[HBR] One more quick question - HR10

[Peter Bertini]

Since the HR-10 frequency doubles the LO on the upper bands (one reason it
sucked so much)  would it possible to preserve the dial calibration when
using
plug in coils?

Pete

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Walt Hutchens <waltah at earthlink.net>wrote:

> Bill Cromwell said:
>
> > I am going to use my HR-10 (not)B as the foundation for
> > my HBR. I am going to remove the xtal filter and do the dual conversion
> > with the 85 kc cans from the BC-453 type receiver (I have the cans). I
> > will be looking for another set of IF cans for the HR-10 to use with the
> > xtal filter and then I will be able to build *two* HBRs! The second will
> > go on the stripped down chassis I have from a Knight Star Roamer.
>
> I probably should not even offer suggestions about the direction of another
> HBR-er's project:  I'm the guy who just spent the last five years or so
> learning how to build a decent series string ham receiver, right?   (And
> for
> my next trick, maybe I'll do something REALLY useful, like sketch the
> circuit diagram on the head of a pin?)
>
> But ... the great advantage of the HR-10 is that it is close to all the
> basic parts for an HBR project, all compatible, and all there in one
> package
> without a bunch of gritty metalwork and force-fitting.   The scheme above
> keeps the dial and tuning cap but pretty much recreates all the other hard
> parts of HBR construction.   In particular there's going to be a space
> issue
> with those command set IF cans:  The usual plan uses four of them, plus two
> IF stages and a second mixer so that's three tubes and four IFTs to be
> added
> with at most two tubes, two (miniature) IFTs, and the crystals subtracted.
> I don't have the receiver in front of me now, but I'm thinking 'maybe ...
> but it'll likely need a cutout and plate so you can squeeze things
> properly.'
>
> (I've no idea what the difference between an HR-10 and a 10B is, but it is
> slight.)
>
> Resale value of an HR-10?   As a complete unbuilt kit, $500-up.   (Yeah
> really ... personally I don't get it, but people collect the darndest
> things.)   As a good original non-smoker working radio, perfect exterior,
> maybe $100-$125?  'I don't know what this is, it lights up, probably just
> needs a couple of tubes,' with non-original knobs $50 +/- a bit.   Those
> are
> eBay prices; at a hamfest they'd be less.
>
> (I expect we all know how to translate 'probably just needs a couple of
> tubes.'  The phrase means 'you are going to spend a week finding all the
> bad
> connections, frozen-solid controls, and other oddball problems in this
> sucker ...')
>
> These are not your father's Collins 51S for resale value.
>
> The Knight Star Roamer is the next step down from the HR-10 and at $37.35,
> just about half the price.   It's a contemporary, but only four tubes
> (6BE6-6HR6-12AX7-6AK6 plus a selenium rectifier and solid state diodes in
> the detector/AVC jobs) and pretty much along the lines of the S-38 and
> similar sets.   There's an overview, here:
>
> http://www.ohio.edu/people/postr/bapix/StarRmr.htm
>
> I'd say this set was a better match to its intended market than the HR-10
> was to its.   It's a very limited set, but at the price, probably okay for
> the beginning SWL who might someday get interested in a ham license.
> There's no sign of a BFO, so by 1970 it would have been obsolete.
>
> I haven't looked at a diagram but with that description it'll have a
> two-gang capacitor (not suited to an HBR) and no sharp filter in the IF.
> Also, that transformer probably will NOT handle 6-9 tubes -- it has perhaps
> 1/3 the filament power and half the plate power needed.   As you imply, a
> separate power supply would be required.
>
> Thinking of the Star Roamer as project foundation might better start down a
> notch from the HBRs.   Maybe something along the lines of the Simple-X
> Super?  With a very high Q antenna coil (and very loose coupling to the
> antenna) you might get an interesting set.   If using a separate power
> supply then perhaps a beam mixer (with separate oscillator) and mechanical
> filter?   That would be a very poor man's Miser's Dream.   Might not have
> enough gain for a mechanical filter though.
>
> I'd say do the HBR first.  That ground has been well plowed; lots of people
> know what works and what doesn't.  My pipe dreams (in the previous
> paragraph) might be no more than that.
>
> Walt
> KJ4KV
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> HBR mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:HBR at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>