Mail Archive Search: <+from:rhill@htonline.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:rhill@htonline.com: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] Amps in Sept QST (score: 1): Author: rhill@htonline.com (rhill); Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:52:15 -0400; I can say that my 91b never failed either, at least since I purchased it back in May. Quite and fun to use. AS for the QST article: "During a contest, it suffered a component failure in the screen su; /archives//html/Amps/1997-08/msg00192.html (8,828 bytes)
2. [AMPS] Alpha models: 91B vs. 89 (score: 1): Author: rhill@htonline.com (rhill); Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 11:47:34 -0400; I am not an expert but just bought a 91B and it arrived last week. So far I think this is a great amp, easy to tune, very nice in appearance. The WP3X team for the last cq ww wpx had one of the 91B's; /archives//html/Amps/1997-05/msg00036.html (8,824 bytes)
3. [AMPS] alpha 91b or 89? (score: 1): Author: rhill@htonline.com (rhill); Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 20:31:40 -0500; Hi all, I just signed up on the list and need some information. I hope this isn't a subject that has been beaten into the ground, if so my apologies. However, I am seriously considering buying an alp; /archives//html/Amps/1997-04/msg00055.html (6,857 bytes)
4. [AMPS] re: 91b 0r 89 (score: 1): Author: rhill@htonline.com (rhill); Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 16:04:47 -0500; Thanks to all who responded. Alot of good material was gained. I have looked further into the amps mentioned as alternatives: commander, qro, al-1500 and now know alittle more about tune ups and band; /archives//html/Amps/1997-04/msg00110.html (6,524 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]