Andy writes:

I have lusted after an HQ180 for 50 years. And now I
might go out and buy one with my next Social Security
check....

So, how many here have experience with the 180 ??
I understand the 170 is more stable and a better receiver...
Anyone care to comment on this....???

I don't ham much anymore, but if I get a Hammarlund
I want to know what I might have to modify to get it working
well.... Anyone with experience in stabilizing/rebuilding/repair
on these Hammarlund models might like to talk about their
experiences, and I would like to listen...

73s from Andy in Eureka, Texas W4OAH

AndyS wrote:
Andy writes:

I have lusted after an HQ180 for 50 years. And now I
might go out and buy one with my next Social Security
check....

So, how many here have experience with the 180 ??
I understand the 170 is more stable and a better receiver...
Anyone care to comment on this....???

I don't ham much anymore, but if I get a Hammarlund
I want to know what I might have to modify to get it working
well.... Anyone with experience in stabilizing/rebuilding/repair
on these Hammarlund models might like to talk about their
experiences, and I would like to listen...

73s from Andy in Eureka, Texas W4OAH

I had an HQ170 in the late 50s. It drifted a quite a bit and also
suffered from tunable hum. At the time, I lived in an apartment in New
York on West 34th Street and Hammarlund was in a building directly
across the street. The company I was with did some work for Hammarlund,
so I knew several of the engineers. They were aware of the problem with
the HQ170 L.O. So they decided to offer a mod kit, but did not want to
go through the hassle of writing detailed instructions. They figured an
experienced ham should be able to modify the circuit from the "before
and after" schematics.

Since I had been a ham since 1939 and was a graduate engineer to boot,
they gave me the kit of parts and told me to let them know if just the
parts kit and schematics would suffice. I got it done, but it took
about a dozen phone calls to their project engineer. Needless to say,
they abandond the idea of selling such a kit.

I assume that the later production runs of the receiver incorporated the
changes, but I do not know for certain.

Bob, w6nbi

AndyS wrote:
Andy writes:

I have lusted after an HQ180 for 50 years. And now I
might go out and buy one with my next Social Security
check....

So, how many here have experience with the 180 ??
I understand the 170 is more stable and a better receiver...
Anyone care to comment on this....???

I don't ham much anymore, but if I get a Hammarlund
I want to know what I might have to modify to get it working
well.... Anyone with experience in stabilizing/rebuilding/repair
on these Hammarlund models might like to talk about their
experiences, and I would like to listen...

73s from Andy in Eureka, Texas W4OAH

The HQ-170 only covered the ham bands of the time. The HQ-180 was
general coverage. Otherwise the two were rather similar.

73, Bob

AndyS wrote:
Andy writes:

I have lusted after an HQ180 for 50 years. And now I
might go out and buy one with my next Social Security
check....

So, how many here have experience with the 180 ??
I understand the 170 is more stable and a better receiver...
Anyone care to comment on this....???

I don't ham much anymore, but if I get a Hammarlund
I want to know what I might have to modify to get it working
well.... Anyone with experience in stabilizing/rebuilding/repair
on these Hammarlund models might like to talk about their
experiences, and I would like to listen...

73s from Andy in Eureka, Texas W4OAH

Hi Andy, I owned a Hammarlund HQ-180 and I thought it was fabulous! I
used it primarily for AM broadcast DXing. It would tune stations my ham
HF rigs had a hard time picking out, even with DSP and filters etc. It
was great on the sidebands in the ham allocations, and SWL was a joy. I
sold it to make room for a HF ham rig. I kick myself for selling it,
now that I have a shack that is big enough for it and my other radio
toys. I never had mine alligned or re-capped because I didn't think it
was needed. It performed very well. I used it more often than my Racal
RA- 6790GM and my Collins R-388URR and they were both sold before the
Hammarlund went. If I ever find another good condition one I will grab
it, no questions asked! 73, Mike...w1sox Andy writes:

I have lusted after an HQ180 for 50 years. And now I
might go out and buy one with my next Social Security
check....

So, how many here have experience with the 180 ??
I understand the 170 is more stable and a better receiver...
Anyone care to comment on this....???

I don't ham much anymore, but if I get a Hammarlund
I want to know what I might have to modify to get it working
well.... Anyone with experience in stabilizing/rebuilding/repair
on these Hammarlund models might like to talk about their
experiences, and I would like to listen...

73s from Andy in Eureka, Texas W4OAH

Hi Andy,

I don't know what the differences are but I owned an HQ170 about 20
years ago and I thought it was a superb product. The audio was just the
best and the sensitivity was unparalleled. What ever you do.... go get
one!! Don't wait anymore. Life is just too short. :-)

Mike K8MB
Apache Junction AZ