20070823.ba v04_n080.bam.20070823 >From ???@??? Thu Aug 23 18:14:30 2007 -0500 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 18:13:31 CDT From: Old Tube Radios To: Old Tube Radios Subject: BOATANCHORS digest 4080 Message-Id: <20070823231332.C86D83180FE@srvr1.theporch.com> BOATANCHORS Digest 4080 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) RE: Re RAO-7/9 by "Art Lebermann" 2) "I'm going home to mother!" by Jsehring 3) 6AH6 subs by Jsehring 4) 6HS6 sub by Jsehring 5) W8JK by "JAMES HANLON" 6) Re: 6HS6 sub by Dan Arney 7) Re: 6AH6 subs by "Arden Allen" 8) Re: 6AH6 subs by wb3fau@att.net 9) Re: 6HS6 sub by wb3fau@att.net 10) Re: 6AH6 subs by Garey Barrell 11) Bird Wattmeter expert? by Ben Hall 12) Re: 6AH6 subs by "Arden Allen" 13) Re: 6AH6 subs by Garey Barrell 14) RE: Boatanchors list - happy 15th birthday by "Ed Zeranski" 15) New Book: The World of Ham Radio, 1901-1950: A Social History by "Ed Sieb" 16) 1937 coil success by "John Gillespie" 17) Re: 1937 coil success by john 18) Re: 1937 coil success by "John Gillespie" 19) Re: 1937 coil success by "Arden Allen" 20) RE: 1937 coil success by "Ed Zeranski" 21) Help for a 261-A TX by "JAMES HANLON" 22) The 6AH6 dead horse by stuck in 50s 23) Kicking the 6AH6 dead horse by "Arden Allen" 24) No doghouse, but a dog's breakfast by "Morris Odell" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <380-220078517221211953@earthlink.net> From: "Art Lebermann" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: RE: Re RAO-7/9 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:12:11 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Phil.... My manual shows the same cabinet for both of the receivers. The only difference seems to be the RC network in the RF stage grid circuits, in the RAO-9. ART W6REQ > [Original Message] > From: PHIL > To: Old Tube Radios > Date: 8/17/2007 2:04:41 PM > Subject: Re RAO-7/9 > > Going from memory which is not that good, I seem to remember > the RAO-7 had the National NC-100 type cabinet while the > RAO-9 had the Navy cabinet. The Navy had better shielding. > Someone with better memory my clear this up > > Phil > ------------------------------ Subject: "I'm going home to mother!" Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 8:44:22 -0600 From: Jsehring To: Old Tube Radios MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <20070819144417.F38C741B490@filter1.e-filtering.net> Hi All, I've got an acquaintance whose large pickup truck is bristling with antenna= s=2E It looks like an overgrown porcupine! At least three HF antennas, n= umerous VHF/UHF whips, multiple GPS pod-things, etc=2E He kids that, "It's= a vandel's worst nightmare, he wouldn't know which antenna to bend first!" I asked him if his spouse ever rides in or drives this behemoth=2E He look= ed at me with great amusement! =20 It brought to mind a cartoon from QST, late 40's I think, drawn by GIL=2E = It showed a young bride rapidly exiting a car bristlting with antennas=2E = She's sobbing, "I'm going home to mother!" The young lad (ham) looks puzz= led and clueless=2E I expect it was also reproduced in the early ARRL Mobile Handbooks=2E Alas= I have none of those=2E Now I was wondering if anyone could locate & email me a scan of it, off lis= t of course=2E --John WB0EQ/VE6 ------------------------------ Subject: 6AH6 subs Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 8:57:24 -0600 From: Jsehring To: Old Tube Radios MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <20070819145720.CE7A741D90B@filter1.e-filtering.net> Perusal of my Alled Radio catalog of 1969 (the only one I have) shows 6HS6 = at $1=2E85, 6AH6 at $2=2E43, and 6CB6 at $1=2E43=2E Granted, the Drakes rx= 's & tx/'s were designed a couple years before this=2E Today's prices (fr= om Antique Elec Supply) aret $16=2E80, about $2 & about $2, respectively=2E= (I wonder what the deal with the HS is?) The 6JB6A tx sweep tube was only $2=2E43! 6146A was $4=2E30, 6146B/8298A w= as $5=2E15, and 6146W was $6=2E60=2E Today's $, about $25=2E Bear in mind that a nice new 1969 car could be had for about $2800, today's= about $20-25K=2E ------------------------------ Subject: 6HS6 sub Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 8:59:13 -0600 From: Jsehring To: Old Tube Radios MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <20070819145909.6C54041D8B4@filter1.e-filtering.net> Ah, forgot to mention current AES price for a 6JB6: $25=2E ------------------------------ Message-ID: From: "JAMES HANLON" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: W8JK Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 11:15:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_1ABB_01C7E252.4476CAE0" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_1ABB_01C7E252.4476CAE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For anyone who knew (of) Professor John Kraus from Ohio State, the = following web site from last weekend's ARRL Letter will be of interest. Aug 15-Aug 26, 0000 UTC-0400 UTC, Columbus, Ohio. John D. Kraus Memorial Amateur Radio Club, W8JK/WOW. 30th anniversary of the "WOW Signal." 