based on the Hawaiian term wiki, meaning "quick", "fast", or "to
hasten" (Hawaiian dictionary). Sometimes the reduplication wikiwiki (or
Wikiwiki) is used instead of wiki (Hawaiian dictionary).

The term Wiki also sometimes refers to the collaborative software itself
(wiki engine) that facilitates the operation of such a website (see wiki
software).

Aloha ya all
--
CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"YT" wrote in message
t...
So what exactly is a 'Wiki' anyways?

A tiny Wookie?

A smaller wok?

"Steve" wrote in message
...
Roger,
Thanks for posting this. I almost fell off of the couch I was
laughing so hard!

Personally, I think the definition of boatanchor will change
with time. These days, I consider anything that uses tubes
(but not CRT's) as boatanchors, including my Kenwood
rigs that use tube drivers and finals. 30 years from now,
any pre-Pentium PC will be considered a boatanchor, and
highly collectable.

Steve W6SSP

"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

Boatanchor.

Any radio that makes my back ache when I pick it up!!

73

Jerry

Beats me, but their definition sounded good! I actually like Jerry's
better, but the older I get that means that BA's get smaller.


On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 13:46:58 GMT, "YT" wrote:

So what exactly is a 'Wiki' anyways?

A tiny Wookie?

A smaller wok?






"Bricktop" wrote in message
.. .
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
gy.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