[Hallicrafters] SX-117

[Carl]

I use a SX-115/HT-32B/NCL-2000

Big radios look better. If I want small I can use the TS-830.

Carl
KM1H




----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kc9cdt at aol.com>
To: <ka1kaq at gmail.com>; <k9cox at charter.net>
Cc: <hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Hallicrafters] SX-117


> In my case I also have to consider the fact that the SX-117 tranceives 
> with my HT-44. My SX-115 does not.
> So, what a delima, keep the SX-115 for better performance  and not have 
> transceive or keep the SX-117 for it's matching looks and function with 
> the HT-44?
> 
> BUT...one more thing to the mix here...I also have a mint HT-32B (I got 
> it this year and have not had time to bring it up and check t out)
> I could use the SX-115 with the HT32B in normal Xmit/Rcv mose like the 
> old days....But then I may not have room aon my ham tables to put my 
> coffee!!
> 
> One of the RX's and one of the TX's must go as I can't justify keeping 
> both.
> 
> Any opinions, experiences etc??
> 
> 73,
> Lee
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Todd, KA1KAQ <ka1kaq at gmail.com>
> To: Ross Stenberg <k9cox at charter.net>
> Cc: hallicrafters <hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Sat, Nov 27, 2010 6:17 pm
> Subject: Re: [Hallicrafters] SX-117
> 
> 
> I think one component that is missing here is value vs performance.
> The SX-115 is indeed a superior performer to the 117 and most others
> for SSB work. Unless you find a real bargain, it's considerably more
> money to buy although prices are down a lot in the last two years. The
> other drawback to the 115 is that it uses only one sideband for AM and
> lacks 160m. But performance-wise, it's tough to beat. Selective,
> sensitive, and rock-stable.
> 
> SX-117 is a decent performer and tough to beat for the average price.
> Best bang for the buck when compared to something like the SX-88 or
> even 75A-4, neither of which I'd consider a good value-to-cost
> example.
> 
> The SX-73 is tough to beat. Excellent performance, geared tuning,
> milspec construction, and reasonably priced compared to the two
> receivers above. Roughly the cost of a clean SX-28A.
> 
> The trick is to decide what the vague term "Best" means to you and
> why, then go from there. Best performance overall? Best bang for the
> buck? Best looks? Best advertising campaign?
> 
> Hallicrafters is known for producing many marginal performers over the
> years, but they also had some real gems and downright good radios in
> the mix. Sifting through the chaff to find the latter is part of the
> fun.
> 
> ~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4
> 
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 12:42 PM, Ross Stenberg <k9cox at charter.net> 
> wrote:
>> I agree, the SX-117 is sort of a sleeper. Great performance but never 
> really
>> thought of it as a boatanchor since was introduced in the mid 60's 
> and one
>> could easily lift it. I have one for sale if interested. Really good 
> shape
>> and not cheap however.
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
> List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
> ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com **
> 
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
> List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
> ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com ** 
> 
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html