The AM Forum

I'm looking for opinions here.  I have pretty much everything covered for CW/AM/SSB on all of the bands EXCEPT for 160.  Collins, in their infinite wisdom, chose to put 160 on their receivers but not on their transmitters.  I can understand why as 160 operation was severely limited back then, yet Johnson put 160 on their transmitters.  Not that I would use 160 on SSB all that much, I'd like the capability.  I have a good RX for 160, a 75A4.  The problem is the TX.  Here are the choices as I see them. 

1) I have a Hammarlund HX50 which is capable of 160 meter operation but needs to have the 160 kit.  I'll never find the add on kit, so I'd have to cobble it together.  Problem is that I don't know what the coil values I need are.  I'm not sure this is worth the effort.

2) Get a CE 100 V / 200 V and add the 160 mod kit available from Nick Tusa.  This was the option I was going to take, but I'm wondering about option 3?

3) Use an SSB adapter with my Viking II or get a Valiant to use the 160 adapter with.    This is my real question.  Is this a good option?  Do the Johnson, Heath or B&W adapters that are out the work well?  I would imagine they problably work ok but are a pain to implement.  Is anyone out there using one successfully?  Also, are the VFO's in the old stuff stable enough to even use on SSB?  I love my Viking II and the VFO seems very stable on the lower bands, so is this a a decent option?  Any and all ideas/opinions are welcomed (Including, "you're an idiot, why do you want to fool with 160M ssb?" !

73, Mike WB0SND

Mike,
I'm in the same boat with a Hammarlund HX 50. If you could, PM me at some point if you have any luck coil wise and I will do the same if I find any thing.
It was agreed here a while ago that the HX 50 would benefit from some mods but I would like to load it up and see what it sounds like to the group for comparison. I'd be curious also what any of the Flex users see out of it on thier end.
                                                  Good luck.
                                                              73 DJ

You may want to ask these guys....a group devoted to boatanchor SSB:

http://www.vintagessb.net/ (http://www.vintagessb.net/)

Hmmm interesting....

 Nope yer not an idiot, an yup it's Fun to fool wiff 160. ;D

Butt ya know if'n it waz me, looking for a boatus anchorus for 160 Me-a-Taas  :)
Single Sideband Phone... I think I would find me an old Swan 160 an really strut
my stuff in true Wrinkle Black SSB Transceiver Style for the times.

http://www.pcs.mb.ca/~standard/160X.htm

Have a good day.. :)

73

Jack.

Jack,

   Running vintage SSB these days on any band is best done amongst friends. Otherwise if you break into a group that don't know you, and then maybe you drift 150 hz, your likely to hear, "hey OM, your drifting out of the band"! There is no allowance these days for drift amongst the appliance crowd, and a 'RIT' knob just isn't used.

   I run my Central Electronics 20A into a Dentron MLA2500 for SSB (AM too). The 20a is modified for ~ 65w PEP output which drives the MLA perfectly to make a lot of noise. There is a group of locals near Austin, Texas that I chat with on 1960 LSB, ground wave.

Jim
WD5JKO

It doesnt take much effort to build a transmitting converter for 160, they were even in the HB's, or you can buy any of the Drake T-4 series.

Carl
KM1H

Just do what alot of the vintage SSbers do.  Run a solid state Yaecomwood radio and claim your on your vintage rig!  I know about 3 or 4 of those guys that do that. Sometimes they get caught on the air if they slip up and mention a the band scope or Auto notch, Some feature that the old rig does not have. One of the guys even kicks his yaecomwood over slightly to simulate Drift.. LOL

Dont you have a 101?  They work great on 160.  Full power out and nice and stable.  If your under 60 years old. You probably wont enjoy 160 to much.  I have met some really cool and insteresting guys down there.. But it took a while before they excepted me.  Its a 60 to 100 year old demographic and alot of them are real rude if you dont have an extra and know code. AM groups might be more excepting.

C

160 SSB can be good. I've been having some fun down there on ricebox SSB (still working on getting a BA setup). I'm on a postage stamp lot and built a coil-loaded dipole (97' LOA) for 160. AM on the FT-897D is only 25W, so that's pretty PW. However, right after I heard a guy say "What kind of fool gets on 160 without an amp?", I had a very nice 23 minute QSO with K0DT (Jim) in Colfax, IA on LSB at 100W. He had me at 59 for the duration. He was 20 over here in TX, but was running an FT-1000MP into an AL-1200.

