[Heathkit] RE: SB-200

[crawfish]

I made that statement on the AMPS reflector last winter and got a lot of
negative comments. So recently I unsubscribed from them, and decided to stay
on lists with people who can speak from experience. I liked the comments
from a HK once who said his 4-el. quad at 25 meters high was his"linear
amplifier in the air".I had two stations in two different areas cut their
power back from 1500 to 500, and there was no difference in readability.This
was on 6 meters, one was 1200 miles away, the other 2200 miles away.Good
info all away around!!
                                  Joe W4AAB----- Original Message -----
From: "WA3GIN in Alex. City, VA" <wa3gin at erols.com>
To: <kgordon2006 at verizononline.net>; <Heathkit at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 5:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Heathkit] RE: SB-200


...and also remember that double the power is 3db. So, the difference
between 500 watts and 1,000 watts is hardly worth the energy to product the
extra 3 db.  With AGC, DSP, DNL, BC, one probably can't hear the difference,
let alone see it on a segmented "S" meter display or on an old analog meter.
I'd spare the tube, reduce the electrical bill, run 500 watts and use the
saved money to purchase a beam antenna with 10 db gain.  That 10 db is
noticeable and the power company can't charge you for it, HAHA.

73,
dave
wa3gin


-----Original Message-----
From: heathkit-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:heathkit-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Kenneth G. Gordon
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 5:54 PM
To: Heathkit at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Heathkit] RE: SB-200

On 26 Jul 2006 at 18:34, Cam and Juli Hedrick wrote:

> I have an SB-230 that I reworked into a SB-200 style.  My output is
> 620 watts keyed down.  Amprex 572B tubes in it and are great
> tubes....20 years old, but only 2 years use.  Meter 2500VDC and .520
> ma, hmmm, a nice amplifier saved.

OK. Thanks for the data. If we assume that your meter readings are
absolutely correct (foolish assumption, but good enough for this
discussion), i.e. we ignore meter and visual errors, then you are
running it at 1300 watts input.

At 620 watts output, that is 47% efficiency, which is right in the ball-park

for these types of amps.

As I said, 800 to 900 watts output with the rig as designed by Heathkit
is pretty difficult for me to accept.

They are a darned good little amp, but they aren't SuperMan either, and
don't/can't violate the laws of physics.

Ken W7EKB
_______________________________________________
List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com **
$$ See the vintage area on the HCI web site - http://www.w9wze.org $$
Heathkit mailing list
Heathkit at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/heathkit


_______________________________________________
List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com **
$$ See the vintage area on the HCI web site - http://www.w9wze.org $$
Heathkit mailing list
Heathkit at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/heathkit