7.045 14.045 7.200 14.250. QSL: Bruce Lerner, KC8VEB, 734 Suntree Dr, Westerville, OH 43081 >.=20 Jim, W8KGI ------=_NextPart_000_1ABB_01C7E252.4476CAE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- * * This post contains a forbidden message format * * (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) * * Mail Lists at theporch.com only accept PLAIN TEXT * * If your postings display this message your mail program * * is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ------=_NextPart_000_1ABB_01C7E252.4476CAE0-- ------------------------------ Message-ID: <46C8CDAA.6060005@pacbell.net> Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 18:09:30 -0500 From: Dan Arney MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Old Tube Radios CC: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 6HS6 sub Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yeah, in 48/49 my dad used to drive 12 miles from Blytheville to the MO state line to get gas in a gas war 9.9 cents a gallon. Hank KN6DI ------------------------------ Message-ID: <002001c7e2b8$204ebf40$5a9e480c@KB6NAX> From: "Arden Allen" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 6AH6 subs Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 16:20:11 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > ....(I wonder what the deal with the [6]HS[6] is?) ....... It's an IF tube in some overvalued vintage FM tuners audiophooles trade their illicit drugs for ;-) Arden Allen KB6NAX ------------------------------ From: wb3fau@att.net To: Old Tube Radios Cc: "Arden Allen" Subject: Re: 6AH6 subs Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 15:30:52 +0000 Message-Id: <082020071530.12460.46C9B3AC0008A200000030AC21587667209A0E00CC0D99@att.net> I looked up the 6AU6 and compared it to the 6AH6, a good sub. Russ. ------------------------------ From: wb3fau@att.net To: Old Tube Radios Cc: Dan Arney , Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 6HS6 sub Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 15:34:08 +0000 Message-Id: <082020071534.15787.46C9B46F000E787800003DAB21587667209A0E00CC0D99@att.net> 9.9cents a gallon! ouch! that hurts! age here is 52, best price I ever remember was 25.9 cents a gallon. Russ. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <46C9D7C8.8050109@mindspring.com> Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:04:56 -0400 From: Garey Barrell MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 6AH6 subs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The 6AH6 is a fair sub for the 6HS6, but not quite as good as it looks on the data sheets. The 6AH6 is characterized at 300 VDC on the plate while the 6HS6 is at 150 VDC, which is the voltage used in the Drake receivers. The absolute conversion gain is not as high, but the receivers have enough overall gain to compensate via the AVC circuit. The difference shows up in Noise Figure, both from internal noise in the tube, and the NF "masking" of the conversion gain. Again, this is hardly a problem anywhere any more since we're almost all limited by external noise rather than receiver noise figure on the HF bands. Maybe if you live in a very quiet area, you might find it superior on 10M, but there aren't any signals there anyway!! :-) I think Heath recommended the 6HS6 as a "soup-up" for one or more of their receivers, but I think that was back when noise was less and 10M was wide open. Bottom line is, I don't think you could tell the difference today except perhaps in a shielded enclosure with decent test equipment. 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 4-B & C-Line Service Supplement CDs wb3fau@att.net wrote: > I looked up the 6AU6 and compared it to the 6AH6, a good sub. Russ. > > > > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <46CA20EA.6070009@bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:16:58 -0500 From: Ben Hall MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Bird Wattmeter expert? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Good evening all, Is there a Bird wattmeter expert here? I was recently told that one could modify the 4410A series of meter to take a Bird 43-type element by by-passing the internal range electronics with a DPDT switch - hooking the meter directly to the output of the line section. Anyone know if this is true? thanks much and 73, ben -- Thanks and 73, Ben, KD5BYB ------------------------------ Message-ID: <004701c7e3a2$7d05d5d0$bb9e480c@KB6NAX> From: "Arden Allen" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 6AH6 subs Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 20:20:30 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > ........Bottom line is, I don't think you could tell the difference today except perhaps in a shielded enclosure with decent test equipment. It all depends on the shielding of the receiver. Later equipmeent (siliconically speaking) is better shielded. Keeping signals and noise out of earlier (tubular) receivers is often problematic but not impossible to get reasonably good sensitivity readings, except in the case of being immersed in a high uV/meter field from a nearby broadcast station. The key to success is using a good laboratory