I think TRP is generally right about the main demographic on 160. I'm 59 (for another few days), so I can fit in pretty well. There's a nice bunch of folks there, I've found. Don't know how much I'll play there in SSB when I finally get the BA stuff on-air in AM mode, but I like the band, so SSB is better to me than not being there at all.

ldb
K5WLF

I second Jim's (WD5JKO) caution on using vintage SSB with a "regular" net or group.  Otherwise at least one member will be less than pleased with drifting and perhaps less than perfect carrier and sideband suppression.  I show up frequently for the vintage SSB net using various rigs and you will stay busy tuning your receiver during a net session.  It is a lot of fun running vintage SSB with a group of like minded individuals but otherwise your vintage rig may be about as welcome as a Ford Excursion at a green party political rally. 

As Carl said the Drake 4 line (any iteration) will run 160 with the accessory range crystals and it is plenty stable to run with the modern rigs.  The Yaesu FR/FL-101 twins make a good semi-vintage pair and is also very stable.  The earlier Yaesu FRDX/FLDX-400 are like the Kenwood 599 series, the receiver covers 160 but not the transmitter.  You could also use the Central Electronics 10 or 20 with a stable external VFO but they will still require some touch up of the carrier balance as they warm up to keep the modern technology folks happy.  Although the Valiant covers 160 the matching SSB adapter does not and the Valiant VFO is woefully drifty for SSB usage.  A Dentron 160 meter transverter is another possibility if you can find one or roll your own.

Jim.  I cant seem to get my Central 20 working. If you are up for having a look at this thing, I would be greatfull. I want to use it as an exciter to run the Globe king 500 on SSB.  I have an SSB adapter for the Reciever now.

I have two sets of Yaesu twins. I have never used them. Both sets have no cable that runs between the two units. If you guys run across that cable, I would be more then happy to cover all costs. 


C

Clark,

The interconnect cable is simple to build.  For the VFO control, it is a 9 pin "octal style" plug for the FL-101 and a 5 pin DIN (available from Mouser) for the receiver.  Mute and anti-vox audio are through the 11 pin "octal style" accessory plug which is usually found with the FL-101.  You need shielded, small diameter coax for the VFO signal leads.

I believe the wiring info is in the manuals, if not I probably have a copy somewhere since I had to build cables for both sets of my 101 twins.

Ok. If it comes down to it, I will try to build them. I would really rather not. I have no time and way to many other things going on. I keep missing the original cable on ebay. 

THanks alot!

C

I have one of these that I've used with Kenwood 599D Twins. Works Great. There's also vintage SSB nets on 20 and 40 meters besides 75 meters, and specific Hallicrafters, Collins. Swan, Heathkit, Drake, and probably several others that operate on these bands regularly. Vintage SSB is probably as "popular", as AM, if not more so, on the bands. Sunday afternoon on 20 meters is a great time for vintage SSB operating.

Mike...I use a CE200V with the 160m mod.  Works great and as you know the vfo is very stable after warm up.  I'd go with option 2.

Frank, W4FMS

I can remember when AM had all but disappeared from the HF bands, but 160 was still full of AM because most of the SSB appliances covered "all-bands, 80-10m". What little slopbucket you heard on the band was with modified or homebrew rigs or one of the very rare factory made jobs that covered the band.

When the appliance manufacturers began including 160m sometime in the mid to late 70's, more SSB was heard on the band, and a lot of the muck on 75 began to appear on 160.

I'll never forget the time a bunch of slopbucketeers were P & M'ing about Tom, W4UOC in Atlanta and myself operating AM on 1885 because they had assumed ownership of 1888 and insisted on operating there even when the nearby frequency had been in use for hours and there were tens of vacant kc/s on either side of the frequency.  Tom was running a DX-100 and I was running a kw with my HF-300 rig.

"The guy in Atlanta is running regular AM, but that guy up in TN is running AM and sideband at the same time. I don't know how he does it, but I'm pretty sure that's illegal."

LOL!!   AM with one sideband also.  Funny story.

I met alot of nice guys on 160.. but its not for everyone. 

There is a group that runs AM that I catch sometimes on 160. They all have 10 minute Egg timers in the shack. They key up, Set the timer and talk until it dings. Then talk for 2 more minutes finishing up.. Then they pass it along.. So each guy keys up for 10 to 12 minutes at a time.  It could be 30 to 40 minutes before you get a chance to talk.  Some enjoy that kind of thing but I lose interest to fast.

