Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /homepages/11/d132647312/htdocs/Amfone/mkportal/include/SMF/smf_out.php on line 47
Another rig question




 
The AM Forum
October 19, 2019, 01:50:34 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Links Staff List Gallery Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 [4]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Another rig question  (Read 51944 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Steve - WB3HUZ
Guest
« Reply #75 on: April 05, 2007, 09:49:55 AM »

IIRC, the TS-820 did not have an AM mode selection.

That KP-81 is a cool looking radio and quite rare in my experience. I've only ever laid eyes on one.
Logged
AF9J
Guest
« Reply #76 on: April 05, 2007, 11:28:19 AM »

I agree Steve,

No, when I cited my TS-820, I meant for physical feel on the main tuning, compared to the Trio JR-310.  Yes, it's just an SSB & CW rig. BTW, Kenwood did make AM versions of the TS-820S, and the TS-830S.  They were called the TS-820M, and the TS-830M.  They were only sold overseas (mainly in Europe).  I'm a moderator on the Yahoo Kenwood hybrids group, and occasionally the members will pick up one of these up in a e-bay auction.  These rigs did about 20-25W of carrier, in SSB with carrier mode.

73,
Ellen - AF9J
Logged
w3jn
Johnny Novice
Administrator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4590



« Reply #77 on: April 05, 2007, 11:51:06 AM »

I have a KP81 in pieces and I'd love a skizmatic for it with parts values.  I have a manual (somewhere) but the parts list is missing.  Mine had a bad case of acne and I repainted the front panel black wrinkle, but it needs to be re-assembled.

So many projects, so little time...
Logged

FCC:  "The record is devoid of a demonstrated nexus between Morse code proficiency and on-the-air conduct."
The Slab Bacon
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3934



« Reply #78 on: April 05, 2007, 12:14:44 PM »

So many projects, so little time...

BOY!! do I know that feeling!!

And, err, it figgers, John if anyone would have one it would be you. I have also never seen one in the flesh.
                                                     The Slab Bacon
Logged

"No is not an answer and failure is not an option!"
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7690


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #79 on: April 05, 2007, 01:09:49 PM »

I agree Steve,

No, when I cited my TS-820, I meant for physical feel on the main tuning, compared to the Trio JR-310.  Yes, it's just an SSB & CW rig. BTW, Kenwood did make AM versions of the TS-820S, and the TS-830S.  They were called the TS-820M, and the TS-830M.  They were only sold overseas (mainly in Europe).  I'm a moderator on the Yahoo Kenwood hybrids group, and occasionally the members will pick up one of these up in a e-bay auction.  These rigs did about 20-25W of carrier, in SSB with carrier mode.

73,
Ellen - AF9J

Actually the AM addition, is fairly simple to these rigs (several discrete components, 2 or 3 transistors, relay). The more difficult part might be to find the 6 KHz AM filter to fit in there.

I still love my Kenwood 599 Twins for all purpose AM and SSB operation. Nice looking, work well, and can hold either one with one hand.
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
Steve - WB3HUZ
Guest
« Reply #80 on: April 05, 2007, 02:46:49 PM »

Quote
They were called the TS-820M, and the TS-830M.  They were only sold overseas (mainly in Europe). 

Cool. I'll have to keep a look out for one. I've always liked the 520's and 820's, and they are solid performers. But I never got one due to the lack of AM. Made my first contact as a JN on a TS-520.

Kenwood also made a receiver called the R-820 (roughly matched the TS-820 on styling) that did have an AM mode. I've never seen one, but ya never know.
Logged
KB2WIG
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4317



« Reply #81 on: April 05, 2007, 03:19:45 PM »

I'll get pounded for this........

Rat Shaft dx 302

An allignment, a little work on the audio,  maybee widen/add more appropriate  filters... 

