Boatanchor Receivers

[KD7KOY]

Thought I start this out because..er..no one was here..: )

First, I'm not an "electronic expert", this is a hobby for me. If you need advice, go to someone that is trained and qualified to work in electronics, because..that ain't me..: )

Hallicrafters SX-101A..Heavy....great receive on sideband..AM ok...Lots of features including notch and crystal filters. Tuning is as simple as it gets. Good sensitivity. Has "pitch control". Nice receiver but not that impressed with overall performance compared to other receivers. I don't like the dail "pointer reset" which is mechanical. Made kind of "funky" (almost designed like an "afterthought"..). The chip "knob" thingy with Hallicrafters is the material the knobs are made of and the design. (has an "outterrim" on some of the knobs that can always find a way to hit something and chip..Seems half the Hallicrafters I've seen have chipped knobs.). Replaced all the knobs with after market knobs and kept the originals in a safe place if I ever sold it. Restringing the dail is a piece of cake. Manual is very detailed and simple to follow. Lots of metal. REAL REAL HEAVY..: P

Hallicrafters SX-115..Handsome receiver. I've had two, have one now. Nice tuning feel. Crystal filters are compariable to the SX-101A I have. The dail is easy to read and handsome. Sound compariable to the SX-101A. Frankly I think the SX-115's are overated. They are nice receivers but do not perform any better than the SX-101A, National or Hammarlund which can be had alot cheaper.. Maybe it's a gee whiz thingy. At any rate, it suffers from the "Hallicrafters chip knob syndrome" too. This is also a heavy receiver. : P

National 173..Neat receiver. Very sensitive. Brings in the weak ones. Attractive. Very nice sound. (Very natural sounding..) Easy to tune. BFO is clean and quick. Cabinet easy to restore, sandblast, primer, paint and then "rub" color sticks over the "indentations" for the controls instead of decals or silkscreening..fun to do. I bought it because I like how the dails glow in the dark..: )

Hammarlund HQ-129X..My fav. simple to operate. I just recapped two of these. Easy to work on, great example of the KISS principle. (Keep it simple stupid..) #lots of room.. (A gorilla with a soldering iron can fix one of these..) There is one cap hidden below the On/Off/Volume switch that I needed to take the switch out along with the earphone plug to get to the cap.(Keep wiring connected, the assemblies will just move out of the way..) Not a big deal, just tedious with somebody with gorilla hands like mine..the rest are easily gotten to. Competes with the National and out does the SX-101A on AM hands down. Ease of tuning competes with the National. BFO I have to say is cleaner and quicker than the National. Just a tad. Nice tone on CW....Very nice sound compariable to the National. Very simple relay system for hookup to a transmitter (2 wires to the relay and your cooking..)This is the one I listen to everyday including the 75 meter AM nets.. One I bought from a friend (Hello Ron whereever you are!!...this guy knows alot....)is going to have the front silkscreened like new. Neat 'machiney appearance"..

Heathkit SW-717..Neat receiver. All solid state. Not the greatest in overall performance but "Takes a licking and keeps on ticking". Tuning is kind of "ragged"..not smooth, but thats the mechanics of the system. Surprised that it is pretty sensitive. Good cosmetics..go's about anywhere. I use this in the kitchen.

Hallicrafters S-38C..Cool little receiver. Was surprised at the sensitivity after recapping this little guy. Not fancy. Not alot of "bells and whistles" but gets the job done for "easy listening" stuff. Good sound for a small receiver of that era. I sold it to a guy that "coveted" it more than me. *sniff*

Heathkit GR-91..Fun receiver. Kind of homely looking though as far as cosmetics...: P
Get the manual, tear it apart, put it back together, tear it apart, put it back together..you get the picture..no brainer. Surprisingly good receive. Crude tuning feel about it, but that is the mechanical design. #(Heathkit "kit" thing I guess.). If you don't like it..Tear it apart, put it back together, tear it apart........lol

Knight 6A122..This is a broadcast and shortwave band radio. Thought I would include it..er..just because. Wood case. Sort of a Crosley "wannabe"..Real simple design. Easy to work on. It was pretty trashed when I got it on Ebay (I knew by the pics..: P). I was surprised to learn all tubes were fine and after recapping the radio and rewiring, some frayed wires, put a fuse inline from Radio Shack, #it fired right up.
Redid the case by handsanding and applying stain and a spray polyurethane. Looks great. I listen to the local stations on this one..nice "bassy tone.."

Just a reminder..if your inclined to "tinker" put an inline fuse in this old stuff. (They did'nt have the "safety" precautions and regs we have now.) Be careful when working with High Voltage. (If it does'nt injure you, it will definatly make you very respectful of electricity. ZZzzZZzap! Yikes..) If your not sure what your doing..don't..

