> Hello Lou:
>
> I have substituted the 3CPX800A7 for the 3CX. The inter element
> capacitances are somewhat different, and you will need to retune the input
> circuit of your amp for lowest SWR after the swap.
>
> The height of the ceramic ring is taller in the CPX (pulse rated), which
> permits a higher anode voltage, which in turn will permit you to more
easily
> drive the triode. There is no other advantage to the change.
>
> The CPX will handle about 7,000 volts and the CX about 5000 volts anode.
> Meaning, at about a ratio of 2 to 1 of peak to average voltage, a 2,500
volt
> supply is more or less max for the CP, and a 3,500 volt supply is max for
> the CPX.
>
> Other than retuning, that is all that I have found.
>
> 73 and Happy DXing,
>
> Mike
> W2AJI
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Gudguyham@aol.com>
> To: <amps@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 10:35 PM
> Subject: [Amps] 3CPX vs 3CX tubes
>
>
> > Hi, Does anyone know with any certainty the difference between a 3CPX
and
> a
> > 3CX tube? Checking the Eimac data in reference to a 3CPX800A7 vs a
> 3CX800A7
> > it shows that a 3CX800A7 and a 3CPX800A7 both can be used in linear
> > operation. As far as the 3CPX1500A7 vs the 3CX1500A7 it does NOT show
> usage of the
> > 3CPX in linear operation, therefore, could the 3CPX1500A7 be
substituted
> into
> > an AL-1500 or similar amp without any caveats? Some time ago the
> question
> > arouse here and Mr. Measures said it could be substituted with no real
> > problem. Was wondering if the rest of the knowledgeable concur with
him?
> What say?
> > 73 Lou W1QJ
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
|