[Hallicrafters] sx 110

[jeremy-ca]

At least back then you only had the "poor" receiver and others keyclicks to 
deal with. The average station was well under 100W to much simpler antennas.

Now you have phase noise and all sorts of non linear distortion crud, spurs 
up and down the band, etc. Some of the early synthesized rigs in particular 
were horrible and they are dirt cheap so they are still popular.

Also, it now seems that at least a KW is needed to contact a local.

Carl
KM1H


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Glen Zook" <gzook at yahoo.com>
To: <WA1KBQ at aol.com>; <hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 8:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Hallicrafters] sx 110


> When I was a Novice Class in 1959 "the" Novice Class
> and early General Class station was a Heath DX-40 and
> a Hallicrafters SX-99.  Myself, I had a WRL Globe
> Chief 90A and Hallicrafters S-107 (reboxed S-53A) and
> upgraded to a Hallicrafters S-85 about a year after
> upgrading to General Class, then shortly thereafter I
> replaced the Globe Chief with a Heath DX-100.  There
> were a lot of Novice Class using the S-38 series,
> National SW-54, and Heath AR-3 receivers.
>
> The receivers drifted, many were basically deaf above
> 14 MHz, the bandpass was "broad as a barn", etc.
> However, no one ever told us how "bad" our receivers
> were so we acquired a cebreal filter, just used them,
> didn't complain about QRM, made thousands of contacts,
> and, basically, "had a ball".
>
> Not many amateur radio operators in those days owned
> Collins or the "top of the line" by any manufacturer.
> In general, at least 90% of the receivers that were in
> general use until at least the last half of the 1960s
> were junk by today's standards.  When I hear someone
> complain about QRM on SSB from stations 5 KHz away or
> from CW stations 2 KHz away I start thinking that it
> should be a requirement that all new amateur radio
> operators have to operate for a year using the wide
> bandwith, drift prone, deaf as a doornail above 14
> MHz, etc.  Then after they were allowed to operate
> with "modern" equipment the number of QRM complaints
> would be almost zero!
>
> Glen, K9STH
>
>
>
>
> --- WA1KBQ at aol.com wrote:
>
> I don't think the SX-110 receiver really had a
> matching transmitter. With the addition of an s-meter
> and a crystal filter the SX-110 was the deluxe version
> of the S-108. I would call the S-108/ SX-110  series a
> short-wave listener receiver rather than a
> communications receiver though it does have a
> stand-by/ rec switch. The S-108/ SX-110 was the final
> iteration of the original 1939 S-20R. Hallicrafters
> sure got a lot of mileage  from that one basic circuit
> over the years and you can trace the lineage all the
> way through starting with S-20R and then on to S-40,
> then  to S-85 (and SX-99), which led to S-108/ SX-110.
> The tube types evolved a little but the circuit was
> essentially the old S-20R circuit which by the way was
> pretty good considering what it cost. I have always
> thought the S-20R was hands down the best buy at the
> time and offered the most bang for the buck in 1940.
> As others  have already mentioned the SX-111 was the
> intended match for the HT-37. SX-111 covered amateur
> bands only in CW-AM-SSB modes with a product detector
> (at least in the later versions) and was a real
> communications receiver. I have used them  and they
> are actually quite good though not as mechanically
> robust as an SX-101  or SX-101A.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Glen, K9STH
>
> Website:  http://k9sth.com
>
>
> 
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> ______________________________________________________________