[Hallicrafters] SX-88 Value Controversy
Carl
km1h at jeremy.mv.com
Sun Feb 8 13:36:36 EST 2009
A better question would be to list the ones that were not.
Carl
KM1H
----- Original Message -----
From: <WA1KBQ at aol.com>
To: <km1h at jeremy.mv.com>; <hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Hallicrafters] SX-88 Value Controversy
> Which production National receivers were equipped with Litz wound IF
> transformers?
>
> -Greg Gore
>
> In a message dated 2/7/2009 10:04:10 P.M. US Eastern Standard Time,
> km1h at jeremy.mv.com writes:
> You seem to be regularly harping about the IF Q, here and AMfone.
> I'll
> have to agree with W3JN.
>
> I guess youve never been into many National receivers. They built
> their
> own IF transformers and LC selectivity networks using Litz wire and
> even
> cup cores which blow away your UNLOADED 180 Q.
>
> When they closed most of their components operation I bought bins of
> Litz wire and still have loads of it in numerous sizes.
>
> Drake managed very impressive LC filtering in the 2A/2B and even
> better
> up thru the R4-B.
>
> Recent experiments with toroids as IF transformers has yielded
> unloaded
> Q's in the 240-250 range at the frequencies of interest. The next
> purchase will hopefully be a coil winder to facilitate experiments and
> restorations.
>
> 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 9:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [Hallicrafters] SX-88 Value Controversy- Pictures
>
>
>> 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)
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>
More information about the Hallicrafters
mailing list