To attempt to close out the GE versus Batwing discussion of history, I was at GE mobile when MASTR II was designed. The designers never took apart any Moto stuff to reverse engineer it.
There was a group that did competitive evaluation testing of moto gear and they issued reports to the design team on what was needed. No circuits were traced out and passed on. Only design goals were passed on. Yes, alot of work was done to the MASTRII squelch to approximate the Micor squelch. There were not many ham designers at GE during that period. I ran MASTR PRO and Motrac in the mobile and really antique RCA base at home. Most of the hams that worked at GE at the time only had old moto, TPL (HA HA) or Prog line. As I recall, in design there were only about five of us hams at that time. There were a few guys in the factory floor and several in parts and factory service. There were a few inactive hams who hadn't seen key or mike for years. Generally speaking the drive was to build the best darned radio for the same $ or less with similar features. One thing we couldn't change! The direction of rotation of the squelch knob differs for moto and ge. I tried to change it on MASTR II. The change almost slipped thru. There are a significant number of MASTR II PSLM control head that have a moto style squelch operation (that was me). A tech in factory test raised the difference to a high level in management and they made use change the drawings back. I still have the only MASTR Pro controller head with a switch to unsquelch, push button to un squelch, a switch to reverse the knob operation. That was a gift at my going away roast party. So if you want to know what happened in the design of MII ask and I might let you know how it was then! By for now and I hope we can close this chapter. 73 Ed K3SWJ ( then K4HPQ and WR4OWN and WB4OWN repeaters) --- In [email protected], "Gregg Lengling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yep they were building radios until the late 70's when they got out of the > business. They also made a lot of car phones using that as the basis of the > unit. > > > Gregg R. Lengling, W9DHI, Retired > Administrator http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org > K2/100 S#3075 KX1 S# 57 > Politics is the art of appearing candid and completely open, while > concealing as much as possible. -States: The Bene Gesserit View > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Neil McKie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 4:50 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff..... > > > It could be ... that was what? 30 years ago? > > Neil > > Gregg Lengling wrote: > > > > Are you sure you mean Bendix and not Delco...because delco out of > > Oak Creek Wisconsin had one very similar. Of course at that time > > they were owned by General Motors...now they are separate and > > called Delphi. > > > > Gregg R. Lengling, W9DHI, Retired > > Administrator http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org > > K2/100 S#3075 KX1 S# 57 > > Politics is the art of appearing candid and completely open, while > > concealing as much as possible. -States: The Bene Gesserit View > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Neil McKie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 2:31 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff..... > > > > Back in the late sixties, Bendix Radio ??, came out with a trunk > > mount radio. The receiver (I think) looked very similar to the > > Motorola Twin-V Line of the era. The transmitter looked like the > > GE Progress Line transmitter deck. Both the receiver and the > > transmitter used a cable to plug into the power supply almost exactly > > like GE did in the Pregress Line. > > > > Neil > > > > Paul Finch wrote: > > > > > > OK, > > > Here goes. There is always going to be some similarities in radio > > > equipment because of the current existing technology. Look at the > > > similarity between the cell phones out today that are built by > > > different companies, are they all stealing each other's designs? I > > > don't think so! > > > > > > Read my response> below. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Kevin Custer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 1:10 AM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff..... > > > > > > Paul Finch wrote: > > > > > > >Kevin, > > > > > > > >Explain please! The only thing I see is the TCXO's that are even > > > >anywhere close. > > > > > > > > > > Similarities in Mobiles: > > > Control Head. > > > > > > Response> Motorola white and grey and squared corners, GE Beige and > > > tan and rounded corners. Everybody had gone plastic at that time > > > due to cost. Real close! > > > > > > PL (Channel Guard). > > > Response> This was an industry standard CTCSS, how can that be copied > > > by GE? Every radio manufacture used this format, guess they all copied > > > Motorola? Motorola called it Private Line, GE Channel Guard, RCA and > > > Johnson something else. One other thing, if I am not mistaken this > > > technology went back to the