Brenda Ann
Actually, The trick is to remove the power supply module and ship them
seperately.
There is even someone who sells crates especially for the R390/R390A.
I am fortunate in that I have both models and love them. They do kinda spoil
you for other radios tho. ;-}} Try the R390 List on qth.net. You will find
everything you need to know and then some.
73
Chuck


Brenda Ann wrote:

"donutbandit" wrote in message
...
"Brenda Ann" wrote in
:

This gives someone plenty of time to find one.. Course, it will
have to be shipped in pieces because of the weight limits.

Fair Radio Sales sells them by the armloads, and gets them shipped
somehow.

Yep, they can freight them, or pay the extra to have UPS or FedEx take them
as over weight. I don't have those options, ergo would have to have it
shipped in pieces (thankfully, they do come apart into recognizable
modules).

You got a boat, Brenda Ann? R-390 will anchor it even in strong
winds!....(c;



On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 12:54:57 +0900, "Brenda Ann"
wrote:

This gives someone plenty of time to find one.. Course, it will have to
be shipped in pieces because of the weight limits.



Take care, all, and stay well.


--
Illigitimus non tatum carborundum

*Don't let the *******s wear you down*




Larry W4CSC
POWER is our friend!

Unless you are a truly hard-core DXer with tube electronics
maintenance skills and equipment, you are asking for trouble.

The things are difficult to tune, require annual tweaks, use parts no
longer made, burn copious amounts of electricity and will ruin any
piece of furniture you put them on top of.

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 12:54:57 +0900, "Brenda Ann"
wrote:

This gives someone plenty of time to find one.. Course, it will have to
be shipped in pieces because of the weight limits.



Take care, all, and stay well.

Sounds like a "keeper" to me!


"David" wrote in message
...
Unless you are a truly hard-core DXer with tube electronics
maintenance skills and equipment, you are asking for trouble.

The things are difficult to tune, require annual tweaks, use parts no
longer made, burn copious amounts of electricity and will ruin any
piece of furniture you put them on top of.

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 12:54:57 +0900, "Brenda Ann"
wrote:

This gives someone plenty of time to find one.. Course, it will have
to
be shipped in pieces because of the weight limits.



Take care, all, and stay well.

How
could anyone even compare any Collins design/product with a portable?
I am outraged. This is absurd.
The audio reproduction and flexibility of having so many controls is
nothing remotely available on ANY receiver I encountered in solid
state receivers (commercial/milspec/consumer/amateur).

"Arthur Pozner" wrote in message
...
How
could anyone even compare any Collins design/product with a portable?
I am outraged. This is absurd.


Is it outrageous or absurd for for some people to prefer crystal
stability, low power consumption, digital readout that's both precise
and accurate, portability and reasonable cost?

If DX-440s were available in 1955 for $250, how many would the
government have bought?


The audio reproduction and flexibility of having so many controls is
nothing remotely available on ANY receiver I encountered in
solid
state receivers (commercial/milspec/consumer/amateur).


Maybe because there's no market for that anymore? Anything they did 50
years ago can be done better today. But only if people want it.

My SX - 62 is certainly capable of hi fi AM reproduction. Maybe even
better than a Collins designed product, if such a thing is possible.
And I hear shrill AM. The AM broadcasters are now preemphising the
trebles and deemphisizing the bass. It wasn't long ago that most
stations had their own individual sound, some better than others. Now
they are processed for the lowest common denominator radio. You just
can't win.

I sure can't see getting outraged at anyone prefering a modern solid
state radio. It's the most practical choice.

Frank Dresser

"Arthur Pozner" wrote :

About the merits of the R-390

=================================

Somebody else added in a comment about the R-390/R-390A.
However, there is a *world* of difference between the R-390
and R-390A. Anyone who has owned both will know all about
it. Audio quality and filtering are among the most dramatic
differences.

But, as long as we're talking audio .. many will also remember
the Hammarlund SP-600 .. another boat anchor. It was another
analog receiver, but not with the odometer-like frequency
readout like the R-390 & R-390A. Instead, the SP-600
had several bands covering up to 50 MHz, but the "bandspread"
dial was soooo widely indicated, that (e.g. on 60 meters) each
single KHz could be indicated by about 3/8-inch on the large
main tuning knob rim. Pretty derned good for a boat anchor.
But,the audio .... the audio ... could not be matched by anything
either then or now. And, I have owned (literally) every major
performer receiver since the war (WW2).

"Arthur Pozner" wrote in message
...
|
How
| could anyone even compare any Collins design/product with a
portable?
| I am outraged. This is absurd.
| The audio reproduction and flexibility of having so many controls is
| nothing remotely available on ANY receiver I encountered in
solid
| state receivers (commercial/milspec/consumer/amateur).
----

As the poster alluded above, the R-390 was a Collins design, and
they also made some. But, the R-390 was a military specification
number, and it was made by several companies, including:
Stewart-Warner, Motorola, Electronic Assistance Corp, as well
as Collins. There were, indeed, varying points of difference in
quality .. but, all of them met the 'military specs' which did not
necessarily mean that was the best which the receiver could do.
Military Spec was a minimal common denominator all had to meet.|

R-390(non A) does not have the audio output power level of
SP-600. It has 0.5 W vs 2W. The LC filters in wide IF position must
be very similar- 16Kc and 13Kc (slightly more in Collins).
Just for fun I connected Sony 7600 to a Hi-fi stereo not long ago.
Sounded pretty decent for a portable on SW (especially with the synch
on). Did synchronous detectors exist in the
fifties?

How
could anyone even compare any Collins design/product with a portable?
I am outraged. This is absurd.
The audio reproduction and flexibility of having so many controls is
nothing remotely available on ANY receiver I encountered in

solid
state receivers (commercial/milspec/consumer/amateur).

I know. That was a silly statement to say that. It'd be like taking a knife
to a gun fight. Not even a fair comparison.