SB-100 series vs. HW-101

[Steve Harrison]

At 05:04 PM 09/06/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Colleagues,
>It seems to me that the HW-101 is not as capable as the older SB-101/102
>rigs. Dial cal. is down to only 5 khz on the HW vs. within 1 khz on the SB.
>No optional remote vfo with the HW but available for the SB. What gives??
>Seems like Heath downgraded the rig when it evolved into the HW-100/101.

The HW-series (all of them) were intended to be lower-cost versions of the
high-line SB series. That's why they created the single-band HW 12/22/32
series in the first place, besides to encourage SSB in the early days (note
the lack of AM or CW or bottom-of-the-band coverage). Who knows why they
never marketed an HW-42 for 15 meters, however... and an HW-52 for 10
meters might have been nice... but for every reason I can think of
concerning a CBer using one on 28 MHz, I can think of an equally-good
reason why a CBer might not have, such as cost and having to build the kit.
So who knows. Maybe the "Hams At Heath" didn't think it a good idea because
of the CBers. But, back then in the '60s/70s, there weren't so many chicken
banders trying to usurp our 10m band. What few there were, were relatively
easy to run off. Today, many of them run more power than we do...from their
mobiles, yet. (But I have yet to hear of, or see one, with a *serious*
stack of 6-element yagis...)

73, Steve Ko0U/1

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --
To subscribe: listserv at listserv.tempe.gov
and in body: subscribe BOATANCHORS yourfirstname yourlastname
To unsubscribe:  listserv at listserv.tempe.gov
and in body: signoff BOATANCHORS
Archives for BOATANCHORS: http://www.tempe.gov/archives
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --