[Test-Equipment] ESI 250-DA vs ESI 250-DE Impedance Bridges

[chearn at widomaker.com]

Mike, 

Having owned both GR-1650A/B and ESI 250-DA, I find the GR easier and faster to
use.  Maybe I never developed a proficiency with the ESI.  I do like the ESI
magic-eye indicators, but they are getting expensive to replace.  The LV
electrolytic capacitors used in the GR unit are failure-prone - I have had to
replace several.  Cheers, Chase/K4AFW



ting "Michael D. Harmon" <mharmon at att.net>:

> Hi Folks,
> 
> I've been looking for an impedance bridge for some time, and had
> really had my heart set on a GR 1650 A or B, but I saw an ESI 250-DA
> bridge for a real steal on EB at y and couldn't resist, so I bought it.
> 
> What I'd like to know is -- how does the ESI 250-DA compare to the
> 250-DE and the GR 1650-series bridges? I know the 250-DA is
> hollow-state technology, but that doesn't bother me, as long as I can
> find replacement tubes if I need them. I think the 250-DE is solid state.
> 
> How do the bridges compare with regard to capabilities? My primary
> requirement is to be able to identify capacitors (esp air variables),
> RF coils, and filter chokes scrounged from cannibalized gear. I have
> a couple of nice dip meters (a Measurements 59 and a solid-state
> Heathkit), but being able to read out values instead of running
> numbers through a formula will be nice.
> 
> Any info would be appreciated. I'm especially curious to know whether
> I should still keep my eyes open for a GR 1650A/B.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Mike, WB0LDJ
> mharmon at att dot net
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Test-Equipment mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/test-equipment
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:Test-Equipment at mailman.qth.net
>