grade signal generator. The 1940's General Radio sig gens are poorly shielded and don't do very well at HF freqs. The HP 606's have well shielded attenuators and the URM-25x series generators are not so bad. Obviously what came later in lab and military generators were well shielded. Heathkits, Eicos, and the variety of TV shop equipment that most hobbiests of yor got started with will with the aid of a freq counter get a receiver properly aligned with patience. However measuring sensitivity is out of the question. I've worked in screen rooms before and the best part of that environment is you don't have to worry so much about your work mate's taste in music because his radio won't hear any stations! Arden Allen KB6NAX ------------------------------ Message-ID: <46CAEBEF.3060708@mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:43:11 -0400 From: Garey Barrell MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: 6AH6 subs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The point I was trying to make was that to tell the difference in performance of a receiver with either a 6AH6 or 6HS6 you would have to be in an area free of external noise with a good (well shielded) signal generator. Most all of us these days are limited by background trash _external_ to the receiver, rather than by the sensitivity or noise figure of the receiver itself. I spent quite a few years inside shielded enclosures doing RFI / EMI testing for NASA in the 60's. They DO have their "unintended" advantages! :-) 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Arden Allen wrote: >> ........Bottom line is, I don't think you could tell the difference today >> > except > perhaps in a shielded enclosure with decent test equipment. > > It all depends on the shielding of the receiver. Later equipmeent > (siliconically speaking) is better shielded. Keeping signals and noise out > of earlier (tubular) receivers is often problematic but not impossible to > get reasonably good sensitivity readings, except in the case of being > immersed in a high uV/meter field from a nearby broadcast station. The key > to success is using a good laboratory grade signal generator. The 1940's > General Radio sig gens are poorly shielded and don't do very well at HF > freqs. The HP 606's have well shielded attenuators and the URM-25x series > generators are not so bad. Obviously what came later in lab and military > generators were well shielded. Heathkits, Eicos, and the variety of TV shop > equipment that most hobbiests of yor got started with will with the aid of a > freq counter get a receiver properly aligned with patience. However > measuring sensitivity is out of the question. > > I've worked in screen rooms before and the best part of that environment is > you don't have to worry so much about your work mate's taste in music > because his radio won't hear any stations! > > Arden Allen > KB6NAX > > > > ------------------------------ From: "Ed Zeranski" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: RE: Boatanchors list - happy 15th birthday Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:52:26 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Geeze! Already????? Work related travel keeps me from playing radio very much but I always look forward to the posts. EdZ KG6UTS BA....Heat, light, dynamic range!!! To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Boatanchors list - happy 15th birthday Thanks to all ...... Nick KD4CPL ------------------------------ From: "Ed Sieb" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: New Book: The World of Ham Radio, 1901-1950: A Social History Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:58:45 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A new academic book is being released shortly, "The World of Ham Radio, 1901-1950: A Social History" I ordered this book last June, from Amazon. They say they will ship end of September. Obviously I haven't read it yet. It covers the era we all love, so I look forward to reading it. Description During the first fifty years of the twentieth century, ham radio went from being an experiment to virtually an art form. Because of the few government restrictions and the low monetary investment required, the concept of ham radio appealed to various people. More than just a simple hobby, however, ham radio required its operators to understand radio theory, be able to trace a schematic and know how to build a transmitter and receiver with whatever material they might have available. With the advent of World War II and the increased need for cutting-edge communications, the United States government drew upon the considerable knowledge and skill of these amateur ham radio operators, validating the fact that ham radio was here to stay. This book explores the history of ham radio operators, emphasizing their social history and their many contributions to the technological development of worldwide communications. It traces the concept of relays, including the American Radio Relay League, from contacts as close as 25 miles apart to operators anywhere in the world. The book highlights the part played by