Plastic Model Numbers

[k4kyv]

I sometimes work CW in addition to AM. About 98% of the CW stations I contact say they are running exactly the same thing: 100 watts with some kind of transceiver. Then they proceed to transmit the model number/letter combination of some Yaecomwood, like 740, 590D, 9400T, etc.  I don't have a clue what those model numbers mean nor do I suspect most of the other hams they work really care, any more than they would if I gave the detailed tube line up of my transmitter.  Wouldn't it be enough to simply say a transceiver running 100 watts, giving the Yaecomwood brand name if they so wished, then describe the antenna before going on to another subject? Who keeps up with all those brand names and the models on the market that go with them?

I run into the same thing on AM when someone comes back to a CQ or breaks into a QSO, using a ricebox on AM.

It used to be standard practice for hams to exchange the tube line-ups in the transmitters and modulators, but I have given that up except when talking to some AMer I think might have an idea what I am talking about.  On CW I usually simply say X watts using a pair of triode tubes in class C, and elaborate only if the other op asks for further details. On AM I usually just tell the ricebox ops I am  running a plate modulated tube type rig and let it go at that, rarely getting a question asking for any further details.

[W3SLK]

Would it be different if it was: RIG HR IS HW-16 WID ABT 50 WATTS OUT?

[Ed/KB1HYS]

I like to run odd rigs.  home brew classic types key'd with a bug ( like that vibroplex). Lately I've been building one tube self-excited rigs.  I think the Chirp & drift on my signal keeps the machine code crowd away...

I also try and answer CW sigs with character, like a little bit of chirp or a fist with that bug accent. Almost guarantees an interesting qso or at least more than just the usual whambam CW qsos.

 A lot of times I'll answer the slower CQ's that are a bit shakey.  I've gotten first time CW qsos from kids and OTs just getting back into CW after a hiatus.  It is sometimes hard to copy, but it's a lot more rewarding for both of us I think.

[AJ1G]

Having a QSO using a ricebox is like driving to work in your late model 4 door sedan driver..comfortable but hardly exciting.

Having a QSO using vintage equipment is like taking a restored 60's musclecar out to a cruise night - a hell of a lot more fun!

[W3GMS]

All well put.  On Straight Key Night it kind of nice since some op's pull out their old novice rigs from the past.  Maybe we need some CW QSO parties encouraging the older type of gear.  We certainly have our share of events for our AM rigs, why not do it on CW as well.

Don, your just an old crotchety op   

Regards,
Joe

[WA3VJB]

Don, even if you kept track of the nomenclature, would it matter?

I tend to note the station's rig in one of three categories:  SDR, "plastic radio" or the specific homebrew/vintage piece.

For me, that's all the more detail I need.  So even if they're sending it on CW,  when you start to hear the string just ignore it. As to why they send the model, maybe they're just practicing their numbers for the Morse Code.

[K5UJ]

It depends on interests.  I have zero interest in cars.  I always buy used and get one that has a good model repair history which I find out about in Consumer Reports.  so now for example I'm driving a '97 Camry 5 speed V6 which I will drive into the ground like I always do with my cars.  When I'm done with it, it will have to be scrapped.  So I know nothing about current models.

To the plastic radio cognoscenti these model numbers mean something.  If you look at some of the manufacturer specific email reflectors, you will find endless debate on the finer details amongst the Elecraft, Ten Tec, JA et cetera rigs from the contesters and dxers and other appliance ops who study the Sherwood rx evaluations as if a few dB blocking dynamic range is a life or death issue.   If you relegate yourself to consumer status you wind up obsessing about this or the ricebox that lacks a rx antenna "port" (the new plastic operator way of referring to a UHF jack) instead of drilling and blasting and adding one.   

I suppose I could tell folks I'm running 90 w. and give the pair of FETs in the PA but I wonder how meaningful that would be to people.  What's lost in all this feature and model fanaticism is 90% of the cw ragchewers would get by quite well running Rangers and NC300s with separate tx and rx antennas for QSK. 

