[Heathkit] Heathkit SB-301 Performance Note
jack m
oldvette at hotmail.com
Mon Feb 18 13:40:08 EST 2013
Dale, One more thing - I also had a complete set of Drake 4-line equipment up to 10 years ago - 1st issue, A's, B's then C's, TR's, RV's, MN's, L-4B - the whole line. While the rigs performed reasonably well, I greatly preferrred the B-Line edition to the C-Line, primarily due to the filter arrangement, and I really liked the looks of the copper chassis if it wasn't all corroded. But I've always considered the Heath SB Line and Collins equipment to be superior in performance. When I needed space (for more Collins and Heath stuff), I decided to sell all the Drakes. That sale continues to finance my hobby! Jack
> From: heathkit-request at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Heathkit Digest, Vol 109, Issue 14
> To: heathkit at mailman.qth.net
> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:00:06 -0500
>
> Send Heathkit mailing list submissions to
> heathkit at mailman.qth.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/heathkit
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> heathkit-request at mailman.qth.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> heathkit-owner at mailman.qth.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Heathkit digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. performance of sb-301 (yash at aol.com)
> 2. belden 8421 (yash at aol.com)
> 3. Re: performance of sb-301 (Glen Zook)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:01:42 -0500 (EST)
> From: "yash at aol.com" <yash at aol.com>
> To: heathkit at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [Heathkit] performance of sb-301
> Message-ID: <8CFDBFFFF1A302C-6D8-30DA at webmail-d087.sysops.aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Just finished going thru the 301, all the usual stuff, replacing caps, out of tolerance resisters and doing a complete test equipment alignment,all came out just fine ,as per the manual. Have worked on a lot of boat anchors over the years and run a Drake 4 line ,all the time. I was very disappointed with the 301,comparing it to the drake, several swans and a ken wood ts-599. Keeping in mind that these rigs are what they are, the Heath 301 doesn't even come close, to the performance of all the others. Iam I overlooking something with the 301? Gone back and read the old reviews and writ ups in QST and the other out of print mags, all gave the 301 decent marks. I find few if any mod's for the 301 shown anywhere,please let me know of a source, about the rig. I guess I expected more from the old rig. Iam seriously wonder if its worth the trouble to go ahead and rework the 401 transmitter and put them on the air as a working set of Heath twins.
> I would sure like to hear from others concerning their results with the 300/301 receiver and as using as a twin setup.
> thanks
> dale wt4t
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:46:43 -0500 (EST)
> From: "yash at aol.com" <yash at aol.com>
> To: heathkit at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [Heathkit] belden 8421
> Message-ID: <8CFDC064896A9F4-6D8-3CFA at webmail-d087.sysops.aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I Found a guy with 40' of belden 8421 cable the other day and bought it. Made a set of INJ and OSC cables and have the rest of the remaining cable. If any one in the group is interested in some of the cable,would be happy to cut it into the proper 38' LENGTHS and ship it out. Iam asking for 4.00 for 2, 37" sections ,mailed. Please get back if any interest.
> thanks
> dale wt4t
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 08:04:18 -0800 (PST)
> From: Glen Zook <gzook at yahoo.com>
> To: "yash at aol.com" <yash at aol.com>, "heathkit at mailman.qth.net"
> <heathkit at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: Re: [Heathkit] performance of sb-301
> Message-ID:
> <1361203458.65803.YahooMailNeo at web160103.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> My SB-301 works fine! ?It is the second one that I have had over the years, the first one being built new in 1968. ?In late 1972, I acquired a Collins 75S-3A (considered by many to be the best of the S-Line receivers) and ran the SB-301 in parallel with the 75S-3A before deciding to go ahead and obtain the matching 32S-3 transmitter. ?This was done for about 6-weeks. ?In 9 out of 10 situations, the SB-301 performed as well as the 75S-3A. ?It was that 10th time that made me go ahead and get a 32S-3 transmitter. ?Things like rejection tuning and slightly steeper "skirts" on the SSB filter, combined with the 200 Hz CW filter instead of the 400 Hz filter in the SB-301 made the difference.
>
> I have worked on a number of Drake R-4 series receivers over the years and definitely prefer the SB-301 to those. ?There is no comparison with any of the Swan units that I have serviced. ?The SB-301 is considerably better.
>
> Presently, I use my SB-301 / SB-401 combination on 160-meters with a home brew transverter (?http://k9sth.com/uploads/transceiver_discription-1.pdf ) and with transverters for 2-meters and 222 MHz. ?On 160-meters, I find the transverter plus SB-301 combination easier to use than my Collins 75A-4.
>
> The SB-300 is not quite as good as the SB-301.
>
> Glen, K9STH
>
>
> Website: http://k9sth.com
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "yash at aol.com" <yash at aol.com>
> To: heathkit at mailman.qth.net
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 9:01 AM
> Subject: [Heathkit] performance of sb-301
>
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Just finished going thru the 301, all the usual stuff, replacing caps, out of tolerance resisters and doing a complete test equipment alignment,all came out just fine ,as per the manual. Have worked on a lot of boat anchors over the years? and run a Drake 4 line ,all the time. I was very disappointed with the 301,comparing it to the drake, several swans and a ken wood ts-599. Keeping in mind that these rigs are what they are, the Heath 301 doesn't even come close, to the performance of all the others. Iam I overlooking something with the 301? Gone back and read the old reviews and writ ups in QST and the other out of print mags, all gave the 301 decent marks. I find few if any mod's for the 301 shown anywhere,please let me know of a source, about the rig. I guess I expected more from the old rig. Iam seriously wonder if its worth the trouble to go ahead and rework the 401 transmitter and put them on the air as a
> working set of Heath twins.
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? I would sure like to hear from others concerning their results with the 300/301 receiver and as using as a twin setup.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Heathkit mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/heathkit
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Heathkit 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
>
> End of Heathkit Digest, Vol 109, Issue 14
> *****************************************
More information about the Heathkit
mailing list