> > Denny Had thought otherwise for years.
> > Eimac still honored their warranty, and the FCC
> > did not seem to care.
>
> None of that matters Phil, because none of that means anything.
>
You are taking me out of context, Tom.
I was replying to Rich's statement that Eimac recommends
a pi input network. I was just pointing out that using a parallel
network (or none at all) will not void their warranty. Using a
parallel network or none at all will not necessarily cause excess
IMD causing the FCC to not type accept a radio. ETO, Dentron,
and others are proof that parallel input networks and even
some sort of a "T" network may not be optimum, but may be
acceptable.
You, Rich, and Eimac like pi networks. Creative Electronics,
RF Power Products, ETO-Alpha. myself, and others like
parallel or T networks. We all have sufficiently clean, and
type accepted products on the air daily. You are not going to
change me and I am not going to change you.
As with parasitic suppressors and other components in an
amp, there are CHOICES which all arrive at acceptable
results.
(((73)))
Phil, K5PC
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|