Heathkit Question

[Steve Harrison]

At 01:09 PM 11/10/98 -0500, George Gleim wrote:

>If Heathkit were to 're-manufacture' any single Amateur Radio product
>(radio and/or complete station) which radio(s) should it be and why.

I'd vote for the HR1680 receiver and HX1681 transmitter. HOWEVER....they
would not be popular unless the following changes/improvements were made:

1. Solid-state final in the 1681 (because power tubes are too
hard/expensive to get now);
2. Modern PIN diode TR switch design that doesn't cause suckout of the
receiver (so you don't have to have a perfect 1:1 VSWR to have the receiver
able to hear further than next door);
3. SSB must be included in the transmitter (because all too many of today's
newbies make the excuse that they "can't" do CW); and
4. WARC bands must be included (because otherwise, the radios would
automatically be 16 years behind the times anyway!).

I've never actually used or seen either of these radios myself so I'm not
entirely aware exactly what other features they may be lacking compared to
something more modern. If the receiver doesn't have it, a noise blanker
should be included. And I don't feel the need for the radios to be
digitized because for one thing, that would increase the complexity
considerably not to mention the cost, plus probably raise the issue of
phase noise and spurs. Keep it simple, such as a fancier version of the old
301/401 series but with sufficient features that the radio can hold their
own among older JA transceivers such as the TS-120/130 and the like.

>For example, I think that the SB-102 Transceiver, HW-23 Power Supply,
>and SP-600 Speaker would be the best choice followed VERY close by the
>Heathkit SB-401, SB-301 twins and SP-600 Speaker.

My second vote would be for something similar to the TS-120/130 series; all
solid-state transceiver with WARC bands but NO unnecessary frequency
digitizing schemes (yes, I know both the 120 and 130 have digital innards;
and what I mean is that a new kit should not have any MORE than the 120/130
already has). By that, I mean NO DSP processors. All too many of today's
radios with DSP synthesizers generate all too much phase noise and spurs as
they come from the factory; I can't begin to imagine what could happen if
an inexperienced kit builder tried to build one of those!

However, another potential market might exist for digitized accessories or
options such as DSP IF filtering, VFO/LOs, V/UHF transverters/converters
for both the receiver/transmitter and transceiver, etc. Perhaps even a QRP
final amplifier option? Or rather, a high-power (>150W output power) final
amplifier option, QRP to something like 25W being standard?

>Both of these radio stations represent quality engineering, ease of use,
>ease of service, and represent a formidable Ham Station even when put
>next to todays 'computer' radios.

That they do; and sooner or later, I'll be hunting for my own 301/401 pair
again.

My idea of price range? Ideally, less than $600 each, maybe $800-900 for
the transceiver and certainly no more than that for each the
receiver/transmitter. Why? Because that is right in the range of other,
more-modern radios with equivalent performance that one can buy used.

Now....George, if I've gone further than you wanted into the "fantasy"
world, then I'd vote for the same radios you mentioned. But frankly, I
don't consider remanufacturing those kits to be feasible considering the
lack of availibility of tubes.

73, Steve Ko0U/1

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