[R-390] looking around for r390-a

[Paul H. Anderson]

On Sat, 29 Jun 2002, Tom M. wrote:

> First, all radios we made to the same specification.  Short of a very
> few spec busts which are uncommon, and after 40 years of aging, I don't
> think one brand is necessarily better than the other with the possbile
> exception of the 67 EAC.

Some differences exist, however.  The slug rack rollers seemed better on
earlier units.  RF decks on earlier units have ceramic wafers.  Someone
with more general experience can tell which models have which.

Be careful to remember that there are two EAC contracts - everyone has
mentioned the 67 EAC, but there was an earlier 60(?) EAC contract where
there would be some differences.

But the main point is, after 40 years, they're mostly facing the same
problems - leaky audio filter caps, under AF deck electrolytic cap, maybe
not so not mechanical filters (recall recent thread about the goo in
them).

> If you find a sound hull, it can nearly always be brought up to peak
> cond. with a bit of TLC.  These radios are very robust and hard to
> break.

I agree 100%.  They are amazingly robust - a testament to the design and
manufacturing of these units.

One other thing - a dirty unit is not necessarily a bad unit - just be
careful that what you're looking at isn't hiding corrosion.  The best unit
to spend your money and time restoring is one that will look great when
you're done, and that means the least amount of corrosion and physical
damage.  Even in spite of corrosion and physical damage, you can still
usually repair them.

Paul