Send TenTec mailing list submissions to
tentec@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tentec-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
tentec-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of TenTec digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Centurian 422 vs Titan III (HENRY PFIZENMAYER)
2. Re: Omni 6 sensitivity (Duane - N9DG)
3. Orion: going back zu 1.371, read why (DK2GZ@aol.com)
4. Re: Orion: going back zu 1.371, read why (Toby Pennington)
5. Re: GFI Problems (K4IA@aol.com)
6. RE: Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't (Jim Brown)
7. RE: Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't (Tom Wagner)
8. Argosy -- QSK control question (Nu7z@aol.com)
9. Scout band modules (Jim Faulkner)
10. Re: Centurian 422 vs Titan III (Jim Miller WB5OXQ)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 10:32:58 -0700
From: "HENRY PFIZENMAYER" <pfizenmayer@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: [TenTec] Centurian 422 vs Titan III
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Message-ID: <009e01c4e5f0$cf1b6f90$f362480c@delldim4500>
Like to hear some opinions on the new Centurian versus the Titan III . If
I
am gonna order the Centurian , I want to do it this week.
1. 1000-1200 watts versus 1500 watts is not an issue for me .
2. QSK life is not an issue , I will operate "semi-breakin" with the amp.
3. Spits and arcs are a big issue.
4. Looks like tube replacement cost are close enough to be a toss up.
5. 99 percent of operation will be CW.
6. While cost is not a complete non-issue , my last amp ran for
25 years and I expect the same with this one, at which point
I won't care anymore !!!!
7. Have an Orion on order and expect to use the amp with Orion
to keep it all Tentec.
8. Reliability -Reliability - Reliability is a major issue.
9. 160 is a must.
I have read all the reviews I can find , looked at archives until
my neck hurts and still have not reached a decision. One thing
that continues to pop out at me is the number of Centurians
for sale used - always wonder why - surely 1000 vs 1500 watts
is not the issue.
Any thoughts ?
off line is fine to hanknospam@att.net
Thanks - Hank K7HP
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:34:45 -0800 (PST)
From: Duane - N9DG <n9dg@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
To: tentec@contesting.com
Message-ID: <20041219173445.92426.qmail@web53008.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I concur with Steve's assessment regarding the SSB rag
chewing case. The Pegasus/Jupiter are probably the two
most pleasant SSB rag chewing radios that there are.
They are not however the best there is when comes to
digging really weak signal out of the noise or for use
on a crowded band. Even less so if you've made the IF
gain full clockwise tweak. The Corsair design is very
clean/quiet design until you get to its audio stages;
there it really begins to show its weaknesses. The
audio filtering op amps and other audio components are
a rather noisy, the Pegasus/Jupiter are much cleaner
and have much less audio distortion.
So it is the relative strengths and weaknesses of both
the Corsair and Pegasus that inspired my DSP IF
experiment with the Corsair II. My initial results
have been very encouraging. More to follow on that
when I get some control issues with the SDR-1000
squared away (I also have some other slightly
different ideas along that same vein in the works too
;)).
Having never used an Omni VI I can't comment about
them. I do believe though that they have a better
(cleaner) audio final amp than the Corsair and other
earlier TT radios with National Semiconductor LM38x
series audio amps (can anybody confirm this for me?).
I also agree with the assessment of the Icom IC-765
posted earlier, it is simply not a pleasant radio to
listen to, and it suffers badly from audio IMD
distortions. I've tried the various AGC mods for it to
lessen that characteristic with little improvement. So
not sure if my 765 have some genuine component problem
or if they are all that way. I suspect it's some of
both. Its main redeeming qualities are that it can
hear very well on LW frequencies bellow 500 kHz and
its pleasant "touchy-feely" ergonomics.
