[Amps] Amps Digest, Vol 117, Issue 24
W8HW
w8hw at att.net
Mon Sep 10 20:10:51 EDT 2012
I have purchased many MFJ products and have good service and great Customer
service after the product sale. Once I broke a part (my fault) and they
sent me the part for free.
73, Bruce, W8HW
----- Original Message -----
From: <amps-request at contesting.com>
To: <amps at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 7:54 PM
Subject: Amps Digest, Vol 117, Issue 24
> Send Amps mailing list submissions to
> amps at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> amps-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> amps-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Amps digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: MFJ products (David Kirkby)
> 2. Re: MFJ products (Mike)
> 3. Re: MFJ products (Alek Petkovic)
> 4. Pulser (Jim Thomson)
> 5. Re: MFJ products (David Kirkby)
> 6. Re: MFJ products (Mike)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 23:52:59 +0100
> From: David Kirkby <david.kirkby at onetel.net>
> To: Gene May <gene-may at hotmail.com>
> Cc: Amplifier Mailing List <amps at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
> Message-ID:
> <CANX10hCYrbd+7iHGm7aom5Dqpcih0HAhCASXaBr8+-v4CfpW6A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 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 at 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 at rogerhalstead.com
>>> To: amps at 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 at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:30:21 -0700
> From: "Mike" <noddy1211 at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "'Amplifier Mailing List'" <amps at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
> Message-ID: <002401cd8fac$3f7595f0$be60c1d0$@net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> 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
>
> I have an old MFJ-989 Tuner and also AL-1500 both of which worked
> perfectly
> out of the box.
>
> 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 at 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 at 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 at rogerhalstead.com
>>> To: amps at 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 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 virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2437/5260 - Release Date: 09/10/12
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 07:31:24 +0800
> From: Alek Petkovic <vk6apk at bigpond.com>
> To: amps at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
> Message-ID: <504E784C.7050707 at bigpond.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 11/09/2012 6:12 AM, Gene May wrote:
>> [Chop]
> or for people who have to squeeze their antennae into small attics.
>
> Tnx es 73, Gene May WB8WKU RECENT RELATED POSTINGS:
>
>
>
>
> Insects have antennae. Hams have antennas.
>
> 73, Alek.
> VK6APK
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 04:00:26 -0400
>>> From: k8ri at rogerhalstead.com
>>> To: amps at 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 at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>
>
>
> --
> From sunny Binningup, Western Australia.
>
> Family Businesses:
> Petkovic Air & Gas. petkovicag at bigpond.com
> SP Electrical. www.spelectrical.net.au
> Hampers by Hand. www.facebook.com/hampersbyhand
>
> http://www.qrz.com/db/vk6apk
> http://www.qrz.com/db/vk6ap
>
>
>
>
>
> =======
> Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
> (Email Guard: 9.0.0.2308, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20600)
> http://www.pctools.com/
> =======
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:42:20 -0700
> From: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom at telus.net>
> To: <amps at contesting.com>
> Subject: [Amps] Pulser
> Message-ID: <140A273C69D94311ACDBE9BFF5EE2C26 at JimPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:20:45 -0400 (EDT)
> From: SavanaPics at aol.com
> To: k6uj at pacbell.net, amps at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [Amps] Pulser
>
> Larry, a fellow HAM in the Atlanta area makes a device called the PECKER.
> it was a big hit years ago on the 3898 group and is still quite popular (
> not to mention reasonable) it is available in either assembled or kit
> format. Go to _www.mrpecker.com_ (http://www.mrpecker.com) . If it is for
> an
> Icom, be sure to ask about the 100 mfd non polarized electrolytic
>
> Eddie, kc4awz
>
> ## The problem with that 3898 pecker device is that is has NO output
> control on it !
> 95% of the time it will blow your alc right to the peg. If you have an
> analog type alc meter
> it gets even worse, since the alc meter isnt really rading true peaks,
> like a peak reading led type
> alc meter. Then folks further screw things up by leaving their processor
> cranked up full tilt
> while using the audio type peckers. Any type of audio pecker needs an
> output pot on the end of it.
>
> ## On the FT-1000D, a string of 60 wpm dits will result in a 50% duty
> cycle.
> On my FT-1000MP-MK-V, the dot dash ratio can be tweaked individually for
> both
> dots and dashs. The default setting is dots= 10 and dashs = 30 .
> Each can be
> set anywhere from 1-129 !
>
> ## In the default 10-30 ratio, a string of 60 wpm dots will result in a
> 50% duty cycle.
> To reduce the duty cycle, the DOT setting is simply reduced to a setting
> below 10.
> IE: while sending dots at 60 wpm, reduce the dot setting from 10 to 9 to
> 8 to 7 etc.
> I think a DOT setting around 7-8 results in a 30% duty cycle. A
> setting of 1-5
> results in a very low duty cycle.
>
> ## For normal CW operation, I use Dots = 10..... and dashes = 36.
> Then I end up with a dot ?dash ratio of 1: 3.6 Which is weighting I
> like.
>
> ## For pulse tuning, DOT settings of 5-8 work great. BUT you have
> to
> remember to put the dot setting back to 10 for normal CW operation.
>
> Jim VE7RF
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 00:47:59 +0100
> From: David Kirkby <david.kirkby at onetel.net>
> To: Amplifier Mailing List <amps at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
> Message-ID:
> <CANX10hDJ-8v9TvgVkFdMvKycsNBQMp71T=Hh-cnBO78MNx5tOQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 11 September 2012 00:30, Mike <noddy1211 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> Dave,
>
>> 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
>
> Mike, I have seen inside some of the MFJ products. Build quality is very
> poor.
>
> Dave
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:54:34 -0700
> From: "Mike" <noddy1211 at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "'Alek Petkovic'" <vk6apk at bigpond.com>, <amps at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
> Message-ID: <002501cd8faf$a1957db0$e4c07910$@net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Antennae (singular: antenna)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antenna_(biology)
>
> I would say strange, but acceptable description for one Antenna and not
> entirely wrong. I prefer Aerial or Aerials, more simple: -)
>
> Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amps [mailto:amps-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Alek Petkovic
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 4:31 PM
> To: amps at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [Amps] MFJ products
>
> On 11/09/2012 6:12 AM, Gene May wrote:
>> [Chop]
> or for people who have to squeeze their antennae into small attics.
>
> Tnx es 73, Gene May WB8WKU RECENT RELATED POSTINGS:
>
>
>
>
> Insects have antennae. Hams have antennas.
>
> 73, Alek.
> VK6APK
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 04:00:26 -0400
>>> From: k8ri at rogerhalstead.com
>>> To: amps at 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 at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>
>
>
> --
> From sunny Binningup, Western Australia.
>
> Family Businesses:
> Petkovic Air & Gas. petkovicag at bigpond.com SP Electrical.
> www.spelectrical.net.au Hampers by Hand. www.facebook.com/hampersbyhand
>
> http://www.qrz.com/db/vk6apk
> http://www.qrz.com/db/vk6ap
>
>
>
>
>
> =======
> Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
> (Email Guard: 9.0.0.2308, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20600)
> http://www.pctools.com/ =======
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps at 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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Amps Digest, Vol 117, Issue 24
> *************************************
More information about the Amps
mailing list