I have a very low sn#, two digit, R-4 I like.The only changes made were led lamps Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] Sender: [email protected] Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 02:39:46 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: Drakelist Digest, Vol 28, Issue 5 Send Drakelist mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Drakelist digest..." Today's Topics: 1. The Drake R-4---PERIOD! (Edward Swynar) 2. Re: Using Heath HP-23 with TR-3 or Looking for an AC-3 (mike bryce) 3. Re: The Drake R-4---PERIOD! (VE3ES) 4. Re: The Drake R-4---PERIOD! (Garey Barrell) 5. Re: The Drake R-4---PERIOD! (BIll) 6. Drake 2 series receivers (Charles Ring) 7. Giving an R-4A the shaft..... ([email protected]) 8. More Questions on Receiver Comparisons (Kevin Nathan) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 12:53:24 -0400 From: "Edward Swynar" <[email protected]> Subject: [Drakelist] The Drake R-4---PERIOD! To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <000f01cb6252$5422acb0$e3213...@compaq> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Good Day All, All this talk about the R-4A, R-4B, & R-4C receivers has me wondering if I might really & truly have the ONLY plain-Jane R-4 (no letters) in existance...! Hi Hi Seriously, I know that's NOT the case, but it sure does seem by times that the original R-4 is the "poor cousin" of the whole family of Drake "R" series of receivers... Personally, I like my R-4, and I like it a lot. Are there any others out there still in use...? ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI- VE3XZ ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 13:47:59 -0400 From: mike bryce <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Using Heath HP-23 with TR-3 or Looking for an AC-3 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii gang.... with the higher ac main voltages running now, the output of the hp23 will run close to 900+ volts.. I'd never use one for the drake rigs mike bryce [email protected] On Oct 2, 2010, at 11:20 AM, Garey Barrell wrote: > Chris - > > The high voltage from the HP-23 is a little high in voltage and a quite low > in current capability. That said, it would probably 'work' for low duty > cycle use. CW, SSB with 'typical' transmission duration, (no AM style 'old > buzzard',) and no AM. > > HP-23 - 700 VDC @ 250 mA > > TR-3 - 650 VDC @ 300 mA, 500 mA peak. > > So the '23 won't blow up, but it probably gets pretty warm. A fan on it > would help a little. > > Much easier is an AC-3, -OR- and AC-4. Either will work just fine. The > AC-4R is a good idea with either. > > 73, Garey - K4OAH > Glen Allen, VA > > Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-B, C-Line& > TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs > <www.k4oah.com> > > > Christopher Bowne wrote: >> Greetings from Chris, AJ1G in Stonington, CT. >> >> This is my first post to the group. I picked up a TR-3 at Near-Fest >> Deerfield >> last fall. Has been sitting while I come up with a power supply for it. I >> picked up a Heath HP-23.as a potential supply for it this spring. From what >> I >> have read the HP-23 might be marginal with the Drakes due to the higher >> current >> draw of the Drake sweep tubes vs 6146s? I would prefer using an original or >> updated AC-3 if anyone has one available for sale. I would also be >> interested in >> a supply for mobile use, again would like to hear comments on use of the >> lete >> model Heath DC solid state mobile supply for the HW/SB transceivers with the >> TR-3. >> >> Also looking for info on using the TR-3 on AM....' >> >> 73, Chris, AJ1G >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Drakelist mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Drakelist mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist > ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 13:52:30 -0400 From: VE3ES <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Drakelist] The Drake R-4---PERIOD! To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Wonder how many R4s were produced? I have an A, a B and a C, a SPR4, a SW4A and some 4 xmitters, but no R4. Good point here. Hmmm..... time to upgrade my shack. VE3ES At 12:53 PM 10/2/2010, Edward Swynar wrote: >Personally, I like my R-4, and I like it a lot. Are there any others out >there still in ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 15:23:31 -0400 From: Garey Barrell <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Drakelist] The Drake R-4---PERIOD! To: drakelist <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Eddy - There were less than 2000 R-4 receivers built, from 10/64 to 11/65. The highest s/n I've seen was 1994, and the R-4A started at 2007. A large part of the R-4 circuitry was lifted from the 2-B. You could 'almost' claim that it was a 2-B with more crystal sockets and a 'linearized' tube type PTO! It is an excellent receiver, just like the 2-B, but not quite up to the later versions in some ways. ------------------ R-4 --- 10/64 - 11/65 --- ~2000 built ALL tube. Passband Tuner w/ 4.8, 2.4, 1.2 and 0.4 kHz. Calibrator. Noise Blanker. ------------------ R-4A --- 8/65 - 8/67 --- ~4,000 built Version 1, 13 tubes, + solid state BAND osc and PTO, BJT. ~ 2,000 built. Version 2, 10 tubes, + solid state Product Detector, AM Detector, AF Preamp and AVC. ~2,000 built. ------------------ R-4B --- 9/67 - 4/73 --- ~9,000 built Version 1, 10 tubes, + solid state Calibrator, PTO in Use light. ~1,000 built. Version 2, 9 tubes, + FET PTO. ~8,000 built. ------------------ R-4C --- 5/73 - 1/79 --- ~13,000 built Version 1, 6 tubes, New circuit, + Three (optional) plus AM Crystal Filters, solid state (Dual Gate MOS FET) 2nd Mixer, AF Output and Noise Blanker (optional). ~2,500 built. Version 2, 6 tubes, + One (optional) Crystal Filter, solid state (FET) 1st IF / Tube 2nd Mixer. ~2,300 built. Version 3, 6 tubes. + Minor circuit changes. LO Injection into 1st Mixer. ~ 4,900 built. Version 4, 6 tubes, + Minot circuit changes. Many inside PTO, 1st Mixer LO Injection levels. ~3,300 built. And yes, I have an R-4, s/n 1800. 