[ARC5] Inspired hack job
Robert Nickels
ranickel at comcast.net
Wed Mar 6 21:10:01 EST 2013
On 3/6/2013 6:08 PM, Robert Eleazer wrote:
> You know it occurs to me that you would have considerable difficulty in finding a receiver that would do a better job over the 190 -550 KHZ range
I'm not sure about that, but I do think many hams missed out out a good
opportunity in not using a BC-453 Q5-er (including me). Two of the
most important elements of any receiver are the stability of it's local
oscillator and the selectivity of the IF - and the 453 scores very well
in both. I'll admit I thought it was a lot cooler to have a Heathkit
Q Multiplier hooked up to my two-dial Hallicrafters than some old
military-looking thing - but if I'd had the chance to hear what one
sounded like and how nicely it tuned the crowded CW bands, I'd have been
convinced otherwise.
One guy who clearly appreciated the power of this combination was Don
Stoner W6TNS, who wrote both the "Novice Q5er" and two "SSB Q5er"
articles in the 50s. (Stoner was a prolific author and builder who
went on to start several businesses, including being the "S" in SGC).
He measured the bandwidth of the 85 kc IF to be 2.7 KHz...a bit wide for
CW but just right for you-know-what! And while the term "Q5er" was
often used when a BC-453 was simply tapped onto the IF of a receiver,
his designs were standalone crystal controlled converters making a
double-conversion receiver capable of tuning 80 or 40 meters. They
didn't look as jazzy as a commercial set with a fancy front panel and
all the trimmings, but I'd say it outperformed about 90% of them selling
for under $200 in actual amateur service.
In retrospect, it's too bad someone didn't come out with a cosmetic
cover like CE did for the 458 VFO, adding a kit for the power supply and
converter in one housing...but gee, I think I feel a new project coming
on...
73, Bob W9RAN
More information about the ARC5
mailing list