Hi I think the lead length on the parts argues against them being pulls from boards. It does *not* eliminate the possibility. I’ve seen low cost manufacture that never did any lead trim. I would not put it at the top of my list for “fancy oscillator of the year”. The price is high enough that you could put together a fairly nice un-compensated XO from parts for much less money. If it *is* an XO, you are paying a lot for it.
Bob > On Aug 23, 2015, at 12:30 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hmmmm.... > > I think I'm convinced, I had my doubts to start with and now have enough > more to ensure I follow a different route:-) > > Regards > > Nigel > GM8PZR > > Hi > > If they are indeed grabbing anything in that package and re-labeling it, I > would > be very careful. True TCXO’s (full compensation network) in that package > are > relatively rare compared to the enormous number of “precision XO’s” made > in the same package. The XO’s had no real compensation. They simply > relied on a packaged crystal to deliver a tighter stability than the open > blank > DIP XO’s of the same era. > > The other obvious issue of a relabel process would be that the one I get > and > review likely has no relation at all to the one you get and try to use. We > could > have parts each built to totally different specs and each made by who > knows who. > > Bob > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