Duane
N9DG
--- Steve N4LQ <n4lq@iglou.com> wrote:
The Pegasus is going to be easier on your ears than
almost anything due to
it's flat audio response, lack of crystal filters
and DSP with gentle
slopes. If you really want the superior selectivity
of the Omni VI then you
need to get one with option 3 and fill up the extra
filter slots. using the
noise reduction feature on cw will also help your
ears some. For SSB, you
will be dissapointed in the Omni VI when comparing
it with the Pegasus (FOR
AUDIO QUALITY). So keep Peggy around.
Steve N4LQ
----- Original Message -----
From: "denton" <denton@oregontrail.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
> Ok Steve...here is my situation...
> I have an old Corsiar II that I am using for
casual listening with a 500
> hrz cw filter..
> I currently use a Pegasus for psk mostly, but I
notice it sounds better to
> my poor ears ( I wear hearing aids in both ears)
than the Corasir II does.
> I hardly work any ssb at all, just some digitial
modes...
> Ten Tec has used Omni VI's comming in all the time
these days, upgrading
> to the new Orion I assume.
> I am tempted to pick up one of those..but which
one?? What is the
> advantage of the Omni VI, same with option 2 and
same with option 3??
> Thanks in advance...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq@iglou.com>
> To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 7:33 AM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
>
>
>> The Corsair II would drive you nuts in that
situation. It's audio derived
>> AGC would pop your eardrums on the stong signals
so you reduce the RF
>> gain then you can't hear the weak one's while the
Omni VI's AGC is the
>> smoothest one around. No comparison.
>>
>> Steve N4LQ
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "denton" <denton@oregontrail.net>
>> To: <wf2u@starband.net>; <tentec@contesting.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 10:25 AM
>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
>>
>>
>>> Wonder how an Omni VI compares to a Corasir II
in similar circumstances?
>>> thanks de Denton WB7TDG
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "WF2U" <wf2u@starband.net>
>>> To: <tentec@contesting.com>
>>> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 6:37 AM
>>> Subject: RE: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
>>>
>>>
>>>>I recently got rid of an Icom 756 in favor of
the Omni VI Opt.3.
>>>> Side-by-side comparison showed that the Omni VI
has a definite edge in
>>>> weak-signal reception. The difference may be
attributable to lower
>>>> phase
>>>> noise in the Omni VI. The 756 DSP wasn't up to
snuff clarifying mushy,
>>>> noisy
>>>> signals. The Omni VI DSP seems to work better.
The IC-756 could never
>>>> hear
>>>> weak signals in the "holes" in between strong
stations, where the Omni
>>>> VI
>>>> picks up some nice activity.
>>>>
>>>> The PBT is different - in the Omni VI you can
lose the station if you
>>>> don't
>>>> retune the frequency when the station gets out
of the passband. In the
>>>> Icom
>>>> radios (I also had an Icom 740) passband tuning
doesn't shift the
>>>> center
>>>> frequency.
>>>>
>>>> In fact, my Omni-C beats the IC-756 in
weak-signal work, except the
>>>> lack of
>>>> PBT makes it harder to dig out weak signals in
between strong stations.
>>>>
>>>> 73, Meir WF2U
>>>> Landrum, SC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com
>>>>> [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]On
Behalf Of DennisKT5D@aol.com
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 5:19 AM
>>>>> To: tentec@contesting.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I had an Icom-765 for awhile which sported
a very good
>>>>> receiver comlete
>>>>> with all the filters for cw work. It had the
PBT and IF shift
>>>>> mods done as well.
>>>>> I sat it down beside the Omni 6+ and did some
testing. Ambient
>>>>> noise level on
>>>>> both was almost identical with perhaps the
edge to the 765. At
>>>>> the time the
>>>>> 765 was matching up with some plans I had for
reconfiguring the
>>>>> shack so I was
>>>>> about to decide to sell the Omni 6+. Then the
CQ WW CW DX contest
>>>>> came along.
>>>>> After A/B comparison during the contest, I
abruptly changed my mind
>>>>> about
>>>>> reconfiguring the shack and selling the Omni.
