Re: [Amps] MFJ products

["Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>]

On 9/10/2012 7:30 PM, Mike wrote:
> Dave,
>
> You have to look at it this way, if MFJ had not bought up many of the old
> Ham Radio Equipment suppliers we may not find stuff at all or at reasonable
> price, anything that is shipped you should check out before using including
> Alpha products
Both Cushcraft and Hy-Gain would likely be gone if not for them.

> I have an old MFJ-989 Tuner and also AL-1500 both of which worked perfectly
> out of the box.
I've had 2 989C tuners and no complaints. I did have to clean the coils 
and contacts a couple of times over the years and I did have to be 
careful about the resonant point on 160m antennas as I could get the 
tuners to arc if that resonant point was near the bottom end of the band 
and I was running the legal limit.  They worked well for the money.
73

Roger (K8RI)



> You Criticize and admit you have never purchased their equipment, so why
> don't you just keep quiet instead of using bad language on the group with
> absolutely no personal experience.
>
> K6BR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amps [mailto:amps-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of David Kirkby
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 3:53 PM
> To: Gene May
> Cc: Amplifier Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
>
> 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
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2437/5260 - Release Date: 09/10/12
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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