Heck, if you want decent 160 meter SSB operation, find a Kenwood TS-520S, 530S, 820S, or 830S. Tube driver and finals, great workhouse, will load almost anything you throw at it. I've had a CE 100V for years and would never consider the time or money involved to add 160 operation. Too many other rigs out there to do the job, or just build a simple 160 transverter like the Dentron 160XV.

Sounds like the perfect therapy for people for have difficulty falling asleep. A small bed side receiver turned to 160.

I have a fixed up skyrider JR at the bedside table. I have fallen asleep many times listening to that thing.  Some Meth heads stole all my wire. I need to string up another long wire!

C

You have that happen quite a lot.

I'd say, might be time to throw the wire antennas on the B+ transformer when you leave town to tune...  Put a knife switch on the ladder line coils to take them out, and have at it.

:)

--Shane

Naw.. Just the one time.. All the wire and antennas where gone when I came back

C

I like Top Band as much as the next guy but I got better things to go
to bed with... ;D I do not take radio to bed..Lol.....

73

Jack.

I've never understood the whole vintage SSB thing (I mean, if you are going to run vintage gear what's wrong with AM) but in my opinion 160 m. was made for AM.  For one thing, it's practically a part of the standard broadcast band so putting any broadcast rig on 160 is a relatively easy process.  A lot of the antenna studies and practices of the broadcast industry can be applied to 160 m.  I'm 52 and I work plenty of hams my age or younger--I don't think of it as an OT band at all.  (This may vary from region to region.)  Collins made transmitters that work on 160--you just have to have a hell of a lot of money to get one:  KW1, 30K1 and avoid getting a stock 75A1.  It's probably easier getting on 160 with an AM rig than it is with a vintage SSB rig.   The keys to success there are running at least 200 w., having a decent tx antenna and a separate low noise rx antenna.  One of the problems on that band is guys who can't be made to believe that a dipole at under 100 feet is not going to work all that well except within a few hundred miles, and even then there will be ground loss.

WHAT!? Have you not spanned the globe with the:

    ;D    Isotron 160m Stealth Ham Antenna, Featuring Dipole Performance  ;D

"With the equivalent "capture" area in metal and a lower receive noise level, Isotrons often work as well as a full-size dipole!

    *
      Solve Virtually Any Restricted Space Problem
    *
      Easy, Quick, and Simple Installation
    *
      Tunes and Performs Without Radials or Antenna Tuners
    *
      Handles Up to 1000 Watts PEP
    *
      Durable Construction, Can be Used in Extreme Weather Conditions
    *
      Excellent For Portable Operation - Emergencies, RV's, Field Day, Motels, Etc.
    *
      Multi-Band Operation on One Feedline with Back-to-Back Mounting. NO Loss of Performance.
    *
      Can be mounted in ANY Position Without Loss of Performance
    *
      Maritime Operation - Uncluttered Setup, with Stainless-Steel Fasteners. Not Dependent Upon Grounding for Performance
    *
      SO-239 Connector on All Models
    *
      One Year Warranty on Material and Workmanship

How Do The Isotrons Work So Well?

This is a very common question from those that have not seen the ISOTRONS in action.  Even those that have, ask it with amazement.

Well, it's not magic.  The ISOTRONS have been developed around specific electrical laws and laws of physics.  At times, the eye can be deceived so that something may look like it is against known laws or what we know as practical. The ISOTRONS were developed around known laws to accomplish an efficient performing antenna in a very convenient package.

For an antenna to work, it should be electrically resonant.  The ISOTRONS are electrically resonant by using only two components - the large coil in series with the capacitive plates of the antennas.  (Match comes automatically with the right combination of the two components at resonance).

There is more that is necessary for an efficient antenna.  An antenna needs a certain amount of area to couple radiation to the atmosphere.  Some call this the "Capture Area".  However, this is an "AREA".  This "area" can be any shape or form.  The laws of physics for this phenomenon do not specify its appearance.  THE ISOTRONS HAVE THIS RADIATION "AREA".  The ISOTRONS exceed or equal (depending upon the model) the area of a conventional one-half wavelength dipole (#12 wire).  In simple terms, we designed the ISOTRONS into a three dimensional package.

THE PERFORMANCE - It speaks for itself.

