[Boatanchors] Making a SX-110 Better?

Fri Mar 11 10:22:46 EST 2011

Just about anything will work up to 40M, an RF stage is not even needed 
except to add image rejection. I bet many Novices of the 50-60's didnt even 
have a clue if they were having image problems.

My education was helped by a knowledgeable ham teacher in HS when I was 14 
and there was a nice club stationMeissner EX Signal Shifter- HB 813 rig with 
811 modulators, a HQ-129X and Hallicrafters Panadaptor to drool over; plus 
stacked 10/15/20M 3 el yagis. This was in the heart of Brooklyn, NY and 
there wasnt any room for lower band wires. He also put me in touch with 
other old timer hams who kept me on the right track.....most of the time.

Carl
KM1H

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Macklin" <macklinbob at msn.com>
To: "The Pollacks" <rinkies at att.net>; <WQ9E at btsnetworks.net>; 
<boatanchors at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 12:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] Making a SX-110 Better?

> This evening I was able to get 5MHz WWV on both receivers. I don't have a
> clue about the calibration of the S-Meters but the both were reading about
> S-9 (after I tuned off the crystal calibrator). They were both readable 
> with
> quite a bit of QSB. But I do think the NC-109 was the better one.
>
> There is a RTTY contest Saturday evening and I will try them on that on 
> 40M.
> Just listening, not decoding.
>
> Bob Macklin
> K5MYJ
> Seattle, Wa.
> "Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "The Pollacks" <rinkies at att.net>
> To: <WQ9E at btsnetworks.net>; <boatanchors at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 9:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] Making a SX-110 Better?
>
>
>>I don't think the SX62A was meant to be a real communications receiver, 
>>but
>> is great for BC and SWL.
>>
>> Glen, your point about inexpensive receivers from the 40s and 50s being
>> limited is well taken.  I think, though, that there is a great variation
>> in
>> quality between units of somewhat similar price, and that a small jump in
>> price brought a big leap in performance in some cases.  The original
>> poster's comment, comparing the SX110 and NC109 is a good example.  The
>> 110
>> sold for $160 and the 109 at $200.  In my opinion, the extra $40 bought a
>> big performance increase.  The NC 188 sold for the same as the 110 but 
>> had
>> no crystal filter, voltage regulator or product detector.  I've never had
>> one of these, so I don't know how it would compare.
>>
>> My first receiver was an S38C, and I made lots of contacts with it, first
>> with an AT1, then an Adventurer.  Then I got an R100, and thought I'd 
>> gone
>> to heaven!  I have duplicates of all those rigs, and the R100 isn't much
>> of
>> a receiver by the standards of better ones of the day, but to me, age 14,
>> I
>> thought I had a 75A4!  It's all in what you compare it to, which I 
>> believe
>> is Glen's point!
>>
>> Ah, nostalgia.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: boatanchors-bounces at mailman.qth.net
>> [mailto:boatanchors-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of
>> WQ9E at btsnetworks.net
>> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 6:26 PM
>> To: boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] Making a SX-110 Better?
>>
>> My starting novice receiver was a Hallicrafters SX-62A.  It had a crystal
>> filter but no band spread tuning and the 40 meter novice band occupies
>> maybe
>> an 1/8 inch of the big dial.  Backlash was plentiful!  Fine tuning was
>> done
>> via leaving the lid open and carefully moving a finger towards the tuning
>> cap to slightly change the frequency.  It had great audio and was a fine
>> SWL
>> band cruiser but basically sucked as a communications receiver.  But I 
>> did
>> make a number of fun contacts on 80 and 40 including Puerto Rico and
>> Canada.
>>
>> After 2 weeks a local ham took pity on the 14 year old novice and loaned
>> me
>> his spare SX-101.  The first week with the new receiver I called CQ on 15
>> and VQ9MI came back, the high point of my novice experience.
>>
>> Recreating my Johnson Valiant/SX-101 1975 novice station was what got me
>> started with vintage gear in 1994.  I now have a couple SX-62 receivers
>> but
>> they are not (and probably will never) be paired with a transmitter.   My
>> nostalgia does have a limit :)
>>
>> Rodger WQ9E
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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 