Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+ceramic\s+vs\s+glass\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 06:08:41 -0800
Personally I wholeheartedly concur with your sentiments here Bill; most of my shack amps are of the ceramic tube variety and indeed do seem to last forever. My only exception amp is the venerable Ken
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00237.html (8,469 bytes)

2. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Col. Paul E. Cater" <paulecater@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 09:40:32 -0500
I'm dubious about some of the ceramics. The ones that require more parts to protect it then actually use it and the old Russian jobs. The 500Z is a time proven design. Many of the failures are do to
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00238.html (9,870 bytes)

3. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: kf8od--- via Amps <amps@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 09:45:38 -0500
My Henry 4K Ultra has a 1973 3cx1500a7, still makes 2500 watts. 73, Mike KF8OD --Original Message-- From: Jim Thomson <jim.thom@telus.net> To: amps <amps@contesting.com> Sent: Sat, Jan 24, 2015 9:09
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00239.html (9,300 bytes)

4. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: Colin Lamb <k7fm@teleport.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 06:53:13 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
Hey, don't forget metal tubes. I built a linear amp in the 1960s using 4 x 6AG7 surplus WWII metal tubes and abused the heck out of it and it still puts out full power. And, my metal 6L6 tube in my 6
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00241.html (7,253 bytes)

5. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.qozzy.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 11:19:33 -0500
I don't know where you get those numbers from but they are obviously improperly weighted. First of all the 3-500 fan amps far outnumber the ones with chimneys by a huge amount, the SB-220/221/HL-2200
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00247.html (13,557 bytes)

6. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Fuqua, Bill L" <wlfuqu00@uky.edu>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 16:29:59 +0000
Naturally, there were a number of tubes that did not require fans at all, but lost favor in the once the 3-400Z and 4-400A tube were being used in amplifiers, such as 250TH, 450TH, and the 813's. Als
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00248.html (14,587 bytes)

7. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Col. Paul E. Cater" <paulecater@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 11:57:27 -0500
I didn't mention any numbers. If I did I would have pulled them out my butt like most do. I really don't know where you would find any reliable data on it other then peoples experience and hearsay. D
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00252.html (15,921 bytes)

8. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.qozzy.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 13:52:09 -0500
Those old 30's era tubes with very low mu did not make very good SSB linears. Even as a teenager I knew better than to use my PP 250TH AM/CW amp on SSB after an appropriate bias change. I had a good
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00255.html (17,942 bytes)

9. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.qozzy.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 13:52:11 -0500
I didn't mention any numbers. If I did I would have pulled them out my butt like most do. ** Unfortunately that is true. I really don't know where you would find any reliable data on it other then p
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00256.html (18,252 bytes)

10. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Col. Paul E. Cater" <paulecater@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 14:14:11 -0500
Carl, you must really enjoy hosing down the decks with testosterone. It seems to be a pattern. When things turn a bit off for you, you get personnel. So be it, that is your style. I have reviewed the
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00257.html (21,723 bytes)

11. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.qozzy.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 19:46:59 -0500
Carl, you must really enjoy hosing down the decks with testosterone. It seems to be a pattern. When things turn a bit off for you, you get personnel. So be it, that is your style. ** Nice try at dam
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00261.html (23,369 bytes)

12. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Col. Paul E. Cater" <paulecater@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 20:14:28 -0500
I thank you for your service to this nation sir. _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00263.html (28,956 bytes)

13. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: Louis Parascondola via Amps <amps@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 20:34:38 -0500
when I think of the word colonel I think of KLINK --Original Message-- From: Col. Paul E. Cater <paulecater@gmail.com> To: Carl <km1h@jeremy.qozzy.com> Cc: Amps reflector <amps@contesting.com> Sent:
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00265.html (8,989 bytes)

14. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: Richard Solomon <dickw1ksz@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 19:44:44 -0700
I do love this group !! And to keep on topic ... the best buy today is a used AL-1200, with a 3CX1300A7. 73, Dick, W1KSZ _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contest
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00266.html (9,748 bytes)

15. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 22:21:57 -0500
It has been my experience, hence anecdotal, that if properly cooled and treated, there is little difference in the useful life of Ceramic Vs glass tubes, but when we get into older tubes, like the PL
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00268.html (10,448 bytes)

16. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Col. Paul E. Cater" <paulecater@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 10:13:45 -0500
Now that is funny Louis-- I need to see if I can find that show someplace to stream. _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00271.html (9,307 bytes)

17. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Jim W7RY" <w7ry@centurytel.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 07:23:59 -0800
I disagree Dick. The AL1500 8877 tube is cheaper, easier to find and more plentiful. If you are not going to RTTY contest, and dont need 160 meters, the SB220 @ $600 to $700 is the best buy. 73 Jim W
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00272.html (10,513 bytes)

18. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.qozzy.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 11:18:06 -0500
With minimal work even the Clipperton L/Clipperton QRO will run 1000-1200W 160-10M. The late L's and all QRO's have a built in tuned input. About $400-500 for a good one if you shop. Operated sanely
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00273.html (12,082 bytes)

19. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: Richard Solomon <dickw1ksz@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 11:30:07 -0700
The AL-1200 has had it's share, some may say more than it's share, of abuse over the years. It's a given that running one at 1,200 watts, RTTY, on 10 Meters is not a good thing. If you insist on runn
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00278.html (13,718 bytes)

20. Re: [Amps] ceramic vs glass (score: 1)
Author: "Ian White" <ian@ifwtech.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 13:41:46 -0500
Exactly. The increased need for protection isn't due to any differences between glass and ceramic construction, but all the other internal changes that were introduced at the same time - along with
/archives//html/Amps/2015-01/msg00279.html (10,228 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]
This search system is powered by Namazu