Tests have measured the ISOTRONS to transmit as well as a one-half wavelength dipole.  The shape of the ISOTRONS give them an excellent advantage for the reduction of noise.  The ISOTRONS have been tested at 3db less noise on reception with an equivalent incoming signal as the one-half wavelength dipole.  Simply stated, while there may be slighly less received signal vs. a dipole, more signals are heard by the ISOTRONS through the reduction in noise!

In the six antenna Reviews, one characteristic was definitely distinctive of the ISOTRONS:  THE PERFORMANCE.

160 Meter Antenna
Specifications

Size (H x W x D)
   

9.5' x 16" x 15"

Bandwidth
   

100 Khz.*

Impedance
   

50 - 75 ohms

Freq. Range
   

1.8 - 2.0 Mhz.

Power Input
   

1000 watts PEP**

Wind Load (sq. feet)
   

1.69

Wind Rating
   

85

Pattern
   

Omni

Weight
   

7 lbs.

MSRP:  $173.95

*     Bandwidth is within 2:1 SWR.  May vary with environment.
**   300 watt, CW (AM, FM, RTTY, etc.)

Good Monday Morning.. :)

I Have given that Trap a good look over in theory Yes it will work.. :)
relegated to more or less QRP operations but prolly be a good local
rag chewers system. I have a very good friend and Talented Amateur
who uses one I think on 80 for a local net here in the tri-state area with
no operational complaints..his name is Bob Ketzell his call is KB3IN I had
helped Bob relocate to his new home and went up an took the antenna
down an waz really interested in what I had in my Hands..Really different.


Figure I could build one with no real remorse, butt, I don't know I'm a wire man.

Understood.  I actually don't operate much phone, anyway.  Mostly CW here.  But I do have 160 AM capability with my Viking II and do use it.  I probably won't use SSB much on 160, I just want the capability.  And I do get on 160 AM once in a while now.  I just put up a killer 160 meter Inverted L with a 60 foot vetical component and lots of 100 foot plus radials.  It's a great antenna for 160.  I never knew I could work so much DX on 160.

Thanks everyone for your opinions.  They've give me a few more ideas of where I might go with this.  A friend of mine has a 20A I think he might sell me.  I can drive my Emtron amp with that.  I think the VFO might not be stable enough, though.  I'd probably only use it during contests anyway, so the drift issue wouldn't be a huge deal.  There are also digital VFO stabilizers out there I may look into.

The Dentron converter is a good idea.  I might see if I can find one of those and try to use it with the KWS 1.  That would probably be the "bee's knees" if it worked.  I"d consider building one, but it would probably never get done......  It would have been SO nice if Collins had opted to put 160 meters on the KWS-1.  The put it on the KW-1......

I know of a good 100V that might be available and I might just take that route as well.  The Nick Tusa 160 meter converter could be installed for not too much money. 

But, most of the time if I decide to get on 160 fone, it will likely be on AM, anyway. 

thanks again guys, and any more opinions are surely welcomed!

73,
Mike WB0SND

Easier work other stations on 160 meters with SSB equipment(vintage or otherwise). More stations on SSB then AM. Easier to work more distant stations on SSB even when band conditions suck. Broadcast rigs are big, bulky, sometimes ugly, and at times, require lots of diddling to get them to operate there. Lots more vintage SSB rigs (depending where you start the vintage clock) can operate SSB then AM rigs in roughly a similar time frame. 100 watt SSB rig can gather you many more contacts even with a modest antenna. Many amateurs live in residential areas with the typical modest size lot so full size 160 antennas with sufficient height can be a problem. You make do with whatever you can fit within the confines of your property. And for some, operating AM on 160, or any other band, probably is not really appealing to them.

If I wanted to run vintage SSB, I would dig out my copies of R/9 magazine from late 1933 and early 1934 and build the SSB exciter per the construction article that culminated the series, using nothing but period components.  The original article was for 75m, but it would take only a slight modification to make it work on 160.

If condx suck too badly or the QRN is too intense, I'd run CW.  I have made 100% solid CW contacts under staticky band condx on 160 in the middle of the summer after calling CQ on CW when there were no other signals, any mode, on the band at all.

If running AM is not appealing to the OP, I probably won't talk to them on phone because running SSB isn't appealing to me.  Maybe CW would be our lingua franca.

"lingua franca" I think I saw something similar to this on an Olive Garden menu.

