PDA

View Full Version : Heathkit HW 100??



K4YND
02-04-2010, 12:28 PM
I thinking about picking one up on Ebay. I would use as a 2nd rig. Is this something that I can actually use and will be preform about as well as my Kenwood TS-130S??

Thanks for the Help

Don
KJ4QKN

KJ4KDM
02-04-2010, 12:33 PM
I had the HW-101 with the EV mic and once that thing warms up it was a sweet sounding rig!

AB9LZ
02-04-2010, 12:39 PM
I have an HW-101 and a ts-130s (and about a dozen other radios) I love the 130 and use it almost daily, the 101 gets used long enough to remind me why I don't like it.

To be fair, I'm a CW guy that likes to work DX, the little 130 holds its own in that regard, it sits in proud company next to a K2 and a TS-850. The HW doesn't really cut it, it may be a fine as a ragchew phone rig though.

73 m/4

KC8VWM
02-04-2010, 01:14 PM
Trying to compare the performance of a boatanchors specifications with a modern day rig is not the point.

You will understand soon after using one, especially if it's a Heathkit. :)

AI3V
02-04-2010, 02:57 PM
There will be VERY little difference in actual "on air" performance of either rig.

One, is a 15 yr old factory built solid state rig.

One is a 30 year old home built tube rig.

If the price is right, and you know how to use/troubleshoot/repair either rig, your good to go.

You do know how to repair a radio?

Rege

WS2L
02-04-2010, 03:45 PM
There will be VERY little difference in actual "on air" performance of either rig.

One, is a 15 yr old factory built solid state rig.

One is a 30 year old home built tube rig.



This is pretty much the bottom line. I have a 101 in my shack and have used the 130 in the past. The 101 is a good starter rig but for serious HF work you might want to consider something newer.

K9STH
02-04-2010, 04:38 PM
The HW-100 is the older version of the HW-101 which was the highest production amateur radio unit ever produced in the United States (well over 30,000 built, actually nearer to 40,000). However, it was designed primarily as an entry level SSB unit. The "big brother" (SB-100 and SB-101) units used basically the same circuit boards as the HW-100 and HW-101 but there are at least 2 significant differences between the HW and SB equipment. The HW series used a relatively simple VFO arrangement which was not as stable nor had anywhere near the calibration accuracy of the SB LMO which was extremely stable and had calibration accuracy well within 1 kHz.

The other thing is that the i.f. filter in the HW series was no where near as good as that used in the SB series. The filter used in the HW had 4 poles whereas the filter used in the SB had 6 poles. The 6 pole filter has much "steeper" skirts and is considerably better performing.

The HW-100 was introduced in 1968 and was replaced by the HW-101 in 1970. In its "day" it was on the high side of "average" but definitely no where near a "top of the line" radio. They can be "fun" to "play with". However, unlike the SB-100 and SB-101, the HW-100 is not as versatile as a more modern rig.

Glen, K9STH

K0RGR
02-04-2010, 05:11 PM
Compared to other rigs of it's time, the HW-100 was very attractive. While it didn't compete with high end stuff, it ran circles around the bottom feeders of it's era, and I'd compare it very favorably with some of the commercial stuff out there, particularly most of popular Swan gear, and the notorious Eico 7-drifty-three.

My good friend, Dan, W6WLE, had one, and it was very much used. We spent a lot of our free time mobiling around in his pickup with the HW-100 and a big Texas Bugcatcher. I think this was probably the most effective mobile setup I ever used. The HW kept on ticking, in spite of lots of miles on back-country roads and trails. Of course, I was accustomed to the HW-12 in my car. The rig seemed indestructible, but that may be attributed to the skills of it's builder.

It was never a competition grade radio, but it was a great portable/mobile rig for it's time.

However, I don't think it will buy you anything over a TS-130, but it will certainly be different. I think you'll like the feel of the HW in some ways, but retuning it when you QSY is a small chore.

I guess it depends on what you want. If you are willing to put in the time restoring and maintaining this rig, it may reward you. But it is in the 'antique' class now.

The SB-series would, indeed, make a better home station, and I bet you can find them for similar prices.

W1GUH
02-04-2010, 07:25 PM
'STH said:


The HW series used a relatively simple VFO arrangement which was not as stable nor had anywhere near the calibration accuracy of the SB LMO which was extremely stable and had calibration accuracy well within 1 kHz.


You talked about the SB-100 and SB-101, but left out the SB-102. Huh? Oversight?

Or...

