[Milsurplus] BC-348Q, R

[Mike Morrow]

Hue wrote:

>I saw an ad for "V & H Surplus" from RTV-News magazine, 1954.
>The ad said they wanted to buy ART-13's, of course, but also
>BC-348, and the ad said "bonus paid for Q and R."  
>Why?

First, I'm unqualified to state anything but my opinion.  Many other list members will have much better input.

I consider the BC-348 series to have been produced in WWII in three generations:

E, M, P - Many double-ended older tubes, VT-48 (41) AF output.
K, L, R - Same as E, M, P except VT-152 (6K6) AF output.
J, N, Q - Big internal redesign using newer single-ended tubes,
             point-to-point wiring, and circuit simplifications such
             as elimination of following features:
             - Antenna alignment trimmer control, 
             - RF stage gain adjustment pot ganged to tuning cap.,
             - Local oscillator voltage regulator. 

The JNQ models would appear to tbe the most modern, but I think that the purpose of their redesign was actually to reduce production costs compared to other versions.   Just look at an R next to a Q and it would seem to me that an R model must have been significantly more expensive to make. 

I can understand an outfit looking for this "latest" model series, but I don't know why it would make much difference as far as selecting between J, N, or Q models other than a Q model would likely have fewer in-service hours on it than J or N models.

The KLR models were produced concurrently with the JNQ models, so a R model likewise would likely have fewer in-service hours on it than K or L models.

Anyway you look at it, a Belmont R model or a Wells-Gardner Q model would have been the last of their respective production series, so maybe that was worth a price premium to the surplus house you mentioned.  It's sometimes hard to keep in mind when looking at post-war surplus ads selling BC-348s for $70 or even complete BC-375s for $50 that those prices translate into about $700 and $500 in today's dollars!

Just my guess, anyway.

I preferred to match a P model to the BC-375-E in my SCR-287, since the older tubes in the P design come closer to being contemporary with the ancient tubes of the BC-375.   I preferred to match a Q model to the T-47A/ART-13 in my AN/ARC-8, since the electrical design of the Q model is more closely contemporary with that of the T-47A.  The R model would be my second choice for my AN/ARC-8.  I don't think there was a finer airborne HF radio system anywhere in the world during WWII than the AN/ARC-8.

Mike / KK5F