I said I don't understand vintage SSB interest; I didn't say I don't like it.  I don't understand the interest in QRP and have no desire to do anything with low power myself but that doesn't mean I don't like it, as long as no one running a few watts tries to work me.   If some ham out there wants to operate an old HW101 or Swan with 2.1 KHz IF filter he can knock himself out.   I happen to reside on a 50 x 100 foot lot but I have an inverted L on 160 with 101 radials.  The idea that vast tracts of land are needed for a full size antenna on 160 is a myth.

Anyway good luck MIke I am sure you will enjoy 160 whatever mode you use;  A lot of guys are having fun with the old CE rigs.  Lately, condx have been so poor even CW is a bit trying.  

73

Rob

From Wikipedia:

A lingua franca (originally Italian for "Frankish language"—see etymology below) is a language systematically used to communicate between persons not sharing a mother tongue, in particular when it is a third language, distinct from both persons' mother tongues.[1]

This can also be referred to as working language or bridge language.

I'm expanding my vocabulary all the time with this amateur radio hobby!

The interest in QRP isn't all that hard to understand.  It is a basic aspect of amateur radio that hams are just by nature somewhat competitive and are always looking for new ways to expand their horizons.  For me, it is just another challenge, not a major direction in my pursuit of the hobby.  Myself, as well as several other AMers have built-up the little Retro75AM 2watt AM rigs....they work great and it has been fun playing around with them.  I wouldn't want to be stuck with two watts all the time, but its fun to see what you can do with flea power.  As for the vintage SSB stuff...well I haven't done too much recently, although I have owned several vintage rigs over the years.  Like many other diverse interests in the hobby....it is another route you can take to have fun and enjoy communicating with others who have similar interests.  It is true that much of the vintage SSB gear doesn't cover 160M.  The Dentron transverter is testimony to that.  I believe also P&H Labs had a similar unit in the 60's or 70's timeframe.  Anyway, its interesting to try and find something to fill the "vintage" category on 160M.

73,  Jack, W9GT

Sort of like Rap.

I saw the following on the Swan User Group some time ago:

A Ham asked his friend what freq the Swan net was on. The reply was - just listen on 40M they will drift by eventually.

Bob  VK7ZL

I remember those el cheapo "sideband for the masses" rigs from the mid-60's, the Swans, Galaxies and Heapshit "Hotwater" rigs, that did not include RIT. You would sometimes hear a QSO in which one rig would be a few Hz out of sync with the other (or the OPs' ears were out of sync), and every transmission each OP would adjust his rig slightly to "clarify" the sound of the other's voice. The QSO would migrate, a few Hz, one transmission at at a time, until it "walked" all way across and sometimes even out of the band.

Thats when radio was real radio.. :P  You where an "operator", as you had to turn all kinds of knobs all the time ::)  Now they are appliances like your microwave or coffee maker. You use them when you want.

C

** I just want to clarify that I wasn't trying to sell the "ISOTRON 160" to anyone.
 I copied & pasted an entire ad from e-pay. I thought it was relevent.
                                                                 DJ





That's funny. ;D

 

I run a CE 100V for vintage SSB. In my opinion all phasing rigs sound better than all filter rigs.  A CE-20A is a classy choice.  For starters, it has a magic eye.  You have to love that.  

The 20A requires an external VFO, traditionally a BC458.  I know one guy who built a huff and puff circuit and got amazing stability out of the old stuff.  That plus a sideband slicer like the CE one mated to some nice old receiver would be a classy vintage SSB station.

Why do this?  It's hobby.  One more thing to do.

I can't believe that ad is for real..I just can't..Tell me it's a joke..

I agree about phasing rigs, Ive had quite a few. Built a W2EWL and then had 10A, 10B, 20A, 100V, 200V, Phasemaster, HT-37. Many of the small ones were used to drive VHF/UHF gear. Didnt go xtal until the Drake C Line around 1985. The only vintage SSB I use these days is a HT32B and have a Gonset GSB-100 waiting for restoration so I can get back to the "sound" again.

Its not truly vintage but the TS-830 has the best SSB sound that Ive owned; I have 4 running 10 milliwatts out of the transverter port for the VHF and up gear.

Carl

I use a pair of TS-940's on HF mostly for DX chasing on CW/SSB. They needed a bit of help in the RX and broadband noise department but the IMD is better than average in the -33/34 dm area; most of the crap on the market today is in the high 20's at rated power. I rebiased the driver and finals and internally reduced the power to around 80W and measured IMD pushing -40dB down. The 80W drives the LK-500ZC and MLA-2500 to 1200W which is more than sufficient to bust pileups, and it keeps those tubes happy much longer.

