Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+triode\s+or\s+tetrode\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+triode\s+or\s+tetrode\s*$/: 24 ]

Total 24 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: Jim Hoge <knowkode@verizon.net>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 06:33:06 -0700 (PDT); I am kicking around the idea of a new amp ( I want 160m capability which my current amp doesn't have) and have a few questions for the gurus and those that have theses beasts. Am I better off with a; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00380.html (6,684 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: Roger <sub1@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:29:10 -0400; Jim, you are probably going to get as many opinions as there are people willing to post. IF you are going to purchase or build makes a big difference. I prefer Tetrodes as they take less drive, BUT T; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00381.html (9,596 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: Colin Lamb <k7fm@teleport.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 08:18:27 -0700 (GMT-07:00); Here are my 3 cents worth, following Roger's 2 cents. There are maxims developed over 50 years: 1. The more complex a project is, the less likely it is to get built. 2. The power dissipation of the t; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00382.html (8,032 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 11:26:36 -0400; A couple of choices: Three 4-400's in swamped grid or GG will give a reliable 1500W with plenty of overhead even at 2500-3000V. In GG they require 120+W drive for that power if down in emission. Pul; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00385.html (13,020 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: "Martin Sole" <hs0zed@csloxinfo.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 22:30:41 +0700; I recall a maxim of some good time ago that postulated power tubes (valves) can be likened to women. One is very nice, two might at first seem like it would be even nicer, however there are pitfalls; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00387.html (8,743 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: Vic K2VCO <vic@rakefet.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 08:30:54 -0700; I think that you meant 'triodes have better IMD performance'? Keep in mind, though, that many transceivers have much worse IMD than a decent amp, especially if the transceiver has a 12v final. I doub; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00388.html (7,993 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: "DF3KV" <df3kv@t-online.de>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:38:04 +0200; Hi Jim, I had the same problem, my usual amp is missing 160m as well. I decided to use a single 3CX3000A7 in GG for my 160m amp. The tube is instant on and the cooling requirement is low. With a rela; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00389.html (8,523 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: donroden@hiwaay.net; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 12:07:15 -0500; 4CX5000 Don WA4NPL _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00390.html (7,183 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:34:34 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: Are you looking to buy or build? Most of the replies so far assume you are going to build, but I sense you are looking to buy. Correct? 73, Bill W6WRT _______________________; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00393.html (8,799 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: Roger <sub1@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:36:07 -0400; That was my thought as well. 73 Roger (K8RI) _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00394.html (9,207 bytes)
11. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: Jim Hoge <knowkode@verizon.net>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 20:45:35 -0700 (PDT); I haven't made up my mind as to buy or build. If I build, I know it will take me too long to complete the project and I will have a tendency to upgrade components above and beyond what would be adequ; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00397.html (8,252 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 22:39:22 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: Actually, that's a very good answer. Shows you have really been thinking about it. If I may, here are a few thoughts I had when I went through the same decision making proces; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00398.html (10,825 bytes)
13. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: Roger <sub1@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 02:05:27 -0400; Agreed. It depends on what will satisfy you. I chose both routes. I've been collecting parts for some time...actually this is the second time for collecting parts. At one time I had nearly every thin; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00399.html (14,075 bytes)
14. [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>; Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 01:02:10 -0700; I am kicking around the idea of a new amp ( I want 160m capability which my current amp doesn't have) and have a few questions for the gurus and those that have theses beasts. Am I better off with a; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00400.html (10,458 bytes)
15. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: Dave White <mausoptik@btinternet.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 10:09:31 +0100; For me, building is half the fun ... Probably more than half. If anything with building I tend to overengineer and leave more of a component safety margin than lashing things together as a filthy bod; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00401.html (10,222 bytes)
16. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: Jim W7RY <w7ry@inbox.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 05:05:18 -0800; Agreed Carl... This is why I'm building another 8877 amplifier. 73 Jim W7RY _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/l; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00402.html (15,504 bytes)
17. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: mikea <mikea@mikea.ath.cx>; Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 08:19:43 -0500; I didn't know you were in my area! The local club found that the 2m repeater RX front end was detuned, the LMR-400 from the RX to the antenna was ... _seriously_ _degraded_[1] by weather and had to b; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00403.html (9,130 bytes)
18. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 08:04:39 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: Excellent suggestion. New homebrewers, please take note. Doing it Dave's way takes away the urgency to get your project done and lets you get some QRO on the air between work; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00404.html (8,710 bytes)
19. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: DAVE WHITE <mausoptik@btinternet.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:37:25 +0000 (GMT); The downside, of course, is that I've spent the last 20 years trawling fleamarkets and amassing useful parts (ok, my wife calls it "junk") that I may need some day. In my case (I think I must be des; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00406.html (9,562 bytes)
20. Re: [Amps] triode or tetrode (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 12:37:12 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: True, absolutely true. What may happen one day however, is you will be sitting down with nothing immediate at hand that needs doing and your mind will start to wander... You; /archives//html/Amps/2010-08/msg00409.html (8,886 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]