The AM Forum
February 20, 2024, 11:00:56 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Links Staff List Gallery Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: BC-348 Vs. BC342  (Read 1282 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
KA3EKH
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 768



WWW
« on: August 18, 2023, 09:26:42 AM »

Its Friday and not a lot going on at work today so thought I would write up something and see if anyone else is interested in adding to it.
I was wondering why in the world of WW2 radios the BC-348 appears to be king, where the BC-342 or 312 that were a ground base version of the same receive and appear as a footnote in comparison?
Although completely different they both cover the same frequency range, use somewhat the same tube line up and were used for the same function except the 348 was designed to be a bit smaller and lighter then the ground base 342, but the 342 had a smother tuning mechanism, usable crystal filter and the 342 came with an internal AC power supply. No BC-348 ever had an internal AC power supply unless modified for AC operation. I know people are going to split hairs and say they have one that had an AC power supply but that was after the radio was built being they were designed and built for installation in aircraft.
looking at sale price for the radios you can pick up a 342 or 312 for less then a 348 and although itís just my observations it appears that there is at least a ten to one ratio of web sites and people using the 348 as compared to the BC-342/312   
The only thing I think that I can say is that the BC-348 receivers served on a lot longer in military service where it was not uncommon to see the BC-348 and ART-13 in aircraft up to the sixties where the BC-342 and 312 were rapidly replaced with newer and better ground receivers like the 51J and 388 with the migration from voice and CW to teletype.
Has nothing to do with the above but tons of BC-312 and 342 receivers were produced early in the war for use with transmitters like the BC-191 and the BC-223 for the SCR-245 that was intended as a short-range ground radio set until the FM radios came out and blew all the short-range ground AM stuff away.
I have an unused BC-312 with the shock mount and all that stuff that I would like to pair with a BC-223 transmitter just for doing the 3885 net out at Hamvention just because its such a huge, heavy and somewhat pointless radio after the advent of things like the SCR-300 FM sets.
Thatís my limited speculation and understanding, anyone else want to chime in and tell me how I have no idea of what I am talking about?

Logged
n8fvj
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 253


« Reply #1 on: August 18, 2023, 09:48:17 AM »

The 342 and 312 is usually a lot less in cost vs the 348 in same condition. I think the popularity is the 348 is a more normal front panel layout vs the very military 342 and 312 'buzzardly' front panel layout and the 348 crystal filter. not installed on the 342 & 312. Power supplies is not normally an issue as most 348 for sale have a HB built-in power supply. Either receiver is fairly good in performance as measured by W1VD here: https://w1vd.com/BAreceivertest.html
Logged
wa2oro
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #2 on: August 18, 2023, 01:37:50 PM »

having owned a number of bc348 and bc342 receivers over the years what i can say is most of the bc348s worked  when received and most of the bc342 land based receivers did not work the bc-342 is much more differcult to work on and repair . the bc-342 type receivers weigh much . it seems to me people in the signal corps would have the same problem when repairing these radios Greg WA2ORO
Logged
KA3EKH
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 768



WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2023, 11:34:26 AM »

It dose appear that the capacitors in the 342/312 may be an issue; I have seen a lot on line about replacing them. I have owned and worked on a ton of BC-348 receivers and have to say the only issue that I have run across is poor conversion jobs and Ham hacks. I have a BC-348Q thatís one of my favorite receivers and it has all original capacitors including the big stupid capacitor that was under the dyno deck. Remember checking it when I got the receiver and it had no leakage and was still 8 mfd so I kept it in the radio for use with the new AC power supply.
I have bought, sold and traded several BC-342 receivers but never spent any time with one but they are heavy, as far as being ugly beauty is in the eye or something like that.
Think back when I was like twelve or thirteen got hold of the manual for the BC-342 and although I did not have one until years later learned huge amounts about how a receiver works from that book. I did have a BC-348 at the time but no book for that.
At work everything now is digital and you donít do repairs as much as change out entire working systems due to obsolescence, now find myself more then ever wanting to play around with the old WW2 AM and CW stuff, biggest problem is finding ways to use the old low power wide band stuff but doing remote ops like at the Hamvention or Military Vehicle Shows provides a venue for that.
 
Logged
KA3EKH
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 768



WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 22, 2023, 08:58:39 AM »

Weird version from Japan of the BC-342, just the receiver for monitoring threats over the ďG-NetĒ or Godzilla Net to find out if Mothra or Rodan are on the way.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/166288461680

Logged
Pages: [1]   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 0.033 seconds with 18 queries.