Carl

As Jack would say: "LOL"
How do you define "decent vintage"?
Of course, you do remember that back in the "good old days" amateurs had to share 160 meters with LORAN, and there were day and night power restrictions depending on where you lived in the U. S. I suspect many manufacturers had little incentive to add 160 meters to all the rigs they produced back in those LORAN days.

Now just Wait a Minute....

Now just what kind of Ops have we got here spoiled Silicon DSP Abusers... 8)

If'n it doesn't have a little drift just what do we expect to operate from what ever period of time this is about even Colons Crap SSB units Drifted...Wooo Hooo Jack said Colons not Colins...  ;D

If it ain't Black and Bears analog dials and requires Tune and Load then it ain't chit..LOL

I'm gona start an anti-Swan defamation league on here...So there  ;D

73

Jack.

Actually, the TS-520 only covered 80 through 10 meters. They added 160 meters to the TS-520S and 520SE. Drake TR-3, -4, -5, -7 all had 160 capability too and are great performers on 160.  Of course, a lot depends on where you place your "decent vintage" clock. The TS-520 series is almost 40 years old. I've used my CE 100, NCX-5, NCX-3, and Apache/SB-10 combo driving a 6 meter transverter on SSB for years. Don't recall anyone complaining about excessive drift. As I said earlier, vintage SSB nets are very common on the HF bands and they are great fun.

Hmmm,  That's like calling a BMW a small step up from a Yugo :)  Swan gear is interestingly quirky and fun to operate but I don't use mine a lot.  It is like a person who is fun to date but you sure wouldn't want to wake up to every morning.

For CW I still prefer either of my Drake C lines to any of my other vintage or modern gear.  The R-4C with the Sherwood narrow CW filter and an outboard Autek QF-1A or similar still does an excellent job of pulling weak CW out of the noise.  Stability is no problem and unlike some of the modern stuff the knobs are big enough to turn one without changing something else by accident.

I have a bunch of Trio/Kenwood including the early JR-310/TX-310 "twins", a TS-520S, TS-820S, TS-830, and a couple of 599 twins.  I just picked up a pair of 599D twins with speaker and all original boxes for $125 at a hamfest.  Of course the transmitter doesn't cover 160 but if that were really an issue it isn't that difficult to homebrew a reasonable powerful transverter for 160.  Kenwood is nice but I still like my Drakes better.

Ah, yes, "implied". I guess "D" was also implied for the 520 and "M" for the 830. Then there was also the 530 series which also worked quite well. Used a TS-820S during Field Day for several years. Great rig and a very reliable performer. Always held up well even during evening Field Day pileups on 75 or 20 meters.

I made 160M DXCC and the first 5 Band WAZ in New England with a Drake C Line. With a couple of easy mods the receiver was great, never had TX problems once I put a muffin fan on the final cage. It was just a PITA in contests for rapid band hopping so I went with the TS-930 and then the 940.

I can honestly say that I have never owned a Swan. After hearing them drift I was convinced. The only thing worse was a Eico 753.

BTW, the Hammarlund covered 160 if you bought the option.

Carl

Speaking of ts-820's I have one coming in for service filter chages an so forth..So what's the problem with 820's something Ishould know about..??

73

Jack.

I am curious also.  I have had a TS-820S with R-820 receiver setup for several years and they perk along with no problem.  I admired them when they first came out MANY years ago when I was a young novice and bought one when I found a nice one at the right price.  The PLL setup for the shortwave bands was a little touchy on the R-820 but that is the only problem I have experienced.  I also had to replace some capacitors in the matching scope but nothing major there either. 

I have experienced zero problems with the matching TL-922A amplifier since I haven't found one yet :)

I had forgotten about the 820 display issue; Kenwood wasn't the only manufacturer to suffer from the idea of using plated through holes.  This also was a problem with their add on digital displays.

The modern rig that was the biggest pain for me was replacing the miniature relays in my FT-102.  I enjoy the rig now that it works and I do have the AM board in mine but I wouldn't want to go through the relay replacement again.

On both the HX-50 and HX-50A  160 band output was available only on special order. Crystal, 1st and 2nd mixer coils, and driver coils had to be installed and wired in. HX-50 had a number of problems. Hammarlund issued a number of bulletins to resolve them. HX-50A wasn't much better with key clicks and VOX relay hang-ups. HX-500 only covered 80 to 10 meters.

