[Johnson] Is the Johnson Viking II better than Heathkit DX 100 ?

[Sherrill Watkins]

Gentlemen: I would like to offer my observations on this subject. While I
have never owned a DX-100, but from reading articles in ELECTRIC RADIO
MAGAZINE, I do not think that there is any question that the overall lever of
quality of the components used in the Viking II are of a better level of
quality than the DX-100, except for the size of the transformer. To my way of
thinking, having the VFO outside the transmitter cabinet is one major
advantage for the Viking II. This is especially true for servicing and
repair. If one applies the modifications that appeared in the three part
article about eight years ago in ELECTRIC RADIO MAGAZINE, by Thomas Bonomo
(sp?) the Viking II audio will sound of "Voice of America Quality". I prefer
the Viking II for these reasons and also its broader frequency coverage
including 160 meters. Also, while I have never seen any scientific tests to
support this, I believe the rotary inductor coil and the better quality of
variable capacitors with wider plate spacing used in the output circuit of
the Viking II will enable it to tune a greater range of reactance for use
into random length antennas than the bandswitching DX-100? To repeat myself,
this is just SPECULATION on my part as I have not seen any tests performed in
this area. - 73's - Sherrill W. k4own.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Glen Zook [mailto:gzook at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 11:08 PM
To: Ron Samchuk; Johnson at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Johnson] re: Viking II better than Heathkit DX 100


I disagree!  The Johnson Viking II was a good
transmitter.  But, various features of the DX-100
(especially the built in VFO) made it, in my opinion,
better than the Viking II.  I have never owned a
Viking II but I have worked on several for others.  My
present DX-100 is part of my re-creation of my 2nd
primary station from late 1960.

There are going to be people who favor one transmitter
or the other.  The Viking II did cover the entire 160
meter through 10 meter range including "general
coverage" frequencies inbetween amateur bands.  The
modulator in the DX-100 was better, the rig had a
built in VFO, and the multiplier and driver tubes were
12BY7 types which, in general, work better than the
6AQ5 tubes that Johnson used for the same stages in
the Viking II.

Glen, K9STH

--- Ron Samchuk <samvideo at escape.ca> wrote:

I agree... the Viking II is a better transmitter than
the Heathkit DX 100.  Johnson made really good
transmitters!  Probably one of the most widely known
Canadian AM stations (Doug VE4BX) always told me that
Johnson made good transmitters. 

Glen, K9STH

Web sites

http://home.comcast.net/~k9sth
http://home.comcast.net/~zcomco

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
Johnson mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/johnson
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
Post: mailto:Johnson at mailman.qth.net