[ARC5] Vintage LF/MF Fun with my BC-453B

[kgordon2006]

I have, and have used, both. Construction and parts-quality of the R-11A is noticably better than the average BC-453.However, the BC-453s were made by several different manufacturers, some of whom were better than others. One particular maker, whose name I have forgotten, was particularly poorly done. Very cheap. Chassis folded rather than drawn, for instance.The R-11As I have (2) are, quite obviously, built better and include higher-quality components, the most obvious ones being the can-capacitors which have ceramic insulators rather than the mica ones of the BC-453.But there are other bits that are higher quality.Both work so much alike that listening-tests show no real difference.The missing BFO and tuning dial of the R-11A being annoying rather than important.Ken W7EKBSent via the Samsung Galaxy S21 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Hubert Miller <kargo_cult at msn.com> Date: 12/27/25  11:40  (GMT-08:00) To: arc5 at mailman.qth.net, List Milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net> Subject: Re: [ARC5] Vintage LF/MF Fun with my BC-453B 
If someone has informed opinion on this question, i would sure like to see it here.
-Hue Miller



Sent from my Galaxy




-------- Original message --------
From: releazer at earthlink.net 




Is the ARC R-11A superior to the BC-453?  Of course it lacks a BFO but I think the construction and materials are superior to the BC-453.  I have examples of each in my collection but I've never done a Fly Off between them.
Wayne





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20251227/0d57be8d/attachment-0001.html>