Why??  General coverage, digi readout, its got a mute, tape out, code practive oscillator (really), external speaker connector, its stable, light wt, physically medium sized, parts are identifiable, and for the most part replaceable... 120v /12v  ... and its cheep  ..... pick them up for $70 ish --------------- ( also,the Fine RatShaft name,  )


klc
Logged

What? Me worry?
WQ9E
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3225



« Reply #82 on: April 05, 2007, 03:20:30 PM »

Hi Johnny Novice,

I don't think that there is a schematic with parts values for the KP-81.  I got a complete unit, a modified unit (loctals in front end replaced with miniatures) and a parts unit and all 3 came with their manuals.  None of the manuals have parts values though they do have a note that a complete manual with parts values will be mailed out when it is completed; I doubt the second manual ever materialized.  I do have a "translation" of a letter on alignment of the KP-81 that Karl Pierson wrote to the owner and I will be happy to make a copy of this for you.

Your KP-81 is well worth restoring, it is a very nice AM and CW receiver.  Be prepared for fun when you recap the front end however.  The two IF decks unplug for easy access but to get to the front end you will have to remove the coil catacomb to release the RF sub-chassis.  Then it appears that originally everything was wired and then the sockets and terminal strips were riveted into place.  I had to use a long nose soldering iron, several different pairs of needle nose pliers, and a lot of patience (mixed with a few curses) to repair this part of the receiver.

One of my manuals has some hand written values added by a previous owner but I doubt that they are complete and I didn't check the accuracy as I went by the value of the installed components.  The same owner also included a time sheet for the amount of time he spent mowing the local graveyard so at least he did document everything.

73, Rodger WQ9E

I have a KP81 in pieces and I'd love a skizmatic for it with parts values.  I have a manual (somewhere) but the parts list is missing.  Mine had a bad case of acne and I repainted the front panel black wrinkle, but it needs to be re-assembled.

So many projects, so little time...
Logged

Rodger WQ9E
AB1GX
Guest
« Reply #83 on: April 05, 2007, 04:08:27 PM »

The KP-81 is the AM heavy-weight receiver champion for sure!
Logged
w3jn
Johnny Novice
Administrator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4590



« Reply #84 on: April 05, 2007, 06:04:13 PM »

TNX, Rodger.  Yeah, I pulled the front end and IF modules out, recapped /em, but the IF module is dead for some reason.  It's all in a box up in my attic now.  Would appreciate any info you have!

I don't have the matching amp/speaker.  If you have a spare, I'd definitely be interested in that as well!  I do have a spare S-meter that I recently found at a hamfest though  Grin
Logged

FCC:  "The record is devoid of a demonstrated nexus between Morse code proficiency and on-the-air conduct."
Steve - WB3HUZ
Guest
« Reply #85 on: April 05, 2007, 06:26:28 PM »

It's a contender but I think some others weigh more. The SP-200 RX section alone weighs around 70 pounds and the separate power supply is another 50 or so. The R-390A weighs 95 pounds. Then there some beast the FRR-9 (IIRC) which weighs several hundred!!!



The KP-81 is the AM heavy-weight receiver champion for sure!
Logged
W1GFH
Guest
« Reply #86 on: April 05, 2007, 07:48:33 PM »

Quote

The SP-200 RX section alone weighs around 70 pounds and the separate power supply is another 50 or so. The R-390A weighs 95 pounds.


Yeah, but...

Logged
AF9J
Guest
« Reply #87 on: April 05, 2007, 09:33:42 PM »

We have a couple of members in the Kenwood Hybrids group who have R-820s.  According to them they're pretty good.  They can also be slaved up to the TS-820S for split frequency work.  I like my TS-820. It's very well made.  The only problem with the 820 series, is the digital display unit.  It's mounted relatively close to the finals enclosure, and as a result, is subjected to heat.  The board contacts oftentimes have to be cleaned, and the mounting/ground screws retightened. I will say this though.  The dial display does work quite well freqencywise.  It is a National HRO-type dial with two geared/nested dials, and slots next to each 10 kHz digit, that show the hundreds number.  Frequency resolution is 1 kHz.  Oh, and this same mechanical dial is also on the entire 820 series, and a variation of it is on the 830 series.  If you'd like, I can put in a WTB for an 820M or 830M on the group.  It's up to you.