ham radio in many of the headlined events of the half century, especially exploration and aviation "firsts". The ways in which these primarily amateur operators assisted in times of disaster including such events as the sinking of the Titanic and the 1937 Ohio River flood, are also examined. About the Author Richard A. Bartlett, professor emeritus of Florida State University, lives in Tallahassee. Details Hardcover: 292 pages Publisher: McFarland (August 13, 2007) Language: English ISBN-10: 0786429666 ISBN-13: 978-0786429660 Product Dimensions: 10 x 7.3 x 0.9 inches Shipping Weight: 1.5 pounds (View shipping rates and policies) More info on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0786429666/ref=pe_snp_666 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000001c7e4fd$c8d96e20$a431bb40@k9a1e1> From: "John Gillespie" To: Old Tube Radios Cc: "Roy Morgan" Subject: 1937 coil success Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 16:47:20 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks to help from Roy Morgan for providing links to various coil winders, we have managed to build a real nice coil winder from junque box radio parts and it works very smoothly. Thanks Roy! The only thing we needed to buy was some 1/4" steel rod. We have been able to rewind the RF coil and now have a working 1937 Oldsmobile radio. The original coil was wound with # 43 cotton covered enamelled wire. This seems to be in short supply these days except for ebay. We rewound our replacement using # 42 enamelled. 1937 technology, wow!! Have you ever looked at a piece of # 43 cotton covered wire, its thinner than human hair. How did they ever manage to get the cotton covering on in production without breaking those tiny wires. # 43 is .002 diameter, with the cotton covering the wire measures .006. Amazing! A special thanks to the boat anchor group... happy 15th.... john ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20070822171013.03064da0@pop-server.nc.rr.com> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 17:10:40 -0400 To: Old Tube Radios From: john Subject: Re: 1937 coil success Cc: "Roy Morgan" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Congrats John, any pictures to share? Did you pi wind it? 73 John K5MO At 04:47 PM 8/22/2007, John Gillespie wrote: > Thanks to help from Roy Morgan for providing links to various coil >winders, we have managed to build a real nice coil winder from junque box >radio parts and it works very smoothly. Thanks Roy! The only thing we >needed to buy was some 1/4" steel rod. We have been able to rewind the RF >coil and now have a working 1937 Oldsmobile radio. The original coil was >wound with # 43 cotton covered enamelled wire. This seems to be in short >supply these days except for ebay. We rewound our replacement using # 42 >enamelled. 1937 technology, wow!! Have you ever looked at a piece of # 43 >cotton covered wire, its thinner than human hair. How did they ever manage >to get the cotton covering on in production without breaking those tiny >wires. # 43 is .002 diameter, with the cotton covering the wire measures >.006. Amazing! A special thanks to the boat anchor group... happy >15th.... john ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000001c7e505$f23b05a0$0530bb40@k9a1e1> From: "John Gillespie" To: Old Tube Radios Cc: "old tube radios" Subject: Re: 1937 coil success Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 17:45:55 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Roy, yep, its pi wound! not quite as tall as the original due to the lack of extra diameters from all the cotton covers, but hey, it works great. Solved the problem (mostly) of wires slipping off the edges. Everything has to be real accurate, bearings on all the shafts, solved it.... thanks again! no pix yet ... john Subject: Re: 1937 coil success > Congrats John, any pictures to share? Did you pi wind it? > 73 > John K5MO ------------------------------ Message-ID: <001b01c7e525$2a8490b0$9a9d480c@KB6NAX> From: "Arden Allen" To: Old Tube Radios Cc: "old tube radios" Subject: Re: 1937 coil success Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:27:58 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John, I also would like to know more about what it takes to build a universal coil winder. Arden Allen KB6NAX ------------------------------ From: "Ed Zeranski" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: RE: 1937 coil success Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:54:57 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: 1937 coil success I also would like to know more about what it takes to build a universal coil winder. Arden Allen KB6NAX Lindsay Publications, http://www.lindsaybks.com/, has plans for a 'universal coil winder'. Listed with radio stuff... EdZ ------------------------------ Message-ID: From: "JAMES HANLON" To: Old Tube Radios Cc: Subject: Help for a 261-A TX Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:34:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0015_01C7E4FB.E51F5AB0" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C7E4FB.E51F5AB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Assorted