Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] Amps Digest, Vol 117, Issue 24

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] Amps Digest, Vol 117, Issue 24
From: "W8HW" <w8hw@att.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 20:10:51 -0400
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
I have purchased many MFJ products and have good service and great Customer service after the product sale. Once I broke a part (my fault) and they sent me the part for free.

73, Bruce, W8HW


----- Original Message ----- From: <amps-request@contesting.com>
To: <amps@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 7:54 PM
Subject: Amps Digest, Vol 117, Issue 24


Send Amps mailing list submissions to
amps@contesting.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
amps-request@contesting.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
amps-owner@contesting.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Amps digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: MFJ products (David Kirkby)
  2. Re: MFJ products (Mike)
  3. Re: MFJ products (Alek Petkovic)
  4. Pulser (Jim Thomson)
  5. Re: MFJ products (David Kirkby)
  6. Re: MFJ products (Mike)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 23:52:59 +0100
From: David Kirkby <david.kirkby@onetel.net>
To: Gene May <gene-may@hotmail.com>
Cc: Amplifier Mailing List <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
Message-ID:
<CANX10hCYrbd+7iHGm7aom5Dqpcih0HAhCASXaBr8+-v4CfpW6A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

A friend of mine calls MFJ:

More f***ing Junk.

I have never bought any of their stuff, and don't feel a desire to.

Dave, G8WRB

On 10 September 2012 23:12, Gene May <gene-may@hotmail.com> wrote:

I've had experience similar to that described below with their products, of which I have a number, some active, some passive. I've learned the following:

(a) don't believe their CCS and max ratings; IMHO they've been somewhat optimistic. (b) the same sentiments re QC that are expressed below. I open and examine them the same way I would examine an early HeathKit or DynaKit that I was resurrecting, one which I made before I had much experience in assembly and soldering,.

Along these lines: I just got an MFJ 998RT, the 1.5 KW, 1.8 - 30.0 MHz, remote antenna tuner. I found one of the bolts that is supposed to hold the cover to its base with its head stripped off. I also found that they used wire at least two gauges smaller than I would have used to wind the coils.

QUESTION: I plan to use the 998RT in my attic right now, not outside, and am thinking of running it with its cover off so that it runs cooler. Their instructions say not to do this, although this seems to relate to safety issues (high RF voltages) rather than function. The cover is made of plastic, not metal, and therefore not a shield against harmonics radiating. Does anyone else have any experience with running this or any other of their remote tuners without covers (indoors, obviously)? Comments or suggestions?

I do like their value, and as below, will probably continue to buy their stuff, with the cautions above. I also particularly like their not cancelling the warranty if you open the device, since I always do.

Ref SWR meters: I like the "computing" type of SWR meter, like first described in QST by Fayman W0GI about 30 years ago. This displays SWR directly, computing it from forward and reflected power and not requiring one to either read some obscure needle intersection, or switch back and forth between forward and reflected power. I still have one of his design I made back then. Grebencamper has described an updated version (in the ARRL Antenna Book - haven't tried it, but the circuit is similar), and Autek Research in FL makes and sells them. I have one of these also and like it. These are VERY handy instruments for Field Day, or for people who have to squeeze their antennae into small attics.

Tnx es 73,

Gene May
WB8WKU


RECENT RELATED POSTINGS:

Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 04:00:26 -0400
From: k8ri@rogerhalstead.com
To: amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] SS Amp questions

On 9/10/2012 12:53 AM, Jerry Kaidor wrote:
*** My impression of MFJ is that they do have some pretty decent engineering in their stuff, but their quality control is strictly to meet
a price.

They do make some handy equipment that works fairly well, they make some to a price and stretch the power out beyond reliability limits, but you only need to look at the QC on the same items built under their control and without to see what building to a price can do.
I still use their products, but pay attention to what I get.

73

Roger (K8RI)
open the> >
> - Jerry Kaidor, KF6VB

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps


------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:30:21 -0700
From: "Mike" <noddy1211@sbcglobal.net>
To: "'Amplifier Mailing List'" <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
Message-ID: <002401cd8fac$3f7595f0$be60c1d0$@net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Dave,

You have to look at it this way, if MFJ had not bought up many of the old
Ham Radio Equipment suppliers we may not find stuff at all or at reasonable price, anything that is shipped you should check out before using including
Alpha products

I have an old MFJ-989 Tuner and also AL-1500 both of which worked perfectly
out of the box.

You Criticize and admit you have never purchased their equipment, so why
don't you just keep quiet instead of using bad language on the group with
absolutely no personal experience.

K6BR

-----Original Message-----
From: Amps [mailto:amps-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of David Kirkby
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 3:53 PM
To: Gene May
Cc: Amplifier Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products

A friend of mine calls MFJ:

More f***ing Junk.

I have never bought any of their stuff, and don't feel a desire to.

Dave, G8WRB

On 10 September 2012 23:12, Gene May <gene-may@hotmail.com> wrote:

I've had experience similar to that described below with their products,
of which I have a number, some active, some passive.  I've learned the
following:

     (a)  don't believe their CCS and max ratings; IMHO they've been
somewhat optimistic.
     (b)  the same sentiments re QC that are expressed below.  I open and
examine them the same way I would examine an early HeathKit or DynaKit that
I was resurrecting, one which I made before I had much experience in
assembly and soldering,.

Along these lines:  I just got an MFJ 998RT, the 1.5 KW, 1.8 - 30.0 MHz,
remote antenna tuner. I found one of the bolts that is supposed to hold the
cover to its base with its head stripped off.  I also found that they used
wire at least two gauges smaller than I would have used to wind the coils.

QUESTION: I plan to use the 998RT in my attic right now, not outside, and
am thinking of running it with its cover off so that it runs cooler. Their
instructions say not to do this, although this seems to relate to safety
issues (high RF voltages) rather than function.  The cover is made of
plastic, not metal, and therefore not a shield against harmonics radiating. Does anyone else have any experience with running this or any other of their remote tuners without covers (indoors, obviously)? Comments or suggestions?

I do like their value, and as below, will probably continue to buy their
stuff, with the cautions above.  I also particularly like their not
cancelling the warranty if you open the device, since I always do.

Ref SWR meters:  I like the "computing" type of SWR meter, like first
described in QST by Fayman W0GI about 30 years ago.  This displays SWR
directly, computing it from forward and reflected power and not requiring
one to either read some obscure needle intersection, or switch back and
forth between forward and reflected power. I still have one of his design I made back then. Grebencamper has described an updated version (in the ARRL
Antenna Book - haven't tried it, but the circuit is similar), and Autek
Research in FL makes and sells them. I have one of these also and like it.
These are VERY handy instruments for Field Day, or for people who have to
squeeze their antennae into small attics.

Tnx es 73,

Gene May
WB8WKU


RECENT RELATED POSTINGS:

Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 04:00:26 -0400
From: k8ri@rogerhalstead.com
To: amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] SS Amp questions

On 9/10/2012 12:53 AM, Jerry Kaidor wrote:
 *** My impression of MFJ is that they do have some pretty decent
engineering in their stuff, but their quality control is strictly to meet
a price.

 They do make some handy equipment that works fairly well, they make some
to a price and stretch the power out beyond reliability limits, but you only
need to look at the QC on the same items built under their control and
without to see what building to a price can do.
I still use their products, but pay attention to what I get.

73

Roger (K8RI)
open the> >
> - Jerry Kaidor, KF6VB

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2437/5260 - Release Date: 09/10/12



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 07:31:24 +0800
From: Alek Petkovic <vk6apk@bigpond.com>
To: amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
Message-ID: <504E784C.7050707@bigpond.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

On 11/09/2012 6:12 AM, Gene May wrote:
[Chop]
or for people who have to squeeze their antennae into small attics.

Tnx es 73, Gene May WB8WKU RECENT RELATED POSTINGS:




Insects have antennae. Hams have antennas.

73, Alek.
VK6APK






Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 04:00:26 -0400
From: k8ri@rogerhalstead.com
To: amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] SS Amp questions

On 9/10/2012 12:53 AM, Jerry Kaidor wrote:
*** My impression of MFJ is that they do have some pretty decent engineering in their stuff, but their quality control is strictly to meet
a price.
They do make some handy equipment that works fairly well, they make some to a price and stretch the power out beyond reliability limits, but you only need to look at the QC on the same items built under their control and without to see what building to a price can do.
I still use their products, but pay attention to what I get.
73

Roger (K8RI)
open the> >
- Jerry Kaidor, KF6VB

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps



--
From sunny Binningup, Western Australia.

Family Businesses:
Petkovic Air & Gas. petkovicag@bigpond.com
SP Electrical. www.spelectrical.net.au
Hampers by Hand. www.facebook.com/hampersbyhand

http://www.qrz.com/db/vk6apk
http://www.qrz.com/db/vk6ap





=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 9.0.0.2308, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20600)
http://www.pctools.com/
=======


------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:42:20 -0700
From: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>
To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [Amps] Pulser
Message-ID: <140A273C69D94311ACDBE9BFF5EE2C26@JimPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:20:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: SavanaPics@aol.com
To: k6uj@pacbell.net, amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] Pulser

Larry, a fellow HAM in the Atlanta area makes a device called the PECKER.
it was a big hit years ago on the 3898 group and is still quite popular (
not to mention reasonable) it is available in either assembled or kit
format. Go to _www.mrpecker.com_ (http://www.mrpecker.com) . If it is for an
Icom, be sure to ask about the 100 mfd non polarized electrolytic

Eddie, kc4awz

## The problem with that 3898 pecker device is that is has NO output control on it ! 95% of the time it will blow your alc right to the peg. If you have an analog type alc meter it gets even worse, since the alc meter isnt really rading true peaks, like a peak reading led type alc meter. Then folks further screw things up by leaving their processor cranked up full tilt while using the audio type peckers. Any type of audio pecker needs an output pot on the end of it.

## On the FT-1000D, a string of 60 wpm dits will result in a 50% duty cycle. On my FT-1000MP-MK-V, the dot dash ratio can be tweaked individually for both dots and dashs. The default setting is dots= 10 and dashs = 30 . Each can be
set  anywhere from 1-129 !

## In the default 10-30 ratio, a string of 60 wpm dots will result in a 50% duty cycle. To reduce the duty cycle, the DOT setting is simply reduced to a setting below 10. IE: while sending dots at 60 wpm, reduce the dot setting from 10 to 9 to 8 to 7 etc. I think a DOT setting around 7-8 results in a 30% duty cycle. A setting of 1-5
results in a very low duty cycle.

##  For normal CW  operation, I use  Dots = 10..... and dashes = 36.
Then I end up with a dot ?dash ratio of 1: 3.6 Which is weighting I like.

## For pulse tuning, DOT settings of 5-8 work great. BUT you have to
remember to put the dot setting back to 10   for normal CW operation.

Jim  VE7RF



------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 00:47:59 +0100
From: David Kirkby <david.kirkby@onetel.net>
To: Amplifier Mailing List <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
Message-ID:
<CANX10hDJ-8v9TvgVkFdMvKycsNBQMp71T=Hh-cnBO78MNx5tOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 11 September 2012 00:30, Mike <noddy1211@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Dave,

You Criticize and admit you have never purchased their equipment, so why
don't you just keep quiet instead of using bad language on the group with
absolutely no personal experience.

K6BR

Mike, I have seen inside some of the MFJ products. Build quality is very poor.

Dave


------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:54:34 -0700
From: "Mike" <noddy1211@sbcglobal.net>
To: "'Alek Petkovic'" <vk6apk@bigpond.com>, <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
Message-ID: <002501cd8faf$a1957db0$e4c07910$@net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Antennae (singular: antenna)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antenna_(biology)

I would say strange, but acceptable description for one Antenna and not
entirely wrong.  I prefer Aerial or Aerials, more simple: -)

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Amps [mailto:amps-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Alek Petkovic
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 4:31 PM
To: amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products

On 11/09/2012 6:12 AM, Gene May wrote:
[Chop]
or for people who have to squeeze their antennae into small attics.

Tnx es 73, Gene May WB8WKU RECENT RELATED POSTINGS:




Insects have antennae. Hams have antennas.

73, Alek.
VK6APK






Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 04:00:26 -0400
From: k8ri@rogerhalstead.com
To: amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] SS Amp questions

On 9/10/2012 12:53 AM, Jerry Kaidor wrote:
  *** My impression of MFJ is that they do have some pretty decent
engineering in their stuff, but their quality control is strictly to meet
a price.
They do make some handy equipment that works fairly well, they make some
to a price and stretch the power out beyond reliability limits, but you only
need to look at the QC on the same items built under their control and
without to see what building to a price can do.
I still use their products, but pay attention to what I get.
73

Roger (K8RI)
open the> >
- Jerry Kaidor, KF6VB

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps



--
From sunny Binningup, Western Australia.

Family Businesses:
Petkovic Air & Gas. petkovicag@bigpond.com SP Electrical.
www.spelectrical.net.au Hampers by Hand. www.facebook.com/hampersbyhand

http://www.qrz.com/db/vk6apk
http://www.qrz.com/db/vk6ap





=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 9.0.0.2308, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20600)
http://www.pctools.com/ =======
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2437/5260 - Release Date: 09/10/12



------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps


------------------------------

End of Amps Digest, Vol 117, Issue 24
*************************************

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [Amps] Amps Digest, Vol 117, Issue 24, W8HW <=