[ARC5] OT: Hally Instability.

[Richard Knoppow]

     Not  just Hallicrafters, I've found a lot of the older receivers 
are microphonic, but they were when new. I think the main problem is the 
design of the tuning capacitors.  The older Collins receivers are about 
the only ones of their vintage to be free of this. The RCA AR-88 is 
quite good but will still "ring" if you bang on its panel.
On 11/14/2015 8:52 AM, Ronnie Hull wrote:
> I had a 101mk III a couple of years ago and it was pretty stable. That is, if you left it alone. I liked it a lot. But if you thumped on the front panel it would whoop whoop whoop down the band...
> Sent from Ronnie's "smarter than Ronnie" Iphone
>
>> On Nov 14, 2015, at 10:34, Fuqua, Bill L <wlfuqu00 at uky.edu> wrote:
>>
>>   Now, my SX101A was quite stable. It was my first real SSB hamband receiver.
>> However, the SX100 I had was terrible and bad microphonics in the local oscillator.
>> I think part of the problem was trying to jam to much into such a small package.
>> After going to crystal controlled oscillators in first conversion things improved considerably.
>>    I was surprised that my HQ110 was as good as it was. I could drop it a half inch and
>> no microphonics.
>> 73
>> Bill wa4lav
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: ARC5 [arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net] on behalf of David Stinson [arc5 at ix.netcom.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2015 10:26 AM
>> To: Paddy Ryan; arc5 at mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: [ARC5] OT: Hally Instability.
>>
>> I'm not doubting anyone who says their Hallys were stable.
>> I do know in 40+ years of hamming, I've handled dozens
>> of them and never seen a single one from the "ham"
>> market line that didn't show mechanical instablilty
>> and "wibble-wobbles" above about 12 MC.
>> Is it possible this was some sort of aging-related
>> design flaw that a few were spared?
>> Has anyone ever done a through investigation
>> to find the root of it?  Coils mounted on a long
>> bandswitch that will transmit shocks like a
>> tuning fork always seemed a candidate to me.
>> Most likely there are multiple causes.
>>
>> 73 D.S.
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> ARC5 mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> ARC5 mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

-- 
Richard Knoppow
1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com
WB6KBL