Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+HF\s+and\s+4cx250b\'s\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+HF\s+and\s+4cx250b\'s\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] HF and 4cx250b's (score: 1): Author: jerry <jlee@oceanwide.co.nz>; Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 18:22:34 +1200; Hi all, Is there some reason why there seems to be very few HF amps built around the 4cx250b's? They seem to be cheep and very plentiful. I am thinking of building an HF amp using 3 or 4 4cx250b's. I; /archives//html/Amps/2004-07/msg00079.html (6,364 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] HF and 4cx250b's (score: 1): Author: Dino Darling <k6rix@earthlink.net>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 07:53:19 -0700; I was told, by a wise person, that if you need more than TWO tubes to get the desired output, GET BIGGER TUBES! I too have been curiuos whay there is a lack of 4CX250Bs in the Amateur market. At 06:2; /archives//html/Amps/2004-07/msg00082.html (7,701 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] HF and 4cx250b's (score: 1): Author: Traian <yo9fzs@office.deck.ro>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:06:53 +0300; Maybe because years ago the 3-500Z was more accessible for the amateur industry regarding the cost (must consider the sockets also!) and availability and the amp complexity was lower (GG). I am aware; /archives//html/Amps/2004-07/msg00083.html (8,355 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] HF and 4cx250b's (score: 1): Author: "DF3KV" <df3kv@aol.com>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:29:34 +0200; around Hi Jerry, nothing wrong with that, plenty of amplifiers with those tubes have been built and used commercially in Europe Example RFT with the KN1E with 4 parallel tubes and one as driver. I b; /archives//html/Amps/2004-07/msg00084.html (7,709 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] HF and 4cx250b's (score: 1): Author: "Alex Dolgosh" <al.dolgosh@hamradio.org>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:55:38 -0400; I built an HF amp back in 1970 with four 4CX250B's in parallel. The tank circuit was a B&W 851 (I think) bandswitching assembly and vacuum variables for tuning and loading. The input circuit was pass; /archives//html/Amps/2004-07/msg00089.html (9,126 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] HF and 4cx250b's (score: 1): Author: R.Measures <r@somis.org>; Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 05:32:35 -0700; On Jul 15, 2004, at 7:53 AM, Dino Darling wrote: I was told, by a wise person, that if you need more than TWO tubes to get the desired output, GET BIGGER TUBES! It's good advice. Each time, one adds; /archives//html/Amps/2004-07/msg00094.html (8,897 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] HF and 4cx250b's (score: 1): Author: Jan Erik Holm <sm2ekm@telia.com>; Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 16:20:47 +0200; R.Measures wrote: Another factor is cost. For example, two 8877s cost more than one 8171, and they will deliver only about 1/3 the output of an 8171 . However, the socket for an 8171 costs more. - ch; /archives//html/Amps/2004-07/msg00099.html (7,826 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] HF and 4cx250b's (score: 1): Author: Tony King <amps@w4zt.com>; Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 08:21:41 -0400; Jerry, I've worked on many (military) 4CX250B HF amps and built VHF ones. They all worked great. I have had some leak smoke and scare the devil out of me with the "POW!" as probably anyone that's spe; /archives//html/Amps/2004-07/msg00118.html (9,075 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]