[CQ-Contest] History of Low Power Category

[Jack Brindle]

According to the ARRL November Sweepstakes announcement in November 1975 QST (P51-52), the class A limit (low power) was
200 watts input power. This makes sense - my SB401/303 combo was rated at 180 watts input power, and put out around 100 - 120
watts or so according to my Heath HM-102 wattmeter (who’s accuracy was and is somewhat questionable, but not bad).

I suspect the change to 150 watts was somewhat arbitrary - they most likely wanted something that allowed these transmitters to
continue at the same level but support the FCC’s new (at the time) output power limits with some leeway. 100 watts does seem a bit
low when you take these radios into account, but that tends to line up with the transistorized transceivers that have followed.

Perhaps Jim Cain (K1CN ?) might be able to shed light on the change - he was the ARRL contest person when I was at the League,
and probably was still in that role when the change was made.

Jack B, W6FB


On Sep 16, 2014, at 6:09 AM, donovanf at starpower.net wrote:

> Hi Randy, 
> 
> Sweepstakes' 150 watt (input power) low power category goes back 
> many years, long before I was licensed in 1959. Field Day was the 
> same. The ARRL DX contest probably adopted the same traditional 
> 150 watt low power limit. 
> 
> 
> There weren't many 150 watt rigs in 1990, I suspect that swayed 
> to power level for CQWW 
> 
> 73 
> Frank 
> W3LPL 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> From: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd at charter.net> 
> To: "Contest Reflector" <CQ-Contest at Contesting.COM> 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 12:38:36 PM 
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] History of Low Power Category 
> 
> I was recently asked why the CQ Contests use 100W as the limit for low power 
> and the ARRL Contests use 150W. I had not really thought about this much 
> and wonder if anyone can explain how the limits were chosen. 
> 
> 
> 
> The CQWW introduced a low power category in the writeup for the 1990 CQ WW 
> SSB Contest (and the rules for 1991). It is assumed that 100W was chosen 
> because it was easily accomplished by most barefoot transceivers or radios 
> of the time. 
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone explain the history of the ARRL selection of 150W? The slightly 
> higher power level can be reached by some radios, but it also encourages 
> "low power" stations to run an amplifier to gain that extra db between 100W 
> and 150W. 
> 
> 
> 
> It would be nice if all contests used the same low power limit. Not because 
> one limit is more right than another, but so there would be less confusion. 
> Last year there was one entrant that entered CQWW as low power and then 
> realized they had exceeded 100W (I think they ran 110W or 120W). They asked 
> to have their entry reclassified to high power. Admirable integrity, but 
> unfortunately caused by the confusion between ARRL and CQ category limits. 
> 
> 
> 
> Randy, K5ZD 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> CQ-Contest mailing list 
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com 
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest