Russ Edmunds <wb2bjh@...>
--- On Wed, 9/17/08, bbwrwy <richarda@...> wrote:
I was a little surprised because I'd not compared them before. Now I
understand why the TRF is still a revered receiver. Of the ULR's, the
T615 fared best, the 39FP in the middle with the DT-400W last. I have
a feeling this is partially due to the longer antenna in the TRF. We
only have to look at what has been accomplished by experiments adding
longer ferrite antennas to URL's.
*** One of my lingering regrets in the hobby is that I disposed of my prefectly-functioning RS TRF back in the early 1970's. At that time, I determined that I didn't need both it and the Hammarlund HR-10 multiband portable ( which I still have in solid working condition ) which was nearly the equal of the TRF.
I can recall hearing some really good DX on the TRF in conjunction with my other receivers at the time in Northern NJ. It was a very sensitive and selective receiver.
But that said, I haven't used the HR-10 actively for DX in years, and I really should do so - especially since it has continuous tuning through the Marine Band and therefore covers the X-Band. It's not an Ultralight, but I'll be interested in seeing how it stacks up against the Sony ICF 2010...
Blue Bell, PA ( 360' ASL )
[15 mi NNW of Philadelphia]
40:08:45N; 75:16:04W, Grid FN20id
FM: Yamaha T-80 & Onkyo T-450RDS w/ APS9B @15'
AM: Modified Sony ICF 2010 barefoot