>>>>> What I discovered was this. I could tune
between two strong US
>>>>> stations a
>>>>> couple of kHz's apart with the Omni and copy a
weak DX station, 3 to 4
>>>>> s-units, easily. Switching to the 765, I
absolutely could not
>>>>> hear the weak DX
>>>>> station. All I heard was an elevated noise
floor due to the close
>>>>> in strong US
>>>>> stations. Clearly, to my ears the Omni is the
superior contest
>>>>> rig of the two. The
>>>>> 765 could hear as well as the Omni in
non-contest conditions so
>>>>> sensitivity
>>>>> was not an issue. Both radios exhibited the
high pitched hiss on
>>>>> white noise
>>>>> but again, the 765 wasn't quite as bad as the
Omni. The
>>>>> selectivity was what
>>>>> really separated the two radios in contest
performance.
>>>>> If your radio doesn't seem to be as
sensitivity as it should
>>>>> be perhaps
>>>>> there is a problem with it. The Omni's
reputation is well earned
>>>>> here and the
>>>>> 765 is gone.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>>> TenTec mailing list
>>>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>>>>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> TenTec mailing list
>>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>>>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TenTec mailing list
>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:18:28 EST
From: DK2GZ@aol.com
Subject: [TenTec] Orion: going back zu 1.371, read why
To: tentec@contesting.com
Message-ID: <27.67f4147c.2ef72e04@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Hello TT-Fans,
I decided to go back to firmware 1.371 today.
I am doing 99% CW this this radio.
Why did I reload the 1.371 firmware:
1. the new keyer function does not work for me, still stuck in cutis B
when
power on the Orion and I cannot see any difference between the A
and
B mode
the only solution is the do a master reset every time you power on
the Orion
The OMNI 6* have a better keyer timing for my operating style
2. the headphone click when you are using a qsk delay less 8%
yes the qsk in faster in 1.372, but it you have the clicks in the
headphone
and you have to reduce the qsk-speed to 8% to reduce the click,
you
are in the same
speed range as with the 1.371 firmware
3. lost the 2. RX nearly every day after power on the Orion, mostly
when
the 2. RX
is listen on 80 meter CW, will not power on the Orion twice a day
in
serie
4. 17 Meter TX problem
often had a extremly current consumption on 17 meter when powering
the Orion on, so
my power supply does not deliever 40 amp and more on 12 volt.
Sometimes this
problem was gone when I switch to 15 meter did a few dit dit dit
and
switch back to
17 meter, but not this sunday!
5. got several times a funny sounding main-receiver when using the AN
on
SSB mode and
switch back CW and turn off the AN
6. the NR does not work as nicely as with 1.371
Yes I did several master reset and also one time a RAM CLEAR and master
reset again.
Yes I know the things that solved with 1.372:
1. the roofing filter kick in is now analog with the BW
2. the RFGAIN is working better now, but the RX was fine also before
3. the Voice-keyer should work now better, but never used the Orion
in
SSB in TX mode
4. the keying loop with ACOM amps should work now, never used a ACOM,
still
using the old Centurion with the amp-keyling line, did not perform
the Centurion mode
for the older Centurion amps
So why I should use the 1.372 firmware as an 99% CW OP?
But also with 1.371 I having one thing that I cant solve up to now:
On 20 meter and up I have an offset of -160 HZ in CW to the frequency read
out.
On the low bands 160/80/40/30 I do not have these offset.
The configuration here is:
ORION AT plus samplex SEC 1223 power supply:
1KHZ TT roofing filter in the 1.8 KHZ slot
600 HZ Inrad roofing filter in the 1 KHZ slot
500 HZ TT roofing filter in the 500 HZ slot
250 HZ TT roofing filter in the 250 HZ slot
all filters enabled(1.8, 0.5, 0.25)
Offset 500 HZ 190 HZ
Offset 250 HZ 110 HZ
Mode LCW on all bands.