TS-820 entered the market in 1976; TS-520 and 599D Twins were already there. TS-820S and 520S entered the market around 1977. TS-830S was introduced in 1979 and exited around 1984. TS-530S, and its variations, came into the market around 1981. It was a somewhat stripped down version of the 830S at a lower price. 830S was designed to replace the 820S. 530S exited the market a few months before the 830S. Late 70's/early 80's came the all solid-state TS-120, TS-180, TS130, TS-430, and TS-930 rigs.

All good info much obliged, Good thread well done.. :)

73

Jack.

With only 25 to 100W available in restricted segments plus Loran its a wonder any had 160.

160 was a popular low power AM commuting band but was pretty much a wasteland on SSB until Loran went away and the full 200 KHz opened to 1500W. I diddled on 160 with the 100V and 75A4 and even worked some DX but New England had 100W at the low end where the DX was. When the rule changed I added the band to the NCL-2000 and then got the LK-500ZC.

Carl

The receiver section on most of the early solid state appliances was a P.O.S. The technology was still in its infancy and you had to sacrifice considerably in performance for the novelty of "solid state".  A classic example is the FT-101E series.  The receiver folds in the presence of a strong signal, even at the opposite end of the band, and the dynamic range sucks.  The Kenwood twins (R599/T599) have the same problem.

The problem is  caused by having multiple converter stages before even the first stage of i.f. filtering.  Tube type receivers like the 75A, 51J and R-390 series use the same arrangement, but the tube type mixers can handle the signals much better than active solid state mixers and solid state amplifier stages.  Later rigs, which showed considerable improvement, had a minimum number of amplifier stages before and after the mixer but preceding the selectivity filters or tuned circuits, and the frequency conversions were all done at the oscillator level before the L.O. was injected into the mixer.  The idea was to keep the signal path single conversion, or if double conversion, to avoid tunable i.f.s, but to use two fixed i.f.s with some selectivity built into the first i.f. stage on.  I believe this first i.f. selectivity is now called the "roofing filter" but I don't know why they don't simply call it the "1st i.f. filter".

I still believe the best active converter/mixer circuit ever devised was the one using a beam deflection tube like the 7360.  There were a couple of similar tubes, designed for TV receivers, that were cheaper than the 7360, which itself wasn't too expensive (less than $10 when it first appeared on the market).  In the rush to go solid state, use of the 7360 was quickly abandoned by the manufacturers and eventually the tube was discontinued.  I still have a couple that I bought back in the 70's.

Something that really made me cry was recently when I purchased a couple of n.o.s. 7360s on line, and when they arrived the Priority Mail self-adhesive box had come undone and the box arrived minus the contents. The seller reimbursed my money, but I would much rather have had the tubes.

The Atlas 215x, an early solid state transceiver, covered 160-15m. It had a decent receiver in it. Both rx/tx sounded ok. The IF filter was 2.8 kc I think. About as simple as you could make it! Just a classic but not a real boat anchor.

I have one yet - along with a 210x (80-10 m)



 

Woo Hoo.  I opened up a can of worms here!  Great discussion.  

I have a fully Sherwoodized Drake C Line.  It's great on 160. What I was looking for (and why I started this thread) was a transmitter that would pair up nicely with my 75A4 station.  Sadly, it won't be a Collins.  I'm thinkin' that proably the best choice will be a nice 100V or 200V that I can add 160 to.  Nick Tusa has a kit for $149.  Or, maybe a 20A that I can drive my Emtron amp with.  I know of a VFO for it that is available.  

Don, PM me if you still want some 7360's.  I have plenty in stock.

Mike

(http://www.vacuumtubes.com/images/collins_5-1.jpg)

(http://www.vacuumtubes.com/images/Drake_Station.jpg)

I remember seeing an advertisement for an adapter that allowed the 75A4 to control the 100V/200V in transceive mode.  Finding one today would be very difficult (and even more expensive) but you could probably build one if you really want that functionality. 

You have a great looking Drake setup and the transmitting converters are very rarely seen.   If you look at the top contest and DX stations of the late 60's/early 70's you will see a lot of Drake 4 line gear for a good reason-it performed extremely well.  I visited some heavy duty contest stations in the 1970's and C lines coupled with Alpha 77 amps were the hot ticket back then.