"The only dumb question is the one not asked."

Your mileage may vary..: )

[benk8dit]

Your article is very good and very in the tone and spirit of ham radio. I just bought an old Hallicrafters sx 101a last weekend and havent plugged it in yet. Im waiting to borrow a variac to bring it up. It's in good shape and has all the knobs. I was 14 when I passed my general exam in 1962, the last year these were made. I dreamed of owning such a reciever, and now I own eight radios that span the years from then till now. They're all american made too. How sweet it is. They're all ready to go as the whim is felt. But I have no Collins gear, no Swan, nor many of the Brands that went belly up before the solid state era. That leaves Heathkit, Atlas, Drake and Ten Tec. Back then, I used a Johnson Viking Challenger and a National NC-88. In retrospect, those were good pieces of gear. I used a VF-1 vfo and a vibroplex bug.
I had an old turner mike. Nice memories.
I can imagine that the sx101a is not going to impress me the way it would have back then. What is impressive is how heavy the rig is. Your comparison between those recievers is very good, so thanks for your effort and I hope you enjoy the fruit of your work. 73 de ben k8dit

[K3UD]

Very Interesting.

I had several receivers that I really enjoyed using.
My favorite was an NC-303 as it never seemed to overload and had what I thought was great selectivity and very nice audio on AM and SSB. Others include the Drake 4B and 4C and the Hammarlund HQ-170, Heath Mohawk (copy of the 75A4?), SX-101, and Drake 2B

For sentimental reasons I also like the Hammarlund Comet Pro which was the first receiver I used as an 9 year old SWL and the SX-110 which was ny Novice receiver.

Also had a chance to use a SX-88 in 1967. Belonged to a ham in town who wanted to sell it because he had upgraded to a Drake Line. I used it for some time and in the end could not afford to buy it. I think the asking price was about $300. I had just graduated from the SX-110 and most likely did not know how to effectively operate the SX-88. In any event, $300 in 1967 was a lot of money for a 16 year old and I had just started driving and dating.

I always thought that the NC-303 which came to me after the SX-88 was a better receiver, but by then I knew more and got the most out of the 303. I sometimes think that if I had bought the 88 and held on to it I could have made a killing on eBay but the reality would have been that I would have most likely sold it at a hamfest in 1968 for less than I paid for it.

Another interesting conception.... I have always thought that the good receivers in the tube era (Drake, Collins, National, Hammarlund etc.) were in many ways better basic receivers than what we get today with up to mid priced transceivers. While I am not trying to start the tubes vs. solid state debate again, it just seems that the tube rigs had better audio, and greater immunity to overload than some of what is out ther now.

73
George
K3UD

[K9STH]

The Heath Mohawk is more like a copy of the NC-300, etc. It is a good example of the medium performing receivers of the late 1950s, but definitely not in the same league as the Collins "A" Line receivers. I have one as part of my original Heath "twins" stations (Apache, Mohawk, SB-10, Warrior) station and have worked on several for others. I like it much better than the NC-300 / NC-303 series of receivers (have owned both over the years - didn't like them that much!) and have been trying to decide if it is a little better or a little worse than the RME-6900 receiver. The Mohawk works better on AM, has 160, 11, and 12 meters (yes, the Mohawk covers 12 meters - the converter band is 22 - 26 MHz). However, it doesn't have a WWV band, but the 5 position selectivity works very well. The 6900 has excellent audio on SSB (one of the best sounding SSB receivers that I have ever owned), and the tuning is a little smoother.

I have a mid-serial number 75A4, a 75A3, and two 75A2 receivers right now. Owned 75A1 s/n 4 that was given to me when I was in college (it was a basket case when I got it) but traded it off in the mid-1970s when you had to pay someone to haul off the old boat anchor equipment (sure wish I had it back). Also owned two other 75A2 receivers that I traded off back during the 1970s. You can't beat the "A" Line receivers for calibration, selectivity, etc. They are very sensitive when aligned properly. In addition, I have a Collins 51J2.

Being a boat anchor "nut", I only have 3 solid-state amateur items, an Allied/Radio Shack AX-190, a Uniden HR-2510 (10 meter SSB mobile), and a Kenwood TR-7950 2 meter FM. Of course, I have all sorts of solid-state commercial FM equipment some of which I do use on amateur frequencies.

The oldest receiver that I have that was primarily used by amateur radio operators is a Hallicrafters S-19 "Sky Buddy". Other "boat anchor" receivers that I presently have are as follows:

Collins: 75A2, 75A3, 75A4, 51J2, 75S1, 75S3A

Heath: AR-3, MR-1, Mohawk, SB-301

Hammarlund: HQ-140X

Hallicrafters: S-19, S-20R, S-40A, SX-100, S-85, S-107

National: NC-2-40D

RME: 6900

Echophone (Hallicrafters bought them out): EC-1

Military: BC-348M

Probably of the receivers that I have owned and have traded off over the years that I really wish I had back are the Collins 75A1 and a TMC GPR-90. Have had a Hallicrafters SX-101 Mark III as well. It was an "OK" receiver, but, in my opinion, not as good at the Mohawk.