Yes I konw the problem could be the offset of the 500 and 250 HZ filters,
but why
only on the bands 20 meter and up?
Switch to UCW on 20 meter and up do not solve the problem above.
First time 1 can remember this offsett problem appear since I put the
original 1 KHZ filter in in
the 1.8KHZ slot, but not 100% sure about this.
73 de Harry, DK2GZ
a TT-Fan since several years
TT gear visit my shak in the past 22 years:
OMNI D, Argonaut, Argonaut II. Paragon, OMNI 6+, TT-Kit 1320
Never had such kind of problems with the K2/100 and TS570D(G) or
the TT-gear above
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:51:13 -0500
From: "Toby Pennington" <toby423@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Orion: going back zu 1.371, read why
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Message-ID: <000401c4e604$18cd6c70$6502a8c0@TOBYROOM>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Harry, sorry to hear about all the problems with 1.372. The last version
1.371 was very stable and without any improvments would be just fine for
most operators. But 1.372 is going to take us up to a new level of
operating
proficency once the bugs are worked out. By the way, the engineering crew
at TT are busy now getting things fixed. The beauty of all this is that
you
do have the option of going back to a version that you liked, and just
keep
on operating until all the issues that concern you are fixed.
Please report your issues to Ten-Tec so they will be aware of your
concerns.
Toby
W4CAK
----- Original Message -----
From: <DK2GZ@aol.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 2:18 PM
Subject: [TenTec] Orion: going back zu 1.371, read why
Hello TT-Fans,
I decided to go back to firmware 1.371 today.
I am doing 99% CW this this radio.
Why did I reload the 1.371 firmware:
1. the new keyer function does not work for me, still stuck in cutis
B
when
power on the Orion and I cannot see any difference between the A
and
B mode
the only solution is the do a master reset every time you power on
the Orion
The OMNI 6* have a better keyer timing for my operating style
2. the headphone click when you are using a qsk delay less 8%
yes the qsk in faster in 1.372, but it you have the clicks in the
headphone
and you have to reduce the qsk-speed to 8% to reduce the click,
you
are in the same
speed range as with the 1.371 firmware
3. lost the 2. RX nearly every day after power on the Orion, mostly
when
the 2. RX
is listen on 80 meter CW, will not power on the Orion twice a day
in
serie
4. 17 Meter TX problem
often had a extremly current consumption on 17 meter when
powering
the Orion on, so
my power supply does not deliever 40 amp and more on 12 volt.
Sometimes this
problem was gone when I switch to 15 meter did a few dit dit dit
and
switch back to
17 meter, but not this sunday!
5. got several times a funny sounding main-receiver when using the
AN
on
SSB mode and
switch back CW and turn off the AN
6. the NR does not work as nicely as with 1.371
Yes I did several master reset and also one time a RAM CLEAR and master
reset again.
Yes I know the things that solved with 1.372:
1. the roofing filter kick in is now analog with the BW
2. the RFGAIN is working better now, but the RX was fine also before
3. the Voice-keyer should work now better, but never used the Orion
in
SSB in TX mode
4. the keying loop with ACOM amps should work now, never used a
ACOM,
still
using the old Centurion with the amp-keyling line, did not
perform
the Centurion mode
for the older Centurion amps
So why I should use the 1.372 firmware as an 99% CW OP?
But also with 1.371 I having one thing that I cant solve up to now:
On 20 meter and up I have an offset of -160 HZ in CW to the frequency
read
out.
On the low bands 160/80/40/30 I do not have these offset.
The configuration here is:
ORION AT plus samplex SEC 1223 power supply:
1KHZ TT roofing filter in the 1.8 KHZ slot
600 HZ Inrad roofing filter in the 1 KHZ slot
500 HZ TT roofing filter in the 500 HZ slot
250 HZ TT roofing filter in the 250 HZ slot
all filters enabled(1.8, 0.5, 0.25)
Offset 500 HZ 190 HZ
Offset 250 HZ 110 HZ
Mode LCW on all bands.
