[Boatanchors] Making a SX-110 Better?

[Bob Macklin]

And I did my Novice year (57/58) with a S-38 (the one with a real BFO) and a 
BC-312. I could not afford any better. I also learned about using a BC-453 
that year.

I thought I was in heaven in 1960 when I bought the NC-109!

Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Glen Zook" <gzook at yahoo.com>
To: "'Carl'" <km1h at jeremy.mv.com>; "KA1KAQ''Todd" <ka1kaq at gmail.com>; 
<anchor at ec.rr.com>; "The Pollacks" <rinkies at att.net>
Cc: "'Boatanchors list'" <boatanchors at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 4:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] Making a SX-110 Better?


>I have said this numerous times before, but, here goes again:
>
> Back in the 1950s and even well into the 1960s, the average Novice Class 
> receiver, and, for that matter, a lot of the receivers used by higher 
> class licensees, drifted, were "broad as a barn" selectivity wise, often 
> was basically deaf above 15 MHz, etc.  People who haven't had to use this 
> type of equipment do not realize how things were in the "goode olde 
> dayes".  The average "low end" transceiver these days run circles around 
> what many operators used.
>
> However, no one told us how bad our receivers were, so, we just made 
> thousands of QSOs and basically "had a ball"!
>
> Glen, K9STH
>
> Website:  http://k9sth.com
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Boatanchors mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
>
> List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
> ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com **
>
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>