Examining the Johnson Matchbox ATU

<< < (7/7)

KM1H:
Quote from: Steve - WB3HUZ on May 12, 2010, 01:55:57 PM

Which well-known DXers were these and what was the basis of their statements?


Quote from: KM1H on May 12, 2010, 01:02:00 PM

Quote from: W2DU on May 11, 2010, 02:40:03 PM

Carl, can you explain why the KW version receives better than the 275W version. IMHO, that concept is what is absurd.

Walt



No, as I dont have one, dont intend to get one, and have never used either. Just saying it is absurd without doing an evaluation is the real absurdity particularly since several well known DXers have stated differently.

Carl
KM1H




Written in various old paper DX and contest journals back when 5BDXCC was announced. Back then 80M DX was a rarity and requirements little known. Then a 160M DXCC came along.

flintstone mop:
Quote from: K5UJ on May 12, 2010, 12:58:30 AM

This is vy interesting.  Maybe EFJ used the four section cap to make folks think they couldn't homebrew their own tuner? hi hi.

  At least I have not seen any vswr creep during long transmissions like I saw with my old bal. tuner, the Bliss Matchmaster. 




Rob


WOW I thought I was the only one who fell into that trap!!

The Bliss tuner did pass muster for the lowest loss, but when components started to fail as that POS coil did, the manufacturer-owner said there were no replacement parts. And talk about a real POS to get into the DAM thing....geesh.
It's in pieces and I built the K1JJ SuperTuner.
Nice info on this thread BTW.
Fred

ke7trp:
We had one of those Bliss tuners. The big one.  I think my elbow still hurts sometimes from turning that damn Crank on the side.  It was sold off.

C

WA1GFZ:
my KW match box produced exactly the same feeder current as the much larger HB fugly

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page