>>From the responses, I see two possibilities.
>
> 1. Replacing the blocking cap may have necessitated
> increasing the
> padder caps on 80 and 160. It seems like all the load
> positions are a
> bit less than the manual would indicate. The other bands
> are still in
> range.
You can go all the way down to a few hundered pF on the
blocker and it will make very little difference in tuning.
It is at a few thousand ohm impedance point.
If the blocker was so bad as to affect 160 or 80
performance, it would be smoking.
> 2. The 80 meter padder cap, which is also used on 160, is
> actually 2
> ganged sections of the 5 section Load variable cap. It is
> possible that
> this cap has become disconnected somewhere in the path
> from the
> bandswitch to ground. The 160 padders are discrete
> components
The problem is the 922 when stock barely makes the lower end
of 160 and 80. Compounding that problem more C is required
as drive is reduced.
There is an inherent shortfall in network range on both 160
and 80.
73 Tom
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|