Yes I konw the problem could be the offset of the 500 and 250 HZ filters,
but why
only on the bands 20 meter and up?
Switch to UCW on 20 meter and up do not solve the problem above.
First time 1 can remember this offsett problem appear since I put the
original 1 KHZ filter in in
the 1.8KHZ slot, but not 100% sure about this.
73 de Harry, DK2GZ
a TT-Fan since several years
TT gear visit my shak in the past 22 years:
OMNI D, Argonaut, Argonaut II. Paragon, OMNI 6+, TT-Kit 1320
Never had such kind of problems with the K2/100 and TS570D(G) or
the TT-gear above
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:08:05 EST
From: K4IA@aol.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] GFI Problems
To: tentec@contesting.com
Message-ID: <fb.66d5b786.2ef739a5@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 12/19/2004 11:56:07 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
crgreene@cox.net writes:
Now I need to get a line filter to keep my XYL's electric bed from
cranking
up when I transmit. That's a no-no at 6am :-)
That's why they have an "OFF" switch. ;-)
Radio k4ia
"Buck"
Fredericksburg, VA USA
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:41:26 -0600
From: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Subject: RE: [TenTec] Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't
To: "tentec@contesting.com" <tentec@contesting.com>
Message-ID: <20041219074140.626F27D05@gw1.nlenet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Actually, it applies to ALL uses of XL connectors for audio, including
broadcasting, ham
radio, sound reinforcement, studios, etc. And a major reason that the guys
have been
having so much trouble with getting mics to work with Orion is that the
mfrs aren't following
the Standard! Oh -- by the way -- at least half of the members of the
Working Group are
hams.
Jim Brown K9YC
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:56:32 EST, N0KHQ@aol.com wrote:
The IEC/AES Standard that Jim is referring to was developed long ago for
Sound Reinforcement Equipment Systems safety and uniformity within the
industry
and doesn't have a darn thing to do with the mic pin-out configurations
on
ham radio equipment.
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:16:19 -0500
From: "Tom Wagner" <tfwagner@snet.net>
Subject: RE: [TenTec] Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Message-ID: <BKELJNBDKBBJLLENNCCDEEILFBAA.tfwagner@snet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Since this didn't get answered, I'll ask again.
Is it TenTec that is not following the IEC/AES standard?
Bottom line, if I have a mic with simple coax -- one center
conductor plus shield -- to which pin is the shield to be
attached on the Orion?
73,
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Tom Wagner
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 4:55 PM
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: RE: [TenTec] Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't
Page 9 of the Orion manual shows ground as pin 2. Page
10 of the manual shows minus (-) as pin 2. It also
shows white as pin 2. A web search shows the
mic pinout for the Omni VI as Pin 2 is ground.
http://lists.contesting.com/archives/html/TenTec/2001-10/msg00163.html
So is it TenTec that is not following the IEC/AES
standard?
Tom - N1MM
-----Original Message-----
From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Jim Brown
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 12:56 PM
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: RE: [TenTec] Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:30:12 -0500, Tom Wagner wrote:
The
Orion really, really does not like pin 2 to
be grounded. (In the Heil setup, pin 1 is the
mic lead center conductor and pin 2 is
the shield.) This was the cause of the
oscillation/instability.
Apparently Heil has never heard of the IEC and AES standards for wiring of
XL
connectors used for audio. These are international standards. The lowest
numbered
pin is ALWAYS the shield. Next one or two contacts are audio. These are
not
new
standards -- they have been in existence for more than 50 years. There
were
two
different standards for whether pin 2 or pin 3 was positive polarity with
respect to
the other. That difference was resolved about 10 years ago. But pin 1 has
ALWAYS
been the shield contact, and 2 and/or 3 have always carried audio. When
there are
control circuits, those circuits should be on the higher number contacts.
