To a degree you are looking at apples and oranges. The AL 572 uses 4
tubes, the RF parts replacement cost is $144 to $239 -depending on the
quality - not $60. The Al 80 Tube cost is $139 to $159 While you can
tube the AL-800 for $459. The real difference is in how you want to
operate. If you are only operating SSB than the differences are features
and tube preference. You should do some research into the future
availability the tubes. The most expensive of the batch - the 3cx800A7
is still a current Eimac product.
If you are interested in other modes than there is a bigger difference.
The 80B is rated 500 watts RTTY (or many digital modes), The AL-800 is
rated 700 watts RTTY and has better key down specs. The AL-572 does not
have a listed RTTY rating. This is not just the tube capability it is
also the power supply rating. I have a Kenwood Linear with a 3-500
final. It will be replaced by either an AL-1500 or a very robust solid
state amp. I am still looking at those options. Since I like digital and
CW, I want and AMP that will sit key down at 1500 watts output for a
long time without problems.
If you only operate sideband or don't care if your digital and CW power
is reduced than your choice might be different. Of course you also need
to look at the required driving power of the amps. There is no benefit
of having a robust amplifier if your transceiver can not drive it in
R Atkins wrote:
> I'm looking over all of the ameritron amps and having trouble understanding
> something... a quick breakdown reveals the following (from their web site)
> AL-80B: 1000 watts,
> tube cost $249. $1399 list
> AL-572: 1300 watts,
> tube cost $60. $1495 list
> AL-800: 1250 watts, tube cost $535. $1995 list
> Without getting into the "why would anybody pay $3500 for the AL-1200/1500
> for 200 watts more?" questions, let me ask...
> Why would anybody pay $500 more for the AL-800 than the AL-572 when it has
> slightly lower power output and the tubes cost 9 times as much?
> .. and why would anybody pay only $100 less for 1000 rather than a 13000 watt
> amp when the tubes cost 4 times as much?
> I'm sure I'm overlooking something here, but not sure what.
Amps mailing list