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

Six of one, half-dozen of the other. No doubt there are plenty of folks out there who are equally bored or disinterested in our ancient nomenclature, tube line ups, and so on due to their primary interest being in new gear, Class E, SDR, or some other non-vintage radio approach.

I just scribble in my logbook and keep going. For me, it's part of the flavor of being on the air working a variety of stations. If it doesn't interest me, I don't waste time thinking about it afterward. Pretty simple, really.

[K1JJ]

Within any sub-culture hobby, there is a status with owning particular models of equipment. Maybe it's an SS 396 Chevelle. Or a Harley Knucklehead.  Or a KW-1. Or a new FT-9000DXX disco duck field goal.

When two guys meet who have vastly different rig goals and standards, most of the time eyes roll and they tune out cuz it does not impress one another.

That's why it pays to hang out (on the air and/or on a website) with like-minded guys who appreciate the stuff you also own and admire. We all need to show off our junk and projects once in a while or it can become boring playing the lonewolf building and working in the cellar to satisfy one's self.

So, bottom line, you've come to the right place if you like AM, enjoy building, restoring or just talking about these things...  We all need each other to add sparkle to this particular corner of the hobby...

T

[W9GT]

Six of one, half-dozen of the other. No doubt there are plenty of folks out there who are equally bored or disinterested in our ancient nomenclature, tube line ups, and so on due to their primary interest being in new gear, Class E, SDR, or some other non-vintage radio approach.

I just scribble in my logbook and keep going. For me, it's part of the flavor of being on the air working a variety of stations. If it doesn't interest me, I don't waste time thinking about it afterward. Pretty simple, really.

Todd...sometimes we agree, sometimes we don't, but I agree completely with your comments.  This seems very much like a non-issue to me.

Hams are, by nature competitive, and they love to brag about their stations and their equipment.  If that equipment happens to be the latest plastic radio or if it is a carefully crafted home brew job that contains a bunch of exotic tubes (or FETs for that matter)....fact is...it is their rig and they are proud of it.  I have both "modern" rigs, as well as several big heavy boatanchors.  I enjoy it all.

The bottom line is that we all generally like to describe and , perhaps brag about our stations and if that entails giving the model # of our latest Asian wonder box....so be it!

[Steve - K4HX]

It's a moot point since CW is a dead mode.   

[K5UJ]

These days the best way to unimpress me is to go out and pay $30K for a KW-1.

[k4kyv]

That's why it pays to hang out (on the air and/or on a website) with like-minded guys who appreciate the stuff you also own and admire. We all need to show off our junk and projects once in a while or it can become boring playing the lonewolf building and working in the cellar to satisfy one's self.

So, bottom line, you've come to the right place if you like AM, enjoy building, restoring or just talking about these things...  We all need each other to add sparkle to this particular corner of the hobby...

That works with AM.  Just listen for the mode.  But with CW it is hard to filter out the plastic radio ops.  Most signals all sound the same, except for the sending. Newbies and OTs alike may have either a good fist or one so horrendous they are hard to copy. In any case, many of the plastic ops can carry on an interesting conversation once you  get past talking about station equipment presently in use. No point in snubbing anyone. It is not unusual to run into retired broadcast engineers and communications professionals who have a lot of knowledge about radio, even though they are now using a ricebox.

I have considered just for the hell of it doing a mod to deliberately add a barely perceptible chirp to the signal, but I don't particularly want to mess around with the stability of my Collins-like T-368 PTO unit I use for a VFO.  I can go xtal control on the HF-300 rig, and some of the xtals do have a chirp.  I'm sure my "bug accent" can already be discerned by someone familiar with the sound.

Many of the CW stations I work have been licensed for decades, but have gone the plastic radio route for the convenience, particularly with the infirmities of old age and often, necessitated by relocation to more modest living quarters.  No doubt many of those same guys rode the anti-AM bandwagon that was so prevalent from the 50s until it began to die down in recent decades.  I always mention that I work over 90% AM phone and less that 10% CW and have no SSB capability. Seldom, if ever, does anyone respond with anything negative about AM, other than to say they haven't used it for years.