Ellen - AF9J

Quote
They were called the TS-820M, and the TS-830M.  They were only sold overseas (mainly in Europe). 

Cool. I'll have to keep a look out for one. I've always liked the 520's and 820's, and they are solid performers. But I never got one due to the lack of AM. Made my first contact as a JN on a TS-520.

Kenwood also made a receiver called the R-820 (roughly matched the TS-820 on styling) that did have an AM mode. I've never seen one, but ya never know.
Logged
WQ9E
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3225



« Reply #88 on: April 05, 2007, 09:50:18 PM »

Although I have not actually weighed mine, according to the manual the combination of the receiver and its power supply total 120 pounds after uncrating.  I have a couple of SP-200's and their power supplies so perhaps I should put one on each end of my daughter's teeter totter to empirically determine the heavy weight champion.  I do know that either are much easier to move than my Johnson Tbolt or Viking 500 modulator/power supply.  If either of those rigs loses a power transformer it will be replaced by the lighter hypersil version!  For a real workout, carry an HP 524C counter up a flight of stairs; I don't know how heavy it is but it sure is awkward.

JN, unfortunately I don't have a spare power supply speaker or you would be welcome to it.  The "complete" receiver which I have restored came with a speaker/power supply and the modified receiver came with a speaker/power supply less one of the transformers.  I will try to restore that one at some point just to see how well the modification to miniature tubes was done.  At least the sheet metal work to install the sockets is very well done so hopefully it is also done well electrically.  The parts unit is missing the sliding coil catacomb and the entire front end assembly so it is basically an IF/detector but I am thinking of using it as the basis for a homebrew receiver since it has such nice tuning capacitors and a very nice IF selectivity response.

One of the first things I would suspect on your IF units is a bad loctal tube socket.  I had to replace a couple of the socket contacts in the restored receiver and I have had to do the same operation on one of the RME receivers I own; at least it is easy to do. 

Let me know what sort of manual or schematic you already have for your receiver and I will make and send copies of any additional information that I have with mine.  This is one of those receivers I never expected to find but I was helping the owner move some of his equipment from his pickup to his table when I spotted these so kindness is rewarded.  It is well worth fixing yours since the mechanical and electronic performance of the KP-81 is very nice.

Rodger WQ9E

Logged

Rodger WQ9E
WQ9E
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3225



« Reply #89 on: April 05, 2007, 10:02:40 PM »

Ellen,

I have the TS-820/R-820 pair and I agree the R-820 is a very good receiver and sounds great on AM-unfortunately my TS-820 is the "S" version so no AM on it.  I have been toying with the idea of doing an article for Electric Radio comparing the TS/R 820 combo to the Drake TR7/R7 combo; since these are transceiver/receiver pairs they can be called cousins instead of twins.  In short the Drake receiver performance is better for weak signals and particularly when QRM is heavy but the Kenwood pair is quite attractive and frequency stability is better unless you pair an RV-75 (rare and expensive) with the Drakes.  And of course the TR-7 transmits AM.

My TS-820S was a $75 hamfest buy because of the flaky digital display.  I got copies of all the service bulletins for the display and performed the recommended procedures and the display problems were different but still flaky.  Over the next couple of weeks I would work on this in my spare time but still found it would flake out during different parts of the warm-up cycle.  I finally decided on drastic action (that I DO NOT recommend others follow).  I took my Harbor Freight heat gun and reflowed the solder connections  and it has worked perfectly since; one of the few times that losing one's patience leads to a desirable result.  By that point I would have preferred a completely dead digital display to one that was intermittent since the mechanical readout is so nice on the 820 rigs.