BA Wizards, (OK, I just finished reading the latest Harry Potter book.) I received the following request from Darron, WA5TCZ, not a BA = subscriber. I'm passing it along in the hopes that one of you can give = him good advice. Please reply directly to Darron at = wa5tcz01@cox.net . Thanks, Jim, W8KGI I am going to build a transmitter that is 80 years old. The tube is a = Western Electric 261-A. These are kind of rare. The filament takes 10V = @ 3.25 amps. I read some where that you could extend the life of the = filament of these kind of tubes if you reduced the filament voltage say = to 9V. How would you go about doing this? Using a dropping resistor in = series with the filament transformer? Do you have any suggestions? thanks, Darron WA5TCZ ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C7E4FB.E51F5AB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- * * This post contains a forbidden message format * * (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) * * Mail Lists at theporch.com only accept PLAIN TEXT * * If your postings display this message your mail program * * is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C7E4FB.E51F5AB0-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:28:57 -0400 (EDT) From: stuck in 50s Message-Id: <200708231528.l7NFSvBZ023954@fracas.netboobie.org> To: Old Tube Radios Subject: The 6AH6 dead horse Got curious this AM & went to '53 ARRL hbk in 7-pin mini section. Wanted to see transconductance difference between 6AG5 & 6AH6. First found a rt-most column titled 'prototype.' Sed 6AG5 was modeled on 6SH7 & 6AH6 on 6AC7. In those days, hams were just starting to use minis. Anyway it looks like 6AH6 was handy in ckt.s wanting high gain- bandwidth. Like the p-p vertical amp.s in a OS-8 'scope. Have hunch 6AH6 goes back to 6AG5 days which was 1945. APS-13 420 rig (radar) used a slew in rx i.f. That is all - just reporting on a never-noticed column Marty ------------------------------ Message-ID: <001f01c7e5cf$e37d9e40$28a0480c@KB6NAX> From: "Arden Allen" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Kicking the 6AH6 dead horse Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 14:48:08 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit After all is said I would think noise resistance is a more important parameter for RF and early stage IF amps. Dunno about mixers, though. Anyone want to kick? Arden Allen KB6NAX ------------------------------ Message-ID: <002301c7e5da$e7703430$ad00a8c0@Morris1> From: "Morris Odell" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: No doghouse, but a dog's breakfast Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 09:11:14 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, Well every collection needs one, and I finally got my first HRO! It looked pretty good from the outside and came with a set of 9 coil boxes and a homebrew PS. I bought it from someone about 1000 km away and last night, after a complicated set of travels and transactions, it finally landed on my bench. The outside hadn't travelled too badly over the last 70 years, but inside - yikes!! Some previous owner had decided to "upgrade" it from a 5 to a M so out went the 6/7 pin sockets, shields and tubes and in went a mixture of glass & metal octals, some with the horrible bivalve clipped shields that were used on the cheapest and nastiest plastic radios of the postwar era. There's a VR105 behind the S meter which was never installed at the factory. He had re-capped it with good quality caps but re-resistored it with the horrible entertainment quality carbon resistors of the 1960s, many of which look re-cycled. The standard of the under chassis work is terrible! Messy wiring, great blobs of solder, clumsy work-arounds, frayed electrical tape, scorched insulation - it's a real dog's breakfast. The homemade PS is not much better - a motley collection of old transformers, block caps (dated 1949 - the year of my birth!) & chokes with the above mentioned messy wiring, all tied together with blobs of solder and peeling plastic insulation tape. Four scrappy looking Si diodes tacked across the rectifier socket. No bleeder!!! Where to start? At least it's complete, the dial feels terrific and the cabinet is OK. There's an output transformer mounted neatly underneath. The only extra hole is a phone jack on the back skirt for the speaker. The chrome plated crystal is there but rattles slightly. I would love to restore it completely. Tubes & sockets are no problem but the tube shields are gone and very hard to replace - I might have to resort to antique radio sales & swapmeets :-( The other option is to competently convert it to a M and try not to look at the tube designations still on the chassis. For now, I would welcome any advice about this classic. I would love to find a doghouse PS but in its absence, the measurements of the box would be nice so I can at least build a repro. Anyone have any tube shields that would at least look original? Comments/suggestions welcome! 73 de Morris VK3DOC ------------------------------ End of BOATANCHORS Digest 4080 ******************************