[Amps] 3-500Z cool down time

[Catherine James]

Given that ceramic tubes appear to last longer on the shelf with less leakage than glass, it's a shame that there isn't a ceramic tube in the price/performance range of the 3-500Z.  It would be well worth paying, say, 10% more for ceramic.  But the actual cost multiplier is much higher than that, so glass tubes will continue to rule at the low end (i.e., far below legal limit).

73,
Cathy
N5WVR
--------------------------------------------
Kimberly Elmore <cw_de_n5op at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

 True enough; I was simply
 statingthat the 3CX1200 is a ceramic replacement for a glass
 envelope. It's a fine tube, though it requires a fair
 bit more drive. That is, aparently, the price paid for a
 high grid dissipation rating. It's easier to drive when
 running 4 kV B+, though. At that voltage, I never fail to
 acieve full output with a 100 W rig on any band. 
 Kim N5OP
 
    
   From: Bill Turner <dezrat at outlook.com>
  To: Amps group <amps at contesting.com>
 
  Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 9:32 PM
  Subject: Re: [Amps] 3-500Z cool down time
    
 ------------ ORIGINAL
 MESSAGE ------------(may be snipped)
 
 On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 20:48:40 -0500, Kim
 wrote:
 
 >The 3CX1200 is a
 ceramic version of the 3-1000Z. I have an amp that uses one
 and it's ready in under 10 s. 
 >Kim
 N5OP
 
 REPLY:
 
 Yes, but that's a very
 expensive tube. I was thinking of a ceramic
 3-500Z for the same price as glass. 
 
 For what they are asking you
 might as well get an 8877. Different
 socket
 but lower drive and more output.
 
 73, Bill W6WRT
 _______________________________________________
 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