[Boatanchors] Hammarlund Pro 310 Rcvr on eBay

[Richard Knoppow]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Knepper" <collinsradio at comcast.net>
To: <W9RAN at oneradio.net>; <boatanchors at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] Hammarlund Pro 310 Rcvr on eBay


>I own a PRO-310 with original speaker.  To those who have 
>never owned this
> receiver, your comments are banal,
>
> If you did own one, you would know that the greatest 
> shortcoming of this
> receiver is the type of drive belt that is used on the 
> bandspread - its
> composition is like leather - it may be in fact!  This 
> belt with age slips
> making the receiver almost worthless from that standpoint.
>
> Yes, I would agree that it is just a nice receiver to put 
> on the shelf and
> admire not use.
>
>
> David Knepper, W3CRA/W3ST

    Everything I've read about them tends to confirm your 
opinion. They are reputed to be extremely difficult to work 
on because of the mechanical design. At the time they first 
came out they looked sexy and performed pretty well but I 
clearly remember deciding that if I were rich I would prefer 
a Collins 75A-4. Now, even that has faults but I think the 
Pro-310 was a blunder on Hammarlund's part. There are a 
number of receivers that tickle my curiosity, about the only 
one with fairly thorough documentation is the R-390A. It 
would be fascinating to know, for instance, what happened 
with the SP-600, the original advertising shows something 
which is recognizable but differs considerably in detail 
from the production model. Another puzzle is the receiver 
announced by the Allen Cardwell company, that one evidently 
never got beyond a concept since the only illustrations of 
it appear to be drawings.
    The conditions following WW-2 are interesting: the 
companies who were established before the war converted 
almost completely to military production. They were joined 
by a number of small companies, some of which were organized 
specifically to obtain government contracts. Some of these 
busineses did not survive reconversion to civilian 
production. I think specifically Hammarlund, Hallicrafters, 
and National, tried to return with essentially restyled 
versions of the same stuff they had built before the war. 
Collins had never built _ham_ receivers before the war 
although they had built special purpose receivers mostly for 
aeronautical use. Their concept was completely new, at least 
to the field. Receivers like the Cardwell and Pierson (do I 
have that name right) might have seemed super in the late 
1930's but too much was going on in the mid to late 1940s 
and they just didn't make it; they were essentially just 
glorified older designs.
     I am not sure what happened to Hammarlund: while the 
SP-600 was a good design most of the later stuff left a lot 
to be desired. There is probably a book in this but someone 
else will have to write it.


--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
dickburk at ix.netcom.com