A while back you reported that at least one of the variations of the "solild state" LMO had big tracking problems. I forget the number you mentioned but it was well outside my expectation; an expectation that was born while operating an SB-102 and whenever I got a chance to I'd ask an S-Line guy what his PTO said. It was always well within "eyeball accuracy" of what my LMO said. I had the TRW LMO, vintage 1970.

Guessing that your statement "well withing 1 kHz" is for the tube type LMO's, and not all solid state LMO's?


Different note:

One thing that's thankfully missing from this thread is comments about drifting in the HW-100. I'd been under the impression that that was a problem, but that doesn't sound right after reading this thread -- especially the comment about running one mobile on back roads.

K9STH
02-04-2010, 08:20 PM
The SB-102 generally has a non TRW manufactured LMO which, to be very blunt, are not very accurate. They are usually "right on" at the 100 kHz points but are often 5 kHz or more "off" in between. TRW did manufacture solid-state LMOs but those were used in the SB-303 and only a relative few got into the SB-102 production. The TRW manufactured LMOs, both tube type and solid-state, are very accurate. Unfortunately, the other companies that manufactured the solid-state LMOs either did not have the capabilities to get the accuracy or else didn't want to take the time to get the accuracy.

I have several solid-state LMOs none of which are very accurate between the 100 kHz points. Those that I have acquired are pretty much "standard" for the LMOs that were used in the SB-102.

There is a fellow in Florida who does take the time to get the non TRW solid-state LMOs reading correctly. However, this operation generally takes between 3 and 4 hours! From what I have heard, he only charges like $35 for doing this which is basically nothing for all the work that is required.

The problems with the LMO is why I do not recommend the SB-102. There have been some people who have replaced the solid-state LMO with a tube type LMO to get the accuracy.

Glen, K9STH

W1GUH
02-04-2010, 08:25 PM
The SB-102 generally has a non TRW manufactured LMO which, to be very blunt, are not very accurate. They are usually "right on" at the 100 kHz points but are often 5 kHz or more "off" in between. TRW did manufacture solid-state LMOs but those were used in the SB-303 and only a relative few got into the SB-102 production. The TRW manufactured LMOs, both tube type and solid-state, are very accurate. Unfortunately, the other companies that manufactured the solid-state LMOs either did not have the capabilities to get the accuracy or else didn't want to take the time to get the accuracy.

I have several solid-state LMOs none of which are very accurate between the 100 kHz points. Those that I have acquired are pretty much "standard" for the LMOs that were used in the SB-102.

There is a fellow in Florida who does take the time to get the non TRW solid-state LMOs reading correctly. However, this operation generally takes between 3 and 4 hours! From what I have heard, he only charges like $35 for doing this which is basically nothing for all the work that is required.

The problems with the LMO is why I do not recommend the SB-102. There have been some people who have replaced the solid-state LMO with a tube type LMO to get the accuracy.

Glen, K9STH

Ah, that clears it up. Thanks Glen! Makes me glad I got an early '102 with the TRW LMO! Even tho' I eventuallly wished I'd gotten a '101 for the LMO reason plus when they went to the '102 the took out "2 LMO operation." You could operate split with a crystal, but they stopped supporting using the external LMO (SB-640).

K9STH
02-04-2010, 08:34 PM
Actually, it was the SB-100 that couldn't really use the SB-640. Both the SB-101 and SB-102 could use the SB-640 but both of the transceivers had to have slight modifications made. The instructions on making the modification was in the SB-640 manual.

There were very few SB-640 remote LMOs made and therefore they are pretty rare. Considering the number of tube type LMOs around it wouldn't be hard to make your own remote LMO. Of course, it wouldn't be as "pretty" as the SB-640 but it would be functional.

Glen, K9STH

KC2TAU
02-04-2010, 11:09 PM
I've had an HW-101 for about a month and a half or so and I really do enjoy it. If you let it sit for 15 minutes or so it's very stable and I'm always surprised with what it can hear in comparison to my IC-703. Everything is well laid out,logical and it is really quite forgiving when you tune it up. It may not have the filters necessary for serious tight quarters work but for 90% of the time it really is a great performing radio.

The only issue these really have is poor grounding on the band switch which causes for low output most often on 40 meters. In addition the screws that secure the boards to the chassis act as the ground and so they need to be secured tightly for proper operation.

It may not have the DSP or multiple filter options of today's radios but it has a very good receiver and I've been told the transmit audio sounds good as well so if you can procure an HW-100 or 101 at a reasonable price I highly recommend it.

ad: tentec