Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+3CX800A\s+vs\s+3CX800A7\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+3CX800A\s+vs\s+3CX800A7\?\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] 3CX800A vs 3CX800A7? (score: 1): Author: Joe Giacobello <k2xx@swva.net>; Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 20:12:55 -0500; I'm interested in knowing if there was a predecessor to the 3CX800A7. Was it called a 3CX800A? Was it physically identical to the A7? Did it have 11 pins like the A7 or 7 pins? I'd appreciate any inp; /archives//html/Amps/2003-11/msg00318.html (6,896 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] 3CX800A vs 3CX800A7? (score: 1): Author: ROBERT MARSTON <rmarston@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:26:07 -0800 (PST); Hi Joe The answer to your first question is yes and no. The 3CX800A7 is an evolution of the 3CX400A7/8874. The answer to your second question is no. There is no such animal as the 3CX800. The number; /archives//html/Amps/2003-11/msg00330.html (8,131 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] 3CX800A vs 3CX800A7? (score: 1): Author: ROBERT MARSTON <rmarston@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 10:11:51 -0800 (PST); Are we having the same conversation ? K2XX posed a question about the final digit in the designation for the 3CX800A7. I explained its meaning and how it's derived. Go back and reread Joe's question; /archives//html/Amps/2003-11/msg00337.html (7,670 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] 3CX800A vs 3CX800A7? (score: 1): Author: "Bert van Holst" <v.holst@hccnet.nl>; Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:55:16 +0100; Your wrong, the cpx is a pulse rate version of the 3cx800a7 wich can handle more high voltage for RF aplications in medical equipment MRI etc. You can swap the 3cpx800 direct with the 3cx800. I have; /archives//html/Amps/2003-11/msg00338.html (9,359 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]