w8jitom@postoffice.worldnet.att.net wrote:
> I don't have my copy of QST. What was the failure of all three amps?
> Does anyone know? So far as I heard, the AL-800 never failed but did
> lose some IMD performance from an earlier test when it was new, but
> not enough to get unacceptable.
>
I can say that my 91b never failed either, at least since I purchased it
back in May. Quite and fun to use. AS for the QST article: "During a
contest, it suffered a component failure in the screen supply.
Otherwise, we found the 91b to be a real workhourse that will just chug
along at 1500 W output for hours on end (one tester called it the
'Energizer amplifier')" For the QRO "During ARRl Lab testing, our
HF-2500DX initially failed to meet spectral purity requirements. .
.problem centered on the 4:1 output transformer that had been used in
the tank circuit" The AL-800 "Late in our review process, we discovered
that our AL-800H had developed a problem that caused intermodulation
distortion (IMD)" (Sept 1997 QST p. 74-75.
Bob n8wfl
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|