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-B, C-Line& TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs <www.k4oah.com> Edward Swynar wrote: > Good Day All, > > All this talk about the R-4A, R-4B,& R-4C receivers has me wondering if I > might really& truly have the ONLY plain-Jane R-4 (no letters) in > existance...! Hi Hi > > Seriously, I know that's NOT the case, but it sure does seem by times that > the original R-4 is the "poor cousin" of the whole family of Drake "R" > series of receivers... > > Personally, I like my R-4, and I like it a lot. Are there any others out > there still in use...? > > ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI- VE3XZ > > ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 16:42:17 -0400 From: BIll <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Drakelist] The Drake R-4---PERIOD! To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Hello, I also have the plain R4 and I love it....never had a b line so I don't know the difference but the R4 works AOK.... 73 Bill On 10/2/2010 12:53 PM, Edward Swynar wrote: > Good Day All, > > All this talk about the R-4A, R-4B,& R-4C receivers has me wondering if I > might really& truly have the ONLY plain-Jane R-4 (no letters) in > existance...! Hi Hi > > Seriously, I know that's NOT the case, but it sure does seem by times that > the original R-4 is the "poor cousin" of the whole family of Drake "R" > series of receivers... > > Personally, I like my R-4, and I like it a lot. Are there any others out > there still in use...? > > ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI- VE3XZ > > > > _______________________________________________ > Drakelist mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 18:50:29 -0400 From: Charles Ring <[email protected]> Subject: [Drakelist] Drake 2 series receivers To: [email protected] Cc: drakelist <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed When I bought my new 2-C in 1968 (never had a 2-NT), I thought I had the latest incarnation of the 2 series and it was great. But I had never seen a 2-A/B and knew nothing about passband tuning. Great disappointment when I learned what was missing in my 2-C, including the A/B's much more readable dial. While I am at it, what is the difference between a 2-A and a 2-B? 73 de W3NU On 10/2/2010 15:23, Garey Barrell wrote: > Eddy - > > There were less than 2000 R-4 receivers built, from 10/64 to 11/65. > The highest s/n I've seen was 1994, and the R-4A started at 2007. A > large part of the R-4 circuitry was lifted from the 2-B. You could > 'almost' claim that it was a 2-B with more crystal sockets and a > 'linearized' tube type PTO! It is an excellent receiver, just like > the 2-B, but not quite up to the later versions in some ways. > ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:14:56 EDT From: [email protected] Subject: [Drakelist] Giving an R-4A the shaft..... To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Just ordered some stainless-steel rod for making a new preselector reduction-drive center shaft for R-4A s/n 3735. The old shaft has a groove worn into the smaller-diameter recess by the ball bearings, which makes the preselector tuning slip rather badly, so I'm going to turn a new shaft on my Sherline lathe and rebuild the reduction drive. This will be an interesting repair...... ;-) I'll also be re-capping this radio (cap kit on order from Hayseed Hamfest) and doing a lot of serious troubleshooting on a rather warbly PTO assembly (that was swapped out of s/n 3781). Basically, this radio now has all of my current known problems rolled into one unit. ;-) 73/arf, Paul, K4MSG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mailman.zerobeat.net/pipermail/drakelist/attachments/20101002/95e38ef5/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:39:35 -0700 From: "Kevin Nathan" <[email protected]> Subject: [Drakelist] More Questions on Receiver Comparisons To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi All, I really appreciate all the feedback I've gotten from the list so far. It eases my mind that Collins, at least the newer models such as the 75S series, is not the answer to what I am looking for. I would also like to indicate here that I would like general coverage but a few SW bands such as can be had with the crystals for the 2B or the R4 series can be equally rewarding. I am also primarily interested in amateur AM vintage work with SW listening as a side interest. I also need to note that size of the receiver is somewhat important here due to the size of my operating table. It is approximately 18 inches deep, 48 inches long with a vertical operating space to the shelf I built above it of 13 inches. and I need to set a D-104 mic with the G type base in front of the receiver. I am also setting a Heath HD-1410 next to the receiver on the right with the Ranger 2 on the left. Therefore, a big receiver that is deep and over thirteen inches high would not work. This effectively rules out something like an R-390 or some of the later Nationals such as the NC-300 or NC-303. The 2B fits here very well as did the Hallicrafter SX-99 I recently sold as well as the Hammarlund HQ-110 I currently have sitting in a corner of the shack. I have a feeling the R4 would fit quite nicely here as well. With this information in mind then, I do have a few more things I need to ask the group. First, what is the major difference in performance between the R4B and R4C models? Someone mentioned the C had a 6 kHz filter one could use for AM but others seemed to feel the C isn't as good. What performance factors lead to this conclusion? Second, for those of you who have used the 2B, what is your suggested tuning method for tuning AM? Is it better to set the band pass at zero and then use the tuning dial to tune off on one side or the other; or, to zero beat the signal with the main tuning knob and then use the band pass tuning to move off to one or the other side band? Finally, if I wish to sell or trade this 2B, is there anyone on the list who wants one who might have a nice, working R4B or C who might wish to trade with or without some cash involved? This 2B is in good shape, has the 2BQ and 2AC with it and a copy of the manual. I have crystals in it for 4.7 to 5.3, 5.7 to 6.3, 11.5 to 12.1 and have a replacement crystal coming that will yield 9.4 to 10.0. I would be interested in talking with anyone just to test the waters so to speak. Thanks much all and very 73. Kevin :) Amateur Radio: K7RX -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mailman.zerobeat.net/pipermail/drakelist/attachments/20101002/edbf5271/attachment.html> ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Drakelist mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist End of Drakelist Digest, Vol 28, Issue 5 **************************************** _______________________________________________ Drakelist mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