The amateur receivers are in addition to about 100 antique / vintage receivers (1920 - 1950) that I also have.

If anyone is interested in seeing some of these, you can go to

http://home.attbi.com/~k9sth

Steve, WB2WIK/6 accuses me of "hoarding" all of the old boat anchors. However, I only have a few when compared to some of the real boat anchor collectors.

Glen, K9STH

[KL7PB]

I have the ugliest 173 you ever saw but it is absolutely
the loudest radio I ever heard. Thanks for the cabinet info. I have 2 others to restore but will probably just sell them. too many things going on. so many qrp kits to build i lost count. The "KonTiki" expedition has a good run down on the web. They used this reciever. It is a gem.

[KC1MK]

I've had several boatanchor receivers over the years, but sold most of them a few years ago as I didn't have room for everything. I still have a TMC GPR-90 that I enjoy using for SWLing. It's a great receiver for SWL use: A pleasure to use, sounds nice. The epitome of 1950's communications receiver.
I've also had a Drake 2B w/2BQ, R4, R4A, and R4B a Hammarlund SP-600, an R-390A, Heathkit SB-300, Heathkit HR-10B, and a Collins R-388. I enjoyed them all and wish I had had the space to keep them!

[N5JOB]

I like the comments in this topic.

I wish there was a radio manufacturer that made a radio that was heavy these days. #Maybe not 100 lbs, but I'm really sick of these 15 lb "lightweights."

I've worked on modern gear and some of it is cheap junk.

What I'd like to see is a nice receiver at about 30 or so pounds, with a nice digital AND analog dial and nice big knobs.

What do you guys think? #I'd buy a modern day boat anchor if I could!

[K5CEY]

Quote[/b] (KL7PB @ July 07 2002,13:27)]The "KonTiki" expedition has a good run down on the web. They used this reciever.
It's worried me for years that "Kon Tiki" used an NC-173 receiver, with it's high power demands while their transmitter was a 'specially designed unit utilizing low drain battery type tubes.

I realize that the 173 was furnished to the expedition as a promotional item by the National Company.

But if I knew I was going to be on a radio equipped raft in the middle of the ocean, preservation of battery power would be of prime importance to me.

# # # # # # # # # # John

[W1GUH]

There are two boat anchors I'm going to talk about here. #First, the 75S-3A, then the Mohawk.

As I just said over on the "best looking radio" thread, I really love listening to the '3A. #I bought it at a hamfest in 2/91, not having ever seen (except in stores, and then rarely) any S-line "in person", so I was truly a "virgin". #The first thing I noticed that I really liked happened in a diner on my way home and was looking through the manual. #I'm an AM'er, so the first question I had was "Does it have a diode detector." #Yes, it does. #And, on AM, the selectivity is the classic IF can type. #Then I couldn't wait to get it home.

While in college in the late 60's, the station was a 200V and a 75A-4 (or a 75A-3 when the '4 was in the shop.), and I pretty much considered that the ultimate rig.

I was DELIGHTED to find, when I finally started playing with it, that the 'S3A felt and sounded, IMHO, and to the best of my memory, it was as good as or maybe even better than the A-4. #I didn't expect that, given the differences in size and construction. #But the 'S3A has the totally solid Collins feel.

I won't go into the SSB/CW operation, I'm sure that's been covered other places.

But I'll add a few words about receiving AM on it. #As expected, it sounds classic with it's IF can selectivity. #And the precision tuning of the PTO makes tuning AM with it a very different, and plesant experience. #Someday I might even play with trying to widen the bandwidth for higher fi sound.

On to the Mohawk, and this is brief.

It's very pretty. #It matches the Apache (IMHO close to, or may be the best AM boat anchor out there). #It has great features:

Rotating drum slide-rule dial.
Converter bands.
Notch Filter
.5 - 5 kc selectivity

Dial calibration is very good, and my seemed to have good sensitivity.

BUT

The sound is, well, not what I'd expected. #I expected a sound more like an SX-101. #But the Mohawk just doesn't deliver that. #I've heard it said that "Heathkit took advantage of every opportunity to introduce distortion." #I gotta second that.

It's agc is also lacking. #It's pretty useless on SSB, and has no slow decay. #

So...they're fun to own and use, so long's as you're aware of the shortcomings. #

Maybe someday I'll tackle the project of modifiying it to eliminate what I don't like. #
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif