Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Re\:\s+Future\s+availability\s+of\s+3cx1200a7\s+and\s+3cx1500a7\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Re\:\s+Future\s+availability\s+of\s+3cx1200a7\s+and\s+3cx1500a7\?\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] Re: Future availability of 3cx1200a7 and 3cx1500a7? (score: 1): Author: Dave Haupt <emailw8nf@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:06:44 -0700 (PDT); Ed, The difference between the '1200 and '1500 in feedback capacitance is only 2:1, and both are very small, indeed. While there are the occasional reports of oscillations with the '1200, it is more; /archives//html/Amps/2003-10/msg00216.html (9,459 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Re: Future availability of 3cx1200a7 and 3cx1500a7? (score: 1): Author: rlm <r@somis.org>; Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 22:15:42 -0700; On Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 05:06 PM, Dave Haupt wrote: Ed, The difference between the '1200 and '1500 in feedback capacitance is only 2:1, ** There is apparently a typo in Eimac Catalog 175. T; /archives//html/Amps/2003-10/msg00226.html (11,865 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] Re: Future availability of 3cx1200a7 and 3cx1500a7? (score: 1): Author: rlm <r@somis.org>; Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:51:16 -0700; On Friday, October 24, 2003, at 09:33 AM, Dave Haupt wrote: Rich, Feedback capacitance is certainly a worthy consideration. To accurately model the potential trouble spots, it needs to be made a part; /archives//html/Amps/2003-10/msg00232.html (17,631 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] Re: Future availability of 3cx1200a7 and 3cx1500a7? (score: 1): Author: Ed Briggs <edbriggs@optonline.net>; Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 11:17:12 -0500; Clarification please: The current Eimac webpage says that the socket is the *same* for both the 3cx1200a7 and 3cx1200z7 (SK-410). Several posts said that the socket was different. Is this a web page; /archives//html/Amps/2003-10/msg00241.html (13,598 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]