I've had good luck with MFJ products (keyers and tuners.) as long as I open the
unit up and correct a few things here and there once in awhile. Shouldn't have
but to me it's not a show stopper given price and general quality of
components. It's just the workmanship lack of quality, which I have come to
expect and accept most of the time from every current manufacturer. I like it
when they fix the bugs from the first production run, relabel it the "A" or "B"
model, and up the price. They have a less than complimentary view of us but
maybe that's because so many fall for it.
I've been working on my Drake line and what a quality piece of workmanship the
originals were/are. Bob, NZ5A
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 10, 2012, at 5:52 PM, David Kirkby <david.kirkby@onetel.net> wrote:
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
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|