[ARC5] BC-455 adventure

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Kenneth G. Gordon <kgordon2006 at frontier.com
> wrote:

>
> No need: they are 3-48 binder-head screws. Originals are cad-plated brass.
>

These screws are an excellent excu....reason to pick up some of the
ham-hacked rigs floating around out there for a couple bucks. Along with
other useful bits, there are oodles of screws you can use when restoring
other sets. I've got a small box full of spares and a couple sets still
kicking around as donors.


> You can stuff the flower-pots with new disk ceramics if you want to. It
> ain't
> hard.
>
> You can see how I did one here:
>
> http://www.w7ekb.com/glowbugs/Military/arc5pages.htm
>

Thanks for posting this Ken, and for doing all the converting and
compiling. I read through it when you posted it a while back, but actually
downloaded and saved the PDFs this time. Handy info to have. The cap
rebuild is interesting too, it dovetails perfectly into a conversation I
was having with Mike Hanz about running the dynamotors and the resulting
failure mode(s).

First of all, leaving that tube-cover off results in the entire receiver
> running
> much cooler. In an aircraft at 30K feet, undoubtedly holding some of that
> heat in is a good idea: in a heated ham shack, not so much.
>

True confessions time: when I 'improved' (hacked up) my first BC-455B back
in '79-'80, it was missing its cover IIRC. Or not, but regardless - I
removed the little cover pins and used the holes for self-tapping screws
which held on a piece of heavy gauge mess for just that reason. I also
removed the side tag and re-mounted it in the middle front of the top
cover, a spot more deserving of a nomenclature tag in my teen-aged mind.

Well, with an IF of 2830 KHz, you are not going to achieve selectivity much
> better than stock even with sweep-alignment of the IF. As I said, those
> receivers were purposely made with a very wide IF to deal with drifty and
> off-
> frequency transmitters.
>

Indeed! Probably the worst drawback to using one as a 'serious' (by today's
standards) receiver.

I have always considered the "ARC-5" receivers to be the very finest single-
> band receivers ever even conceived, let alone built in large quantities.
> They
> are definitely one of my very most favorite receivers.
>

I agree, despite all of the rumblings out there against them. I recall how
amazed I was at the true band spread effect of the tuning mechanism and
dial, how difficult it was to separate stations on a FT-101EE at the time
and how easy it was to tune in *any* individual station on my little
Command set. It sounded a lot better, too. Still have it to this day,
though the Philco console speaker I lashed to it with a Cannon connector
has since gotten torn up pretty bad. Last used it maybe 8-10 years ago
listening to WBCQ on shortwave. Thought a couple times about 'restoring' it
back as close to original as I could, but that would change the character
of a big part of my radio life and education. That little set is what gave
me my respect and appreciation for the entire line of equipment which
brought me to this point in collecting and preserving them. To me, it's
priceless.

Have fun getting yours to where you want it, Bill. The whole thing about
the journey vs. the destination and all that.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4