BTW -- I'm a member of the AES Standards Committee Working Group that
maintains these standards.
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:18:08 EST
From: Nu7z@aol.com
Subject: [TenTec] Argosy -- QSK control question
To: tentec@contesting.com
Message-ID: <196.34b6ea02.2ef73c00@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Hi everyone -- I just purchased an Argosy and on CW it transmits almost/is
true QSK. This makes it a little more difficult to key an amplifer with
and I
was wondering if anyone has worked this problem and have been able to
establish
some sort of delay control?
Thanks in advance --
Rick -- NU7Z
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:35:27 -0800
From: "Jim Faulkner" <jrf59@earthlink.net>
Subject: [TenTec] Scout band modules
To: "tentec reflector" <tentec@contesting.com>
Message-ID: <41200412019213527790@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
(If this comes through twice, sorry for the SPAM--it's my first attempt at
a post)
I'm looking for 12M and 17M band modules, a noise blanker card, and a
mobile mount for my Scout.
Thanks in advance & 73,
Jim K5ZED
Rio Rancho, NM
Jim Faulkner
jrf59@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:33:51 -0600
From: "Jim Miller WB5OXQ" <wb5oxq@grandecom.net>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Centurian 422 vs Titan III
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Message-ID: <002a01c4e612$6f03db20$0200a8c0@atmp3ehbvwdfo7>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
I have owned a Centurion for years, I don't remember how long but over 5
years I know. I bought it used and with the original tubes in it. It
will
make at least 1300 watts with 100 in on all bands except 10 where it only
made 1100 but my omni 6+ may have made less tha 100 watts of drive too, I
never checked. I have tried to use it onj 160 but it has distroyed every
antenna I have tried to use and I do nto have room for a full size 1/2
wave
dipole. The output meter would show 1500 into the dummy load on 160 and
my
antennas could not take the power. I have used it on 3,885 am and with 25
watts in it makes about 400+ watts of carries and easily modulates way
beyond that. It is fairly quiet and I have never used it on CW, only am
and
ssb. I am told with graphite tubes and a couple of small mods it will do
over 1500. I do not care because i am not convinced anyone would notice
the
difference in 1200 and 1500 watts! It is quick and easy to tune and has
never arced in me on any band. It can run on 110 vac but it is not
recommended and I have always run mine on 220vac. Absoutely no problems
of
me.
WB5OXQ, Jim in Waco.
----- Original Message -----
From: "HENRY PFIZENMAYER" <pfizenmayer@worldnet.att.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 11:32 AM
Subject: [TenTec] Centurian 422 vs Titan III
Like to hear some opinions on the new Centurian versus the Titan III . If
I
am gonna order the Centurian , I want to do it this week.
1. 1000-1200 watts versus 1500 watts is not an issue for me .
2. QSK life is not an issue , I will operate "semi-breakin" with the amp.
3. Spits and arcs are a big issue.
4. Looks like tube replacement cost are close enough to be a toss up.
5. 99 percent of operation will be CW.
6. While cost is not a complete non-issue , my last amp ran for
25 years and I expect the same with this one, at which point
I won't care anymore !!!!
7. Have an Orion on order and expect to use the amp with Orion
to keep it all Tentec.
8. Reliability -Reliability - Reliability is a major issue.
9. 160 is a must.
I have read all the reviews I can find , looked at archives until
my neck hurts and still have not reached a decision. One thing
that continues to pop out at me is the number of Centurians
for sale used - always wonder why - surely 1000 vs 1500 watts
is not the issue.
Any thoughts ?
off line is fine to hanknospam@att.net
Thanks - Hank K7HP
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.0 - Release Date: 12/17/2004
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.0 - Release Date: 12/17/2004
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
End of TenTec Digest, Vol 24, Issue 68
**************************************