[Collins] R388 51j-3
Fern Rivard
[email protected]
Tue, 27 Jan 2004 22:18:36 -0800
Hi Dennis:
I've owned both the J3 and the J4 simultaneously and still have the
51J4's and I never noticed much difference in the audio quality between the
two models. I do know that the early 51J4's did lack receiver sensitivity
but the late ones were very sensitive. I wouldn't even think of trading a J4
for a J3. If you want wider than 6 khz mechanical filter for am use,
there's a 9.1 khz filter that will work nicely in there. I got one from Yves
WN4I some time ago but I think that he is out of stock of those now.
Cheers from Fern VE7GZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis Gibbs" <[email protected]>
To: "DAN COTSIRILOS" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 12:38 PM
Subject: RE: [Collins] R388 51j-3
> Dan and the group,
>
> This may be blasphemy on my part, but I prefer the 51J3/R-388 over the
> 51J4s. The 51J3/R-388s seem more sensitive, and the audio quality is
indeed
> better. I can't help but think it is related to the insertion loss of the
> mechanical filters in the 51J4 - which is nothing more than a 51J3 with
the
> mechanical filter conversion kit installed. Am I nuts, or does anyone
else
> feel this way? I love a nice 51J3/R-388 for general SWL'ing.
>
> Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of DAN COTSIRILOS
> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 3:20 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Collins] R388 51j-3
>
>
> I haven't had a 388 51j3 in a long time! The audio is fantastic. I know
the
> J4's are the coveted ones but they don't hold a candle to the crystal
filter
> audio. Its like hi-fi!! Dan
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
> text/plain (text body -- kept)
> text/html
> The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
> or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed. To learn how
> to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html ---
>
>