[Amps] 6146B vs 6146W

Mon May 17 21:42:02 EDT 2004

Just my 2.5 cents worth....

I've had mixed experiences with replacing 6146As or Ws with 6146Bs.
My FT-102 seems quite happy with either though it requires a bias
adjustment and a touch-up neutralization.  

My Kenwood T-599 is another matter altogether.  I put a shiny new
pair of 6146Bs in it and couldn't keep it powered up long enough to
adjust anything.  Almost immediate destruction of the driver tube's
cathode resistor and one of the PA's cathode resistors occurred. 
Upon replacing these parts and trying again it was apparent that
parasites had infested my transmitter.  The 6146, 6146A and 6146W
tubes I have in my stash don't cause me any problems in this
transmitter. The circuit could probably be modified to enable the
6146B's to run happily, but I wanted to keep this thing original.

I also have an old Eico CW transmitter that will oscillate with a
6146B.

I'm told that the 6293 makes a teriffic replacement for a 6146A, but
I've not tried this.

--
Randall D. DuCharme (Radio AD5GB)

Powered by FreeBSD!
The Power to Serve

 --- On Mon 05/17, Gary Schafer < garyschafer at comcast.net > wrote:
From: Gary Schafer [mailto: garyschafer at comcast.net]
To: stevengrant98 at yahoo.com
     Cc: Amps at contesting.com
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 13:27:41 -0400
Subject: Re: [Amps] 6146B vs 6146W

The 6146W has a ruggedized filament. The rest of the characteristics may be the same as a 6146A or a 6146B depending on when the 6146W was built. From what I have gathered the early 6146W was the same as the 6146A but with rugged filament. After the 6146B came into existence, a short time after that all 6146W's were made the same as the 6146B but with the rugged filament. So if the 6146W's you have are later versions then they are probably the same as the B. As far as a B not working in place of a regular or A version, I have never had a problem with interchanging them except in the collins radios where you sometimes had to change the neutralizing circuit to get them properly neutralized. In VHF and UHF radios it may be more of a problem. In your HF rig, plug them in and if you can neutralize the final they should work fine. 73 Gary K4FMX Steven Grant, W4IIV wrote: > you may run the "W" 
 if you wish > the 6146B had different capacitances from the 6146, and 6146A, so the B would not work properly in older (and some newer) equiptment. it caused bad parasitics.....in my opinion, this tube (the "B") should not have been called a 6146 at all...it is that different > > if you choose to run the "W" (a rugged version of the 6146A) it should work ok tho cause those tubes were much more stable...of course settings may be a tad different > > steven > Steven Cook <sccook1 at cox.net> wrote: > I have been reading up on the 6146 and would like to know if the "W" version would be suitable for use in a TS-830S. I have read that the "W" version is rated for less plate dissipation -- is this because it is a ruggedized version and the ratings are "conservative," or does the "W" truly have less plate dissipation than the "B" version. > > Thanks in advance... > > WG7K > _______________________________________________ > Amps mailing list> Amps at contesting.com > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps > > STEVEN GRANT W4IIV > 		 > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > SBC Yahoo! - Internet access at a great low price. > _______________________________________________ > Amps mailing list > Amps at contesting.com > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps > _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps at contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com