These days the best way to unimpress me is to go out and pay $30K for a KW-1.

What impresses me more is those who have KW-1s because they owned it before they became collectors' trophies, and refused to part with it when they started bringing in big bucks.  I remember sometime in the 70s seeing one sit all day unsold at either the Dayton or Cincinnati hamfest flea market, with the price tag marked $500. That was a few years before I purchased the two 75A4s, one with only one filter for $200, and the other with all 3 stock filters but with banged up spinner knob and mechanism, for $100.  Later I repaired it with the unopened n.i.b. Collins spinner knob/vernier mechanism kit complete with instruction manual, that I purchased for $35.

I wouldn't swap-even my homebrew HF-300 rig for two KW-1s.

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

These days the best way to unimpress me is to go out and pay $30K for a KW-1.

Certainly if they need to make that the focus if the conversation. I've no problem with anyone spending whatever they want for the gear they choose. It's the ones who brag about how much they spent, all the "MINT" gear they have in their collection and so on. Anyone can buy a collection. It's easy to throw money at the cleanest example when you have it. Building your station through years of practice, research, and first hand experiences is the only way to gain the knowledge that goes with it. No amount of money can buy that.

As Don says, there was a time when KW-1s, Viking Kilowatts and other big rigs went begging. As I've mentioned before, I found mine in an antique shop along with a bunch of other gear back in the 80s before they became fashionable. Bought the whole lot for $350 and have made several times that amount since upgrading(selling) several of the pieces. So the only real money I have in it is the money for repairs and maintenance. But it also gets used, not worshiped. Which results in it getting broken *grumble*spit*mutter*.

I wouldn't swap-even my homebrew HF-300 rig for two KW-1s.

They're definitely not the best bang-for-the-buck in today's world, that's for sure. And the KW-1 does have its shortcomings as we've discussed before. But back in the day, I doubt you could've built your HB rig for less from the photos I've seen of it. Transformers, chokes, meters, even tubes and sockets we pick up cheap today were pricey back in the day when bought new. The overall quality and flexibility of the KW-1 helps its value today, but by far the low production numbers and resulting 'collector' factor have driven the prices. And while prices are down slightly, it's still more than I'd pay. We just have more and better options today.

[W3SLK]

Steve said:

It's a moot point since CW is a dead mode.

I'LL GIVE UP CW WHEN THEY PRY....... ooops. Sorry! 

[K5UJ]

They're definitely not the best bang-for-the-buck in today's world, that's for sure. And the KW-1 does have its shortcomings as we've discussed before. But back in the day, I doubt you could've built your HB rig for less from the photos I've seen of it. Transformers, chokes, meters, even tubes and sockets we pick up cheap today were pricey back in the day when bought new. The overall quality and flexibility of the KW-1 helps its value today, but by far the low production numbers and resulting 'collector' factor have driven the prices. And while prices are down slightly, it's still more than I'd pay. We just have more and better options today.

I think every KW-1 owner I know or can think of paid no more than $2K for his and got it a long time ago.  Maybe the $30,000 KW-1 is a myth.  Maybe they are listed for that but no one ever pays that much.

[k4kyv]

I wouldn't swap-even my homebrew HF-300 rig for two KW-1s.

They're definitely not the best bang-for-the-buck in today's world, that's for sure. And the KW-1 does have its shortcomings as we've discussed before. But back in the day, I doubt you could've built your HB rig for less from the photos I've seen of it. Transformers, chokes, meters, even tubes and sockets we pick up cheap today were pricey back in the day when bought new. The overall quality and flexibility of the KW-1 helps its value today, but by far the low production numbers and resulting 'collector' factor have driven the prices. And while prices are down slightly, it's still more than I'd pay. We just have more and better options today.

I built the HF-300 rig over the carcass of a homebrew 250-watt broadcast transmitter from the 30s.  Unfortunately, by the time I got it, it had already gone through a hammy hambone conversion, and all that was left was the empty shell with dials, meters and nameplates intact, but the interior gutted, and a coat of ugly telephone company grey covered up the original black wrinkle.  I did get a box full of parts from the original transmitter, but far from enough to rebuild it, even if I had had the documentation.

