[ARC5] BC-221-J vs BC-221-T or what?

Sat Feb 13 19:11:14 EST 2016

The ones that have a modulated output function are the most useful. All LM's have this feature but only some BC-221's have this capability.
 Jay

-----Original Message-----
From: Commtekman--- via ARC5 <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
To: 1oldlens1 <1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com>; arc5 <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sat, Feb 13, 2016 4:05 pm
Subject: Re: [ARC5] BC-221-J vs BC-221-T or what?

I found my two BC-221 in storage, one is a AF and the other is a AK. The AK model
has a canvas cover with a headset in the front compartment. The battery compartment had a coiled cord with a T-51 switch and harness straps, the
cord end has a three prong plug like the type that would mate with the
EE-8 field phone.

In a message dated 2/12/2016 10:13:08 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, 1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com writes:
TM 11-300 is the one that covers all models. I think mine was   originally in a canvas case but I have only a canvas carrying sling.   

On 2/12/2016 7:44 PM, Commtekman at aol.com wrote:

Hello,

I follow your forum and thought I would mention that I do     have a TM on BC-221 sets, not

sure which one it was written for, I could probably find     it if it would help someone. I have

two BC-221, I think one is in a canvas case, both are     in storage and I am going over

there tomorrow.

Bob Schaefer

K6OSM

In a message dated 2/12/2016 7:14:56 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, 1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com     writes:

   Somewhere I found a military TM that       covers all of the BC-221 meters. Noton BAMA and I can't find it. It may       help because at least it would tell you what differences are between       them.  I have a BC-221, a late one with factory power supply. I have       to look to see which version it is.  Its in a wooden case which makes       setting the crystal calibrator difficult since it drifts a little with       temperature and I don't want to drill a hole in the case. It is quite       accurate once warmed up. 

On 2/12/2016 4:38 PM, Don Merz via ARC5       wrote:

I guess the time has         come for me to keep one of these in the shack. I have had literally         dozens of them go through my hands over the years. Now I have two here         and one of them is going to stay. But which one? The J model is in         lesser condition. The T model is almost like new. Both have AC supplies         in them--the one in the T model might be a factory supply. The one in         the J model is almost certainly homebrew. Both have the spare tubes and         hex wrench where they ought to be. Both have the correct calibration         books. Both were made by Zenith. 

Is there any reason to         prefer one over the other except overall condition? I have not tested         them yet. But it does not seem like they would be hard to get running.         Is there an achilles heel in them that I should check?

Any suggestions welcome.

73 de N3RHT

______________________________________________________________
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

______________________________________________________________
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

______________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20160213/f936eb6f/attachment-0001.html>