Thanks for the tip, but I've already got 2 of 'em.   The KWS-1 RF deck is on the far left in the picture.  The power supply is out of the picture.  If the KWS-1 had 160, the I would have never started this thread!

#1: S-Line audio sucks with the standard 2.1 KC SSB TX filter. You can (with some luck) find the Collins P/N 526-9500-00 2.9 KC filter. There is also a 3.1 KC filter. You need to swap out the carrier osc xtals with any new filters. At least you'll sound human again.

#2: It is very easy to homebrew a 160 transverter for the S-Line as it already has a low-level SSB output for use with the Collins 62S-1 6+2 transverter.

I still have a beautiful homebrew 160 transverter from when I had an S-Line. Fun boatanchor technology project. Mixer->driver-> pair of 6146s. Don't use it any more since the FT-100D covers 160 SSB, and I'm on AM 90% of the time.

I think P&H Electronics made an adapter that allowed transceive with another TX and 75A4 but I think it only works on 20 and 80 meters.  Not sure, though.  Actually, transceive isn't really a big deal.  I don't mind zero beating the VFO  As many have pointed out, a valid concern is the stability of the VFO/PTO.  I think that probably this stabilizer would do the trick for most situations:  http://home.comcast.net/~k4dpk/pep_adapter.htm  

Dunno what I'm gonna do, but I'm leaning toward a 20A or a 100V/200V.  The complexity of the 100V/200V scares me a bit, though.  The 20A need no mods for 160, either.  They both are COOL!  I really don't know why I'm so hot on this, I operate 85 percent CW, 10 percent AM and 5 percent SSB, anyway.  I've got 160 AM and CW covered.....just not SSB.

The 100V/200V transmitters are not that difficult to work on.  You will find a bunch of low value electrolytic caps that will all be bad.  There may be a problem with batteries leaking in the limiter module.  There are some different work around procedures if this has happened.  The VFO probably will need cleaning/lubricating.  It takes a couple of hours but it really isn't technically/mechanically challenging so don't let it scare you.  Although the 20A is a nice little rig the 100/200V is really a nicer match for your 75A4.  I restored a 200V a few years ago and use that with a National NC-400.  I also have a 20A/CE VFO/600L paired with a Drake 1-A.  Both CE units have held their alignment quite well for phasing type rigs and have nice audio but having the VFO built in with reasonable power makes the 200V preferable.

The only problem with the 100V/200V is fighting with audioholes for real TungSol 6550's. Ive heard the imports dont work well or last long at RF. The last NIB matched pairs I sold last year went for close to $400/pair; Im saving a few in case I get the itch for a 100V again to go with the same 75A4 Ive had since 1965 (with 7360 mixers and a lot more).

Carl

I'm sure the Tung Sol tubes are better quality but I've been using Svetlana 6550's in my 200V for the last 5 years.  No problemo.  Although it's only got "Ranger class" power, it sounds pretty good on AM too.

CE made some nice stuff.  About 2 years ago I actually ran into Wes Shum on 160m who was also running his 200V.  That was a big thrill.  Wish I had the qsl card.

Frank

I'd love to have a 200V.  If anyone knows of one for sale, please let me know.  For the time being, I think I've found a Dentron 160 Transverter.  I'm going to try using it with my KWS-1.  That would give me the feel of using my KWS-1 on 160.  I'd still like to find a nice 200V......

As for the Tung Sol  6550's, I'm in the tube business, so no worries there.  I don't normally talk about my business in forums like this because I don't want people to think I'm trolling for money.  I have about 50 or so Tung Sol 6550's in stock plus many more good used ones.  I wouldn't have to worry about that issue.  I'd probably use the Svetlana's in it, anyway.  No need to use a Tung Sol if the others work fine.

Mike WB0SND. 

If anyone is interested, you can find my url by looking at my QRZ page.

I wonder if the New Sensor version of the Tung Sol 6550 is any good in a 100/200V? Also the series has been expanded into KT88, KT90, and most recently the KT120 which boasts a 60 watt Pd..

http://www.audioenz.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=119468

I wonder if the big boy KT120 has any usefulness at RF?

Jim
WD5JKO

From what I've seen, the KT120 is pretty much a GU50.

They where designed for RF.


--Shane

Upon further googling, I guess that's electrically.  Mechanically they are a different story.

The GU50 has a BITCHEN socket, though :)

At $90 a pair they better be good!

I wonder if using them in a Viking l or ll at the existing power level would improve anything?

Carl
KM1H