[Hammarlund] HQ-110 question...or five...

[Kenneth G. Gordon]

On 9 Jun 2011 at 0:00, lardiere at ix.netcom.com wrote:

> Ken,
> 
> Buy an HQ-170!  (easy to find, fixes all the 110 problems.)

I have heard from multiple sources that the HQ-170 is a real sleeper and an excellent buy. I 
have had my eye out for one for some time now. When fund become available, I'll get one.

>  Or, buy
> an HC-10 and plug it into the HQ-110 (hard to find and very expensive,
> but this was Hammarlund's answer to your questions). 

I have also been watching for an HC-10:all I have seen have sold for FAR more than I would 
be willing to pay! :-)

> 
> Or - something I have thought about for years - incorporate a decent
> AGC into the 110 that works on CW/SSB.  Could be solid state.  That
> would be a popular item for this particular receiver.

I have a most excellent and simple AGC circuit which was published in Electric Radio 
magazine some time ago. I intend to implement that as soon as I can.

I also intend to completely rebuild the CW/SSB detector circuit. The one in the HQ-110 quite 
simply stinks, although, given the state of the art at the time, it was probably unusually good. 
It was most certainly better than the common diode detector and too-little BFO injection that 
most had at that time. But considering what we have now, it REALLY stinks!!!

And the audio needs to be "tweaked", but that is simple and has already been done.

>  As for the
> drift, etc., I just live with it on mine.

According to an article I recently read on this subject, the author discovered that Sylvania 
brand 6C4s and 6BE6s were FAR better with regard to drift and reliability than any other 
brand. However, FINDING Sylvania branded tubes is difficult.

I DO know, since I have a passle of 6C4s, that spending a couple of hours trying various 
ones resulted in substantial reduction of drift. Trouble is, they don't STAY that way for very 
long.

>  For serious work on the
> higher bands, I go to the Drakes and Collins. 

And I use any of several of my older rigs for that too, mostly Heathkits, although some ex-
military...or my TS-940SAT.

> If you succeed with any upgrades, you would be a popular guy.

Oh, I will succeed all right: however, the work involved may not be the choice of many owners 
of the receiver. I tend to get stubborn concerning things like this. I see potential, and then 
enjoy seeing just how far I can take that...probably to an extreme...but it IS fun.

>  There
> are a LOT of 110s on the shelves out there.  They are relatively
> small, good looking, and could be very usable with some basic
> upgrades. 

And, in my opinion, they are actually a very good receiver. Mine exhibits unusually good 
sensitivity, less than 1 microvolt clear up through 6 meters, and the selectivity is quite good.

The "Q-multiplier" works unusually well....when properly aligned...

I very much wish I had had one of these when I was a new Novice back in 1956 instead of 
the Heathkit AR-3 I did have...

I used the HQ-110 and my original DX-35 in a Classic Exchange a few years ago, and really 
liked the combo.

Thanks for the notes and encouragement, and vy 73,

Ken W7EKB