[R-390] R-390A Cost Reduction and Improvements (was dead horse Hi)

[Todd Bigelow - PS]

Barry Hauser wrote:

>Well, Jim, there's more than one way to read the product brochure.  As far
>as beating dead horses is concerned -- preferred here as beating live ones
>would be cruelty to animals. ;-)
>
>Let's review, maybe one last time ... (right)
>  
>
<snip good clarification info>

>As for which version is a better one now -- 40-50 years later?  It depends
>more on condition of the individual unit, including any
>restoration/recapping that's been done as well as personal preferences --
>not to mention pot luck of what you come across at what price.
>  
>
This is more accurately what determines the 'best' radio to an 
individual. After all, if you 'cost-reduce' a viable product into 
something less, is it not 'cheaper' by intent? When writing it all up, 
you pretty much have to justify your decisions to change this or remove 
that, in a positive light (of course). Otherwise, who'd agree to the 
program/plan?

They knew they had a winner with the R-390, so it makes some sense that 
they'd want to strip it down a bit or 'streamline' the process with the 
thought of mass production. Adding mechanical filters wasn't cheap either.

The "A" model is certainly more plentiful and therefore, more popular. 
Familiarity has alot to do with it, but it's just a great radio 
none-the-less. Still, you cannot beat its namesake, the good ol' R-390, 
for overall performance and construction. Comparing the "A" to the R-390 
is a lot like comparing a Bentley to a Rolls Royce. It's not a case of 
comparing a Toyota to a Rolls or even a Lincoln (I feel a car thread 
approaching!).

>Gotta go put the dead horse back in the freezer.
>
While you're in there, wanna grab me another cold can of that black 
stuff from capacitor innards? Whassat called again? You know, the gooey 
stuff......

Solve the great debate of R-390 vs. A - drive both!!   (o:

Boomer,  KA1KAQ