Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+YC\-257\s+VS\s+8877\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+YC\-257\s+VS\s+8877\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] YC-257 VS 8877 (score: 1): Author: Dennis W0JX <w0jx@yahoo.com>; Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:06:38 -0800 (PST); There is o significant difference worth mentioning. The filament voltage of the 3CPX1500A7 is specified by Eimac to br 5.5 volts at 11.2 A while the 8877 is specified at 5.0 volts at 10.5 A. If the a; /archives//html/Amps/2007-01/msg00182.html (7,085 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] YC-257 VS 8877 (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 06:13:22 -0500; I think you will find the internal structure other than better insulation is the same as an 8877 and that Eimac only runs the regular filament/cathode hotter by jacking up the filament voltage. Othe; /archives//html/Amps/2007-01/msg00184.html (7,290 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] YC-257 VS 8877 (score: 1): Author: "Robert B. Bonner" <rbonner@qro.com>; Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 07:30:40 -0600; Somebody might want to get "CURRENT THOUGHTS FROM EIMAC" as just like the rest of us, attitudes over time. Like today I hate ham radio, yesterday I didn't, tomorrow I might not again. When I first go; /archives//html/Amps/2007-01/msg00186.html (9,534 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] YC-257 VS 8877 (score: 1): Author: Gudguyham@aol.com; Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 10:29:31 EST; If you get a good 3CPX it should work good - last long time. BOB DD Bob, this is the information I obtaind BEFORE I offered the tubes for sale for amatuer use. I would NOT have bought them myself if; /archives//html/Amps/2007-01/msg00187.html (7,578 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]