[Milsurplus] Hacked-Up BC-342 Question

[Al Klase]

Joe,

Yes, a 6SK7 would make sense, but I wouldn't use a 6SH7 or 6SJ7.  People 
don't understand the difference between remote-cutoff and sharp-cutoff 
pentodes.  The latter will compromise both the AVC and manual RF gain 
control action.

Actually, I'd back off to the 6K7 for historical accuracy.  (But, not a 
6J7. :-) )

Al

On 6/21/2012 6:30 PM, Joe Connor wrote:
> I just started working on a very hacked-up BC-342 that was stashed away in my basement. The cosmetics are a nightmare.
>   
> On first inspection, I see that the 1st RF tube, which is supposed to be an 6K7 (VT-86), is actually a 6SH7. The grid cap is missing and the former grid-cap lead is apparently wired to the underside of the tube socket.
>   
> Is anyone familiar with this mod? Does a 6SH7 make sense in this application? If not, what non grid-cap tube makes sense? If the prior owner simply wanted to use a non grid-cap tube, wouldn't the 6SK7 make more sense?
>   
> As always, thanks for your advice.
>   
>   
>   
>                                         Joe Connor
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2179 / Virus Database: 2437/5084 - Release Date: 06/21/12
>

-- 
Al Klase - N3FRQ
Jersey City, NJ
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/