On Aug 10, 2005, at 6:16 AM, Dr. William J. Schmidt, II wrote:
> I would think that using surplus tubes in the same basic price class
> (813's,
> 572B's, or 811A's), you would get a much higher "watt per dollar"
> return.
The best watts per dollar tube is seemingly the 8171. They go for c.
$200 on eBay. That figures out to c. 12-cents per watt, including
shipping.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Dr. William J. Schmidt, II K9HZ
> Trustee of the North American QRO - Central Division Club - K9ZC
>
> Email: bill@wjschmidt.com
> WebPage: www.wjschmidt.com
>
> "If computers get too powerful, we can organize them into a committee;
> that
> will do them in." -- Bradley's Bromide
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Bowman" <wa3rey@comcast.net>
> To: <amps@contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 5:54 AM
> Subject: [Amps] TV sweep tubes and 6146s
>
>
>> What is the reason amplifiers never seem to be designed using four
>> 6146s instead of TV sweep tubes like for example, four 6KD6s?
>> I must be missing something obvious here.
>>
>> I'm asking because I'm thinking of building a 400W or so PEP amplifier
>> for 75 and 40 meters.
>>
>> Keeping cost really low is one of my goals here and I have several
>> good
>> 6146s in the junk box.
>>
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Tom, WA3REY
>> _______________________________________________
>> Amps mailing list
>> Amps@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
>
Richard L. Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734. www.somis.org
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|