[Boatanchors] B&W6100

[D C _Mac_ Macdonald]

MOST equipment of that vintage had LOTS of vacant space on the 
under side of the chassis. Hand wired components generally meant 
having enough room for a human to get in there and wire it up! 
 
Having said that, I don't have a manual for the 6100 which MIGHT 
show a picture of the under side as built with arrows or such to 
identify the components. 
 
My HX-50 manual has tube socket views from the bottom that show 
voltages on one page and resistance values on another page.  There 
is truly lots of space under there. 
  
* * * * * * * * * * * 
* 73 - Mac, K2GKK/5 * 
* (Since 30 Nov 53) * 
* Oklahoma City, OK * 
* USAF, Ret'd 61-81 * 
** FAA, Ret'd 94-10 * 
* * * * * * * * * * * 
 
 

> From: wv2zow at gmail.com
> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:38:59 -0500
> To: ka9egw at ka9egw.com
> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] B&W6100
> CC: boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
> 
> Brian: I know the CPI is frequently used to compare yesterday's prices to
> today, but that is an overall index and does not really apply to specific
> markets. Electronics is a real exception to the CPI. For example, a 1957
> color TV, 19" would sell for $500, and, at the end of the CRT TV era, a 19"
> unit could be had for $49. Using the typical CPI calculator, comparing 1957
> to 2009, CPI says a 19" TV should cost almost $4000, but working back, the
> $49 TV would have cost only $7 in 1957. Could one build the B&W transmitter
> today? It might cost $6000, but it wouldn't be built the same way, and it
> would probably still cost around $800. Gasoline, however, which cost about
> $0.20 per gallon in 1957, using the CPI, should only cost $1.69 today, but
> that didn't happen either! --73, Mike, WV2ZOW
> 
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Brian KA9EGW <ka9egw at ka9egw.com> wrote:
> 
> > Pete's right.  The underneath view has a high-school-shop-class look to it.
> > $875 [price in B&W's advert in 11/63 issue of 73] works out to $6786 in
> > last
> > year's dollars.  *I* wouldn't pay ~$7K for a rig that looked that junky
> > underneath...I wonder if they were all that sloppy looking?  Now I'm afraid
> > to look under my recently-acquired one...but now I gotta HI HI  73, Brian
> > KA9EGW
> > >SNIP<
> > Looking at the bottom chassis view of S/N 227 (there isn't one for S/N 283)
> > I'm not very impressed, it almost looks like someone found a bunch of stuff
> > in their basement and sloppily wired it all up.
> > Was B&W highly considered when it came out ? -pete
> > >SNIP<