73, Rodger WQ9E

We have a couple of members in the Kenwood Hybrids group who have R-820s.  According to them they're pretty good.  They can also be slaved up to the TS-820S for split frequency work.  I like my TS-820. It's very well made.  The only problem with the 820 series, is the digital display unit.  It's mounted relatively close to the finals enclosure, and as a result, is subjected to heat.  The board contacts oftentimes have to be cleaned, and the mounting/ground screws retightened. I will say this though.  The dial display does work quite well freqencywise.  It is a National HRO-type dial with two geared/nested dials, and slots next to each 10 kHz digit, that show the hundreds number.  Frequency resolution is 1 kHz.  Oh, and this same mechanical dial is also on the entire 820 series, and a variation of it is on the 830 series.  If you'd like, I can put in a WTB for an 820M or 830M on the group.  It's up to you.

Ellen - AF9J

Logged

Rodger WQ9E
AF9J
Guest
« Reply #90 on: April 05, 2007, 10:13:00 PM »

Here's another thought Steve & Roger,

If either of you are still interested in a tube Kenwood with AM capability (besides the Twins), there is the TS-900.  I've read a few reviews of it on e-ham, by some hams who have used it for AM, and they said it's an OK rig for AM.  The only downer about it, is that it's relatively rare (but much more common than the TS-820M, or 830M), and it uses sweep tubes for finals. Also, unlike the Kenwood hybrids, it uses an outboard power supply.  It's a cool looking rig.  You know how the earlier Twins have what looks like brushed chrome enclosures?  The TS-900's enclosure, looks like copper.

BTW Roger, when I got my TS-820 (the very first year version of this series - the digital display was only available as an option, and mine didn't have it installed), I also had a choice of getting an 820S.  I just didn't want to screw around with the display.  I find the dial mechanism (which is pretty much like the one on the Twins), to be just fine.  You did the best method for dealing with the display problem, resoldering things.

73,
Ellen - AF9J
Logged
W8EJO
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 528



« Reply #91 on: April 05, 2007, 10:59:29 PM »

It's a contender but I think some others weigh more. The SP-200 RX section alone weighs around 70 pounds and the separate power supply is another 50 or so. The R-390A weighs 95 pounds. Then there some beast the FRR-9 (IIRC) which weighs several hundred!!!



The KP-81 is the AM heavy-weight receiver champion for sure!

My all time gonad buster was the RCA AR-88 I had. Don't know the weight but I always dreaded moving it.  Big, awkward & extremely heavy.

My Valiant seemed like a lightweight in comparison.

Logged

Terry, W8EJO

Freedom and liberty - extremist ideas since 1776.
w3jn
Johnny Novice
Administrator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4590



« Reply #92 on: April 06, 2007, 07:32:50 AM »

The National FRR-59/WRR-2 is well over 200 pounds.  The TMC DDR-5 is a synthesized receiver in a 6' rack and is, IIRC, almost a thousand pounds.

HUZ knows firsthand about the weight of the FRR-59 - he helped me move it from my pickup to the table at Dayton one year  Grin
Logged

FCC:  "The record is devoid of a demonstrated nexus between Morse code proficiency and on-the-air conduct."
Steve - WB3HUZ
Guest
« Reply #93 on: April 06, 2007, 10:07:07 PM »

Yea, my back still hurts!!

I may be in touch on the TS820/830M Ellen. Any idea what they go for?


The National FRR-59/WRR-2 is well over 200 pounds.  The TMC DDR-5 is a synthesized receiver in a 6' rack and is, IIRC, almost a thousand pounds.

HUZ knows firsthand about the weight of the FRR-59 - he helped me move it from my pickup to the table at Dayton one year  Grin
Logged
AF9J
Guest
« Reply #94 on: April 06, 2007, 11:27:03 PM »

Not really sure Steve.  Probably similiar in price to the 820S & 830S (in other words about 260-400 dollars, depending upon the condition).

Ellen - AF9J
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 [4]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

AMfone - Dedicated to Amplitude Modulation on the Amateur Radio Bands
 AMfone 2001-2015
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.046 seconds with 18 queries.