So I built a new transmitter of my own design, using technology pretty much period correct for the original.  Most of my parts were "vintage" when I first built it in 1970, and many of the parts from the BC transmitter were already "vintage" when it was put together in the late 30s.  Using what was available, much of the stuff that went into it was "ham radio quality" components picked up at hamfests, etc.  But over the years, I was able to gradually replace the cheap ham radio grade components with corresponding top-of-the-line commercial components dating back to the period.  For example, the highly inadequate original BC-610 class B driver transformer was eventually replaced with a UTC LS series transformer, using a quad of 2A3s in the driver stage.  The pole pigs were replaced with commercial grade radio plate transformers.  All the audio iron is now broadcast quality stuff. Even now, I still occasionally spot a component at a hamfest that I think is better than something that is already in it, and bring it home and try it out. If it works to my satisfaction, I keep it in place as a permanent replacement.

The whole thing didn't cost me a lot at any one time, but over the years I probably have put more $$$ in it than I might want to admit, but still, certainly nothing even close to what one would be expected to pay to-day for a KW-1. But to have built that same exact transmitter in 1937 or in 1939 from scratch, using the exact same components that are in it now (most of which BTW had already been made by then), would  have cost far more than 99% of hamdom could have afforded. It would have probably cost a lot more in real money than what people are allegedly paying now for a mint condx KW-1.

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

To the best of my knowledge Rob, they topped out around $25-$26K. I recall someone trying to sell one on ebay a couple years back for $30K, then dropping the price to $25K and it still didn't sell. He claimed to have sold it for $30K privately, which didn't seem to add up with the online ads and opportunities.

I do know of one that went to Japan back in the early 90s for $46K, but it was before the big feeding frenzy started here. It was also accurately-restored to the last detail, which pleased the Japanese collector no doubt. He also paid to air freight it over, not cheap by any means. Isolated incident reflecting one person's desire and means, not what was going on with them at the time.

Got my first Johnson Viking KW in 1986 for $200. Got my 30K-5 in '85 or '86 as trade for a Hallicrafters SR-150 I had very little in. And the guy thought I was nuts.

So yeah, there was a time not so long ago when people got this stuff because they liked it and wanted to use it, not for any perceived value beyond that. But hey - if you've got the money and want one, why not? Life is short, and as they say - they're not making anymore of them.

[AJ1G]

It's a moot point since CW is a dead mode.   

Maybe commercially, militarily and on the high seas (at least in the USA) but it's still a great and popular mode for ham comms.  It will get through when the going gets tough and you don't have a lot of fancy hardware and software for the "newer" digital modes. (CW being the "original" digital mode!)

[k4kyv]

You can still hear a lot of morse code on short wave, in between the ham bands.  Somebody is still using it for non-amateur military/government/commercial communications. The numbers stations use it, too.

[Mike/W8BAC]

I got it! Like the World War II enemy aircraft identification Charts...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/divemasterking2000/376197100/

We should publish plastic radio charts with three views and a short bio. That way Don you will have instant identification and can comment on the features. Maybe even petition the ARRL for a new award like Worked All Yeasu's?    

[Steve - K4HX]

  Did ya notice this? I was joking.   

[Bill, KD0HG]

I wouldn't swap-even my homebrew HF-300 rig for two KW-1s.

I'm with you Don, I wouldn't swap my homebrew tranny for any KW-1.

[Sam KS2AM]

If you're not familiar with some of the gear that other folks use on the air you may find this site helpful.  

http://rigpix.com/

It has a picture and basic description of rigs from the 20's until present day.  It even includes listings for many of those meaningless model designations like "Ranger", "32V-3", "75A-4", "NC-303" etc.  

[Pete, WA2CWA]

You can also here, http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/hfdisc.html to view rigs from the 70's to the present that have been discontinued and here http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/hamhf.html for all the current HF rigs.