[Milsurplus] Re: [Boatanchors] Somewhat deaf BC-342

[WA5CAB at cs.com]

Actually, I don't totally agree with Al.  I've seen BC-312/342's, BC-348's 
and other models of the vintage where virtually every capacitor in the radio was 
bad.  But I've also seen them where none were bad.  The most common case, 
though, is that all of a particular value of a particular type will be bad with 
maybe some but not all of other types and values.  The last BC-312 I rebuilt I 
had to rebuild every one of the triple .05's and replace the resistors they 
had taken to the grave with them.  Otherwise, there were three others, one of 
which was naturally the hardest one in the set to replace.  After doing it, the 
one that had to be replaced in one of the IF transformers seemed simple by 
comparison.  :-)  Which I wouldn't have said before doing that set!

In a message dated 7/16/2007 3:58:20 PM Central Daylight Time, al at ar88.net 
writes: 
> These receivers were originally populate with the dreaded "Micamold"
> paper bypass capacitors.  All bets are off until they are all replaced.
> Unfortunately, there are caps inside the four sections of the front end
> as well as some of the IF cans.  I restored a BC-312 last year.  I
> really like how it works, but I'm not sure I'd care do it again.
> 
> Good luck,
> Al
> 
> Ian Wilson wrote:
> >I have a radio that I am fairly sure was originally a BC-342. It has a
> >number of modifications,
> >one of which has mounted an S-meter over the nameplate <g>. In 
> >addition to
> >this, the
> >crystal filter control is gone, and there is a very well-constructed 
> >power
> >supply in place
> >of the original..........
> >
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab at cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab at houston.rr.com> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20070716/649861b7/attachment.htm