[R-390] R-390 restoration and modifications

[scott]

Awww....C'mon Paul....We're just trying to have a little
fun.  The solid state guys need some thicker skin.

Scott


----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul H. Anderson" <pha@pdq.com>
To: <r-390@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 12:40 PM
Subject: [R-390] R-390 restoration and modifications


>
> Folks have written strongly negative postings about modifying R-390's,
> especially with solid state changes to the tube circuits.
>
> I think it is a shame to come down hard on people who want to modify them
> or have done so in the past.
>
> The reason I say that is that the best way to learn about something is to
> take it apart, work on it, fix it, modify it, and so on.  I do this with
> cars, and no one screams about me putting a 302 roller motor shortblock
> into my 1966 Mustang (underneath the CA emissions heads, smog gear, and
> so on).
>
> Sure, there are fewer R-390 and R-390A's than Mustangs.  Some R-390's
> certainly deserve to be saved in as original condition as possible - those
> that are rare and unique - R-389's, pristine R-390's, and so on.
>
> But come on - there are a lot of R-390A's out there that would have been
> dumpster fodder 10 years ago.  Some on the list feel that St Julien Creek
> radios aren't worth bothering with, with good justification (their
> condition isn't worth the time needed to repair them properly).  Other
> people, like me, feel the St Julien Creek radios have enough potential to
> be worth the time, on average.  Certainly some will be lemons, but I
> suspect most clean up to be perfectly adequate radios.
>
> What's wrong with someone experimenting?  Alex wanted to do solid state
> replacements for some hard to find R-392 tubes (26C6) - plug in, sure, but
> what's wrong with some other guy taking a ratty R-390A and experimenting
> with the circuits, trying different approaches to things for the purpose
> of learning, not to mention fun?
>
> I see a lot of conflicting views on this list - "the radio is perfect,
> don't modify it", "the radio has poor AGC, do this mod", "tubes are
> glorious, don't replace them", "let's build a solid state 6082", "diodes
> vs 26Z5W's" , and on and on.  What's the line between solid state being
> good versus bad?  Military obviously used them in the power supplies (and
> probably preferred them).  Heat and power reductions are good - having
> options for when rare tubes are no longer available is good, too.  But a
> little experimenting should be ok, too.
>
> Take the eBay auction for the transistorized R-390A.  They guy said he did
> it long ago - maybe he dug it out of a dumpster recovery missing half its
> parts with broken wiring to boot.  I admire him for having the knowledge
> to fully understand the R-390A well enough to go through and solid state
> everything, and still have it play at the end!  Is it better?  Is it
> faster?  Prettier?  I don't know and I don't care.  He had the balls to do
> something different, enjoyed the result, and shouldn't be persecuted for
> it.
>
> It was pretty painful awhile back seeing many dozens of very hostile
> messages about the person asking about solid stating their R-390A.  It is
> just a radio, and just a hobby.  The museums have as many as they need,
> they last a long time, and there are still plenty to go around.  In the
> long run, we're all gonna be dead, and the radios are probably going into
> dumpsters anyway.
>
> If you're gonna scream about someone solid stating an R-390A (theirs, not
> yours), where's all the hue and cry about parting out radios?  Should
> every R-390A be saved, no matter what the cost?  What about the folks with
> 5 radios (like me, oops) - are they all playing 100% perfect, 100%
> pristine original restored examples, or are they just collecting dust on
> the shelves?
>
> I think it is perfectly appropriate to question if a particular radio
> warrants special preservation or not.  But if it is just a below average
> condition, garden variety R-390A from a garden variety contract, then
> what's the big deal?
>
> Just as there are Mustangs (6 cylinder drivers), and then there are
> _Mustangs_ (boss 429, boss 302, 428 CJ, plus dozens of variants of rare
> combinations), there are R-390's (bottom of the barn scavenging trip
> recoveries, meterless St Julien Creek wonders), and there are _R-390's_
> (about any R-389, a Rick Mish restoration of a NIB R-390, or a low serial
> # 67 contract EAC or many others).
>
> I personally draw the line at drilling holes in a piece of metal that is
> original unmodified.  Many other changes on an R-390 series are hard for
> me to justify for my radios for my purposes.  Other people naturally
> differ.
>
> I think the R-390 restoration hobby has room for both modified radios and
> unmodified.  It would be great to see some more tolerance and acceptance
> of both ends of the hobby.
>
> Thanks for reading,
>
> Paul Anderson
>
> _______________________________________________
> R-390 mailing list
> R-390@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-390