Re: Slider decision, comparison of E100 and SWP (both with filter mod)


I also find my S5W (had it since 1981) to be my flagship set, even over the slider E100. What amazes me is that the SONY accomplishes it's outstanding sensitivity with a smaller, 6.375" antenna! It's filter is quite good. It can seperate stations 10 KHz apart that are undoable on the DT-400VX and PR-D5. The PR-D5 has a 7.874" antenna; the slider has one 7.5". How does the SONY do so well? It is also my best set in an urban market packed with local am stations.

--- On Fri, 2/27/09, MarkWA1ION wrote:
From: MarkWA1ION
Subject: [ultralightdx] Slider decision, comparison of E100 and SWP (both with filter mod)
To: ultralightdx@...
Date: Friday, February 27, 2009, 9:58 AM

I have had Steve Ratzlaff modify both an Eton E100 and a C. Crane SWP
for me with the Murata filter.

The modification, in both cases, makes these little radios into
competent foreign DX machines. Selectivity turns out to be
comparable which, I guess, is what you would expect. TA activity was
a bit light last night (best on the low end), but both receivers had
no problem separating Morocco-612 from the
WGIR/CHNC/WIP/ WIOD/Cuba "furball" on 610. Closer splits like Algeria-
549 and Canaries-621 were occasionally "sliceable" but needed a bit
more signal strength to be comparable to adjacent domestics. A short
drive away at the shore, these would have been "lead-pipe cinches".

The idea, once both radios were back here, was to choose one to
be "sliderized" by Gary DeBock whilst keeping the other one as-is for
travel demands where fragility of the slider assembly or undue
airport security curiosity could be "negatives".

I am choosing to have the SWP modified with the slider on the
following grounds:

(a) The Eton E100 is somewhat more sensitive above 1000 kHz, about
the same 750-1000, and only a bit "deafer" below 750. Thus it has
the edge over a greater portion of the band than the SWP, so it needs
less help. I can always pull up the Radio Shack passive loop if I
need to peak up low band signals.

(b) The shortwave frequency ranges are less on the SWP, so it lends
itself to being converted to something which will be utilized
primarily for medium-wave DX duty.

In a couple of months, or sooner if the weather is good, I am going
to take 3 to 5 of my more sensitive portables to a local park within
5 miles of several transmitter sites including 50 kW monsters on 680
and 1510. Rejection of spurious responses will be an obvious metric
along with the usual testing for audio recovery on weak daytime
signals (there are many metro-NYC targets at about 200-250 miles
perfect for this) and selectivity next to strong sloppers.

I expect that the slider SWP will be among the select group of high
sensitivity sets, along with the much larger Sony ICF-S5W and ICF-
2010, the C. Crane CCRadio, and others. Preliminary sensitivity
screening here so far shows ICF-S5W as tops in that regard, so it
will be interesting to compare the slider SWP when I get it back.
The outdoor testing not far from several transmitter sites will sort
out the winners from the 'wannabes' in the spur-rejection part of the

Mark Connelly, WA1ION - Billerica, MA

Join to automatically receive all group messages.