[Hallicrafters] SX-88 Value Controversy- Pictures

[WA1KBQ at aol.com]

Government contracts are approved or not  approved for any one of a myriad of 
reasons, not because there is something  wrong with the receiver. The 
responsibility for correcting a fault in the design  rests solely with the 
engineering department. Clearing inventory due to a missed  government contract or 
producing an engineering benchmark for "halo receiver"  bragging rights by selling 
at a loss Hallicrafters still managed to put a few  more SX-88s out there in 
one year than National did NC-400s regardless of the  high price. The 
Hallicrafters SX-88 is the only production receiver ever sold  with Litz wound 50KC IF 
transformers having a "Q" of over 180. Did you ever  question the brass 
threaded adjusters in most receiver's IF transformers? The  presence of brass spoils 
"Q" but installing threaded brass rod adjusters is less  expensive than 
threading hard brittle ferrite.

-Greg Gore

In a  message dated 2/7/2009 8:22:16 P.M. US Eastern Standard Time, 
km1h at jeremy.mv.com  writes:
With at least 2 production runs that Im aware of and rather extensive  
advertising Id say they were trying to establish a high end foothold and  
not simply clearing inventory.

With the HRO-60 in the same price  range and minus several SX-88 features 
it had about a 14 year successful run  and substantial sales.

With Collins, National, Hammarlund and TMC having  extensive government 
business it makes me wonder what the buyers found wrong  with the SX-88??

Carl
KM1H





----- Original  Message ----- 
From: <WA1KBQ at aol.com>
To:  <hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net>; <km1h at jeremy.mv.com>
Sent:  Saturday, February 07, 2009 7:58 PM
Subject: Fwd: [Hallicrafters] SX-88 Value  Controversy- Pictures


> The fact that it sold in low numbers  (miserably  you said) was because 
> the
> receiver was  originally targeting a government  contract that did not 
>  go
> through. Hallicrafters decided to go through with a  small  production 
> run anyway at a
> loss as a "halo" receiver which  ended up  selling around 500 units 
> over the
> course of one  year but the high price ($5000  in today's dollars) was 
> more  than
> most hams were willing to shell out for a  Hallicrafters.  Around 100 
> have
> been accounted for so far  today.
>
> -Greg  Gore
>
>
> From:  km1h at jeremy.mv.com
> To: WA1KBQ at aol.com,   hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net
> Sent: 2/7/2009 5:35:40 P.M. US Eastern  Standard  Time
> Subj: Re: [Hallicrafters] SX-88 Value  Controversy-  Pictures
>
>
> Why not let Jay, W1VD, run  it thru its paces as he has done  with many
> other vintage radios on  AMfone?
>
> That would settle its  performance pretty well dont  you think?
>
> The one I owned was only about 10  years old  when I got it and as I 
> said
> earlier I wasnt impressed. (As  a  teenager in the 50's I wanted one
> simply for the looks but  reality resulted  in a HQ-129X). Neither were 
> a
> few  engineers at National that put it thru its  paces. Even then it 
>  had
> an aura that it was something more than just a well  built  radio. They
> were primarily comparing it to the NC-400 which has  its  own set of
> problems IMO.
>
> The fact that it sold  miserably speaks  volumes of what prospective
> buyers thought of it  then.
>
> When I sold  it, it was all original so naturally  performance was way
> down in 1998 or so.  My parents used it to  listen to SW classical 
> music
> and gave it back when  they  moved to a condo in NC.
>
> Carl
>  KM1H
>
>
>
> ----- Original  Message ----- 
>  From: <WA1KBQ at aol.com>
> To:   <hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009  3:20  PM
> Subject: Re: [Hallicrafters] SX-88 Value  Controversy-  Pictures
>
>
>> Pictures with short  descriptions of a typical   SX-88 restoration at:
>>   http://amfone.net/Amforum/index.php?topic=17990.20
>>
>>
>>  Go to  the bottom  of page two. This was a recent discussion  at
>>  amfone.net on
>> vintage receiver   performance.
>>
>>  Regards, Greg
>>
>>  **************Who's never won?  Biggest  Grammy Award surprises of  
>> all
>> time on
>> AOL Music.
>>
>  
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?ncid=emlcntusmusi00000003)
>>   ______________________________________________________________
>>   Hallicrafters mailing list
>> Home:   http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hallicrafters
>> Help:   http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post:   mailto:Hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted  by:  http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email  list:  http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>
>  **************Who's never won?  Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all  
> time on
> AOL Music.
>  
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?ncid=emlcntusmusi00000003)
>  

______________________________________________________________
Hallicrafters  mailing list
Home:  http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hallicrafters
Help:  http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post:  mailto:Hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by:  http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list:  http://www.qsl.net/donate.html  

**************Who's never won?  Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on 
AOL Music. 
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?ncid=emlcntusmusi00000003)