Re[2]: [TowerTalk] X9 plus 40m

[Bob Otto]

Hello W4EF,

I want to be fair here.  In previous posts I've summarized some data
from the report.  The report does exactly what you outlined, at least
as far as they could given the data they had available at the time it
was written.  Much additional information has been provided on this
list.  I didn't reproduce all the data the report has because:

A)  It's too lengthy
B)  Not all of it was relative to the discussion
C)  Those who want more information are free to buy the report.

>From my perspective, the report was well written and provided some
extremely good data for the HAM community to **evaluate** and use at
its discretion.

73's from.......

Bob Otto
N8NGA@one.net
Cincinnati, Ohio

**********************************************
DXCC 10M         ** DX is !! **        WAS 10M
       There is a very fine line between
         "HOBBY" and "MENTAL ILLNESS"
**********************************************
When trouble arises and things look really bad,
there is always one individual who perceives a
solution and is willing to take command.
      VERY OFTEN THAT PERSON IS CRAZY!
**********************************************
Friday, September 08, 2000, 9:51:54 AM, you wrote:


Wdc> Does the Tribander report state the problem with the KT34XA? Seems that
Wdc> this would be the best thing to do - that is have a paragraph stating what
Wdc> the problem was with the tribander tested, the degree to which the problem 
Wdc> exists (e.g. all antennas after 1995), and what can be done to fix it (replace
Wdc> capacitor tubes). This would be the fair and balanced way of approaching 
Wdc> the problem which would help inform the amateur consumer that the KT34XA 
Wdc> is a potentially viable performer if this manufacturing defect is corrected. 
Wdc> Perhaps Steve and Ward could put an addendum sheet in the tribander report. 

Wdc> Mike, W4EF.............................................................................................................

Wdc> ----- Original Message ----- 
Wdc> From: "Guy Olinger, K2AV" <k2av@contesting.com>
Wdc> To: <towertalk@contesting.com>; "Dave Hachadorian" <k6ll@juno.com>
Wdc> Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2000 8:16 PM
Wdc> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] X9 plus 40m


>> 
>> As were several year's worth of KT34XA's apparently. It's NOT like only
>> two or three were bad, and the testers had one of a handful of
>> defectives. They had one of hundreds that were bad. You might have
>> better luck with a certain Firestone tire.
>> 
>> For several years the 15 meter caps have the wrong diameter tubing on
>> one end. So in reality there are two kinds of KT34XA's: original OK
>> variety, and more recent 15 meter messed up variety. The later variety
>> will wind up being converted with M2's upcoming kit to get them right.
>> 
>> - - . . .   . . . - -     .   . . .     - - .   . - . .
>> 
>> 73, Guy
>> k2av@contesting.com
>> Apex, NC, USA
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Dave Hachadorian <k6ll@juno.com>
>> To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2000 9:42 PM
>> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] X9 plus 40m
>> 
>> 
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, 7 Sep 2000 19:54:11 -0400 "R. Otto" <N8NGA@one.net> writes:
>> >
>> > >  The KT34XA came out in the middle of the pack --
>> > > it's not a bad antenna....it's just that there are better antennas.
>> > > The top performer was the Force12 C31XR, with the X9 a close second.
>> > > I
>> > > bought the C31XR.
>> > >
>> > > You can buy a copy of this report for a nominal charge (considering
>> > > the investment you're making in the beam) at
>> > > http://www.championradio.com/.   Champion Radio is a dealer for
>> > > Force12, but don't let that put you off........the report was
>> > > independently done.
>> >
>> > Bear in mind that the particular KT-34XA tested for that report
>> > turned out to be defective.
>> >
>> > Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
>> > Big Bear, CA
>> > K6LL@juno.com
>> >
>> > --
>> > FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
>> > Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
>> > Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
>> > Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>> >
>> >
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
>> Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
>> Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
>> Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>> 
>> 


Wdc> --
Wdc> FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Wdc> Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Wdc> Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Wdc> Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com



--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com