The 75S-3...what I have to say about it.

[w1guh]

Yea, it is not generally considered to be a "good" AM boat anchor.  And with a lot of good reason.

But, when I moved to my present QTH, I was faced with the decision of which ONE radio did I want to take with me.  The space said that I could only take one radio, and I had to blow off some great receivers, like the GPR-90 the HQ--180...the R-4C...and the decision, after taking everything into account was my 75-S3A. 

I know that S-line gets a bum rap here....after all, it represants the ultimate weapon in the SSB vs. AM thing that happened in the early sixties.   ,

But, as it turns out, the 75-S3 is a receiver that I say beats other boat anchors, as the ultimate boat anchor, in any category except "total AM bandwidth."  Nope....R-390's with the 15 kc if bandwidth beats the pants off a 75-S3.

But, except for that, the '390 can't hold a candle to the 'S3 as a ham receiver.

Yea....details about this will be coming...just wanted to get the idea out there about a good SW receiver.  I love the 'S3 that's been the only boat anchor that I could physically bring here...it has peformed par excellance!  No kiddin'.

Happy Holidays!

Paul

[w3jn]

There's a alot to be said for the 75S series as battle-mode receivers  They are very stable, small, light, and good performers in every respect save audiio quality. 

If you were to go out looking for one to buy, they are a very poor value though, as the Collins Collectors/japanese/koreans/ are driving up the prices.

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

There's a alot to be said for the 75S series as battle-mode receivers  They are very stable, small, light, and good performers in every respect save audiio quality. 

If you were to go out looking for one to buy, they are a very poor value though, as the Collins Collectors/japanese/koreans/ are driving up the prices.

Couldn't agree more. I think of the 75S series as an updated version of the 75A-4, basically. And I love my 75A-4 for what it is: a good, stable, battle-mode receiver in the same respects, and also lacking in the audio dept. Unfortunately, the Junior Collins version 75S lacks 160 as well, the trade off I guess being a more portable size. This really puts it into the 'More Money for Less Radio' category if you're looking to buy something. 

Collins gear is (in my opinion) the overall best gear available. Not for every situation or every user, but in overall quality, design, construction, and durability. It gets a bum rap mainly due to the idiots who choose to worship rather than enjoy using it, and pay big bucks in many cases for bragging rights over functionality.

As you point out, John - you sure can buy a lot more radio and enjoyment with that collector price tag.

You're lucky to be an owner not having to buy one, Paul - and smart to hang onto it. They are indeed a piece of work. 

[w1guh]

Sorry it took so long for my reply.

Yea...I look on my 'S3A as a streamlined 'A4.  With all that means.  Art collins was a genius/artist to do that.

How I got that 'S3A?  I was EXTREMELY luck.  It was plain dumb luck.

Somehow, I had gotten the S-Line bug shortly before that, where I "knew" there was S-Line in my future.

Well, before I could act on that, I saw this one at a hamfest in Feb. '91.  I spotted it and talked to the guy about it.  On first look, the only thing to detract from it was a dirty chassis.  While we were talking, I stuck my finger on the cassis & rubbed it.  Wow!  It wasn't discoloration, it was dust.  Under the dust was a pristine chassis.

Still, I was thinking his price was high.  But, he convinced me it was a good price.

So I got it.

As it turns out, the price was, well, at the time, maybe just right.  But now, I won the lottery there.  If only because that radio has been the most enjoyable radio I ever owned.

OK....the lore of "S-Line virgin discovers what he REALLY got."

I love this hobby.

[W2JBL]

   i have a 75S1 and a 75S3. both are very good on AM. the S1 has it's stock loose coupled IF cans for AM, and it's about 8KC wide, nice for the daytime on 75. my S3 has a 6KC mechanical filter for AM. a bit tight unless you slope tune, but the notch filter is a nice tool for the "tools" that Quirm us. the S1 has an aftermarket Waters notch filter that's also very good. both receivers respond very well to simple audio mods. my only complaints about them is the weak front end. nice, very quiet and good sensitivity but somewhat limited dynamic range. i get cross modulation and blocking troubles that my 390's and 390A's never suffer from. the product detectors are also somewhat distorted due to low BFO injection levels. if i ever get around to it i'm going to screen modulate my 32S1 (after the "real CW mod") and get my whole S Line on AM. be sure to go to confession after you mod your S Line gear, HA!!!

[w3jn]

Even so, the 75S series is MUCH better than the 51S-1, which has one of the worst front ends ever in a so-called professional grade tube receiver.

[w1guh]

   i have a 75S1 and a 75S3. both are very good on AM. the S1 has it's stock loose coupled IF cans for AM, and it's about 8KC wide, nice for the daytime on 75. my S3 has a 6KC mechanical filter for AM. a bit tight unless you slope tune, but the notch filter is a nice tool for the "tools" that Quirm us. the S1 has an aftermarket Waters notch filter that's also very good. both receivers respond very well to simple audio mods. my only complaints about them is the weak front end. nice, very quiet and good sensitivity but somewhat limited dynamic range. i get cross modulation and blocking troubles that my 390's and 390A's never suffer from. the product detectors are also somewhat distorted due to low BFO injection levels. if i ever get around to it i'm going to screen modulate my 32S1 (after the "real CW mod") and get my whole S Line on AM. be sure to go to confession after you mod your S Line gear, HA!!!

I understand the the 75S-1 has a rear panel jack for a Q-multiplier, and that the Heath QF-1 was very effective in that application.  Did you ever try that?

The only other receiver I know of that had a jack like that was the lowly AR-3 (my first receiver).  And, the QF-1 was extrememly useful in the crowded novice bands of 1960.  To learn that it (the QF-1) was also a good addition to an S-line receiver is a testament to Heathkit, or something.  How did the performance of the Waters unit compare to the QF-1?  I remember that the QF-1 was very effective as both a peak and a null.

My 'S-3A has the narrow CW filter, and it's very effective, but the QF-1 had the tunable, very sharp peak function that maybe would be a more effective operational tool?  Makes me want to get a QF-1 and try it on my S-line.

Side comment...my next receiver was the Knight R-100 chosen, among other reasons, because it had a good Q-multiplier built-in.