[Hallicrafters] What was the summit of Hallicrafters , performancewise?

[Rich Oliver]

Clemens,

I have no answers but two comments.  First, Bill Halligan set out to 
produce the best receivers the state of the art would allow.  They did 
indeed build some of the finest receivers of their time, but the greater 
impact was their many inexpensive, enty level sets, like the 5-T Sky 
Buddy my father bought in 1936.

The second comment goes back to the "of their time" business.  You might 
have to include the DD-1 on your list as a contender for the best 
receiver of its time (1938).

Cheers, Rich, KC9GQ

Clemens S.Ostergaard wrote:
> This discussion may have run earlier, or many times, I am fairly new to 
> the list. If there is a consensus already, please just refer me to that.
> 
> My question really is: Among general coverage tube receivers what was 
> the pinnacle of performance reached by Hallicrafters? Collins had the 
> R-390A and the 51J-4. National had HRO-60, Hammarlund had SP-600,  Racal 
> had the RA-17, Siemens the EK-07, Eddystone the 880/2, and so on . If it 
> was the SX-88 why was it not produced in greater numbers? Too expensive, 
> too difficult to maintain? Is the SX-73 in the running? Did 
> Hallicrafters not really go for government contracts? Which receiver 
> would the Hallicrafters list decide to put in the field against the above?
> 
> Best,
> 
> 
> Clemens S.Ostergaard
> Denmark
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Hallicrafters mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hallicrafters
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:Hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net
> ----
> List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF **for assistance**
> dfischer at usol.com
> ----
> Hallicrafters Collectors International: http://www.w9wze.org
> 
>