days of the old Motorola 80-D and GE > > > Pre-Progress line of radios but they all put their own name on this > > > technology. > > > > All used the EIA tone scheme ... only Motorola called each tone a > > specific designator. Ie: 1Z for 100.0 Hz; 1A for 103.5 Hz etc. > > > > > > > RF Power Output Options (Like 110 watts). > > > > > > Response> Again, industry standard, GE, Motorola, RCA, Aerotron and > > > Kenwood all had and still have that power level, that is if they are > > > still in business. As someone else pointed out a lot of this was > > > driven by the industries like police and fire departments that were > > > specifying the equipment. > > > > > > AF Power Output (10 watts) > > > > > > Response> Big deal, this is the best level for use in noisy environments > > > like large trucks! > > > > > > Channelized Crystal Elements. > > > > > > Response> Like I said, this is the only real thing I can see that is > > > similar but still not really the same circuit! > > > > > > 5 Pole HR in a casting that is not soldered to the PC board. > > > Response> This style of helical resonator is the best for selectivity, > > > I think the noisy cities we live in drove this design. Johnson, RCA > > > 1000 and other serious manufactures also used this number of helical > > > resonators, did they copy Motorola? (RCA did copy the Master II and > > > paid big time!) > > > > > > Dual Hysteresis Squelch. > > > > > > Response> May have gotten the idea from Motorola but did not copy the > > > circuit. > > > > > > Single Conversion Receiver, with 11 meg I-F frequency. > > > > > > Response> GE's was 21.4 I believe and this was driven by cost as must > > > as anything else, it's just cheaper and some people think it keeps down > > > intermod. > > > > > > Same number of I-F poles. > > > > > > Response> Physics, that's just what it takes to have the required > > > selectivity. > > > > > > Stable RF/AF circuitry operates on 10 volts (9.6 on the Micor) > > > > > > Response> GE's Master Pro ran their circuits on regulated 10 volts long > > > before Micor came out! > > > > > > PA Protection (VSWR). > > > > > > Response> Yeah, they copied Motorola's protection circuit that only > > > caused more problems in the radio, I don't think GE had a SWR > > > protection circuit, at least I never had to work on one, I worked on > > > a lot of Motorola protection circuits. GE did have power control. > > > > > > Receiver Sensitivity. > > > > > > Response> How can that be copied???? Technology improved letting > > > everyone improve receiver sensitivity! > > > > > > Preamp is an option. > > > > > > Response> Everybody had that option! Guess they all copied it! > > > > > > Frequency Ranges (Like 150.8 mc.) > > > > > > Response> I have no idea what you are getting at here, the frequency > > > ranges were/are set by the FCC, not Motorola! If you mean the > > > frequency bands the radios covered, again physics have more to do with > > > it than Motorola or GE and those bands go back in some form for as > > > long as radios have been around. > > > > > > Size. > > > > > > Response> Right, while the overall footprint is close (but no cigar) > > > the height of the GE radio is a 1/2 inch less than the height of the > > > Micor, where is the similarity? Motorola-Charcoal grey, GE- Beige. > > > GE Length 19.0 Width 11.75 Height 2.5 Total 558.125 cubic inches > > > Micor Length 17.625 Width 13.0 Height 3.0 Total 687.375 cubic inches > > > You do the math.... > > > > > > Weight. > > > > > > Response> GE 25 pounds. Micor 26 pounds. This is with mounting plates. > > > GE's is very heavy metal plate and the Micor is a thin stamped plate. > > > It's obvious that the actual GE radio weighs less than the Micor since > > > the plates are so different. > > > > > > Gee, there are hardly any similarities now that I look at it..... > > > Get real...... > > > > > > Kevin Custer > > > > > > Response> Gee, lets keep this up, I am having a lot of fun while > > > bringing back some great memories! What this comes down to is you > > > think Motorola developed all the good radio technology, simply not > > > true! I have worked on both, I like both but prefer the GE radios. > > > Show me an actual circuit that is similar, that's what counts! Some > > > things like PA's and oscillators are so generic there is only one way > > > to design them but there is a lot of differences between the Master II > > > and Micor radios. If Motorola truly thought GE copied their design > > > Motorola would have been all over GE, just like GE got all over RCA! > > > > > > In conclusion, Master II had a completely different case and different > > > color, Micor had their transmitter on one side, the receiver on the > > > other. GE had their exciter on the left front, receiver in center and > > > audio on right front, helical resonators near the center back with the > > > PA and heat sink in the very back, yeah very similar! Look at the RCA > > > copy of the Master II if you want to see true "copy". > > > > > > Like you said, get real! > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
