[Hallicrafters] What was the summit of Hallicrafters , performance wise?

[Steven Grant, W4IIV]

some would say the SX-88, some the SX-42, or SX-28.
 
I say it was the SX101a....heres why...IF notch,
selectable 
selectivity, 2 ways of attenuating the signal (the
trimmer (my fave) or the RF 
gain) selectable AGC, a good noise limiter, and my
101a is very stable 
(just clean the band switch when needed, and make sure
the capacitor 
stator is tight)
Plus there is a way of doing an "IF shift" just move
the BFO off and 
tune over.
really cuts the QRM
 
steven  W4IIV 


Bill Gerhold <k2wh at optonline.net> wrote:In my opinion,
a receiver is a receiver is a receiver. I have
compared
a state of the art (mine) ICOM 756pro next to an
SX-111 receiver
switching
rapidly between both. Anything the pro could here, the
111 heard just
as
well. Collins? Yes, the KWM-2, 2a R-390 etc. I have
used them also and
they never outperformed a good Hallicrafters receiver.
They all heard
the same thing. Stability, and construction, the
Collins won/wins
easily.

Now if we are talking about bells and whistles, then
of course current
transceivers win with DSP, notching, band pass tuning
etc. As to the
pinnacle of Hallicrafters receives, not sure. Of
course the low value
or mass produced receivers such as the S-38 were poor
receivers. But,
move on up to the SX-111 and beyond, as I said, just
as good a receiver
as today's receivers IMHO.

73 from K2WH 
Hallicrafters, The Radio Mans Radio
http://www.w9wze.org/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/The19Group/


-----Original Message-----
From: hallicrafters-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:hallicrafters-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of Jim
Brannigan
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 19:29 PM
To: Clemens S.Ostergaard;
hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Hallicrafters] What was the summit of
Hallicrafters
,performancewise?

I don't think that any American made receiver of the
50's , 60's 70's
came
close to Collins receivers.
The stability, mixing scheme and mechanical filters,
just blew the
competition away.......
Of course, Art Collins had Curtis Lemay and the US
Treasury to support
his
R&D. Hams were a secondary market for Collins
products.

Jim

> 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

______________________________________________________________
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



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com