Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Well! The email system seems to have stripped the tabs out of my chart,
but I hope it's readable.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/10/25 09:34, Maynard Wright via groups.io wrote: Hi, Don,
I measured my S-40B's antenna terminals with an old analog VOM, so don't
take the measurements to be exceedingly precise, but I think that they
do tell the story:
Band A1-A2 A1-G A2-G
1 540-1680 kHz OPEN 1200 ohms OPEN
2 1680 kHz - 5.4 MHz OPEN 4 ohms OPEN
3 5.3 - 15.5 MHz 0.4 ohms OPEN OPEN
4 15.5 - 44 MHz 0.5 ohms OPEN OPEN
I conclude from this:
1. My S-40B (top of chassis stamped "AUG 3 1953"; back of chassis
stamped "70E937") does not have the input coils reversed as shown in the
schematic diagram;
2. My S-40B does feature the curious input wiring that would make a
balanced line input useless on bands 1 and 2.
Added to this, my S-40B is quite sensitive and usable on Bands 1 and 2.
I use it for CW QSOs on 80 meters (and 40 on Band 3). I have always
used it with the A2-G link in place and with an unbalanced input, so I
haven't previously noticed the curious input wiring.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
On 2/10/25 05:43, Maynard Wright via groups.io wrote:
Hi, Don,
I did check the S-40A schematic and it shows all the input coils wired
so that on all bands they can function as balanced input circuits unlike
the S-40B and S-85 that leave terminal A2 open on Bands 1 and 2.
Now, is the receiver really wired that way or is the schematic wrong?
Later today (or tomorrow) I'll turn my S-40B around and measure terminal
A2 (DC continuity to A1 and G) with the bandswitch in all 4 positions.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
On 2/9/25 23:57, don Root wrote:
Maynard
<>
<
<>
<
<>
<>
<>
I did not get that far. My coils between the hears are smoked now, How
it works or doesn’t gets more mysterious by the hour.
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Maynard Wright
via
groups.io
*Sent:* Monday, February 10, 2025 12:04 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem
during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Hi, Don,
Oops! I lost track of who was doing what here.
I have only your diagram, not the S-85 manual, but note that when the
bandswitch is set to Band 1 or Band 2, antenna terminal A2 is not
connected to anything that provides continuity except for some possible
stray coupling. The manual for my S-40B shows the same circuit but with
Bands 1 and 2 as they should be.
The alignment instructions for the S-40B specify connection of A2 to G
using the supplied link, so they are ok. The operating instruction,
though, specify removal of the link when a doublet antenna with a
balanced feedline is used without pointing out that this would lead to a
connection of one side of the transmission line to A1 and the other
side, connected to A2, open.
If the S-85 manual is similar, it might be important to take into
account the disconnect of terminal A2 on Bands 1 and 2, depending on how
you are using the receiver or feeding it signals for adjustment.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
On 2/9/25 13:46, don Root wrote:
Emanuele, no need to reply to this, it is more for others that have an
S-85. I don’t blame you for being fed-up with this radio, and giving up;
we all have had that feeling, ?but for the benefit of others we wonder
if ?yours is wired as per the schematic, or is it actually wired like I
suggested it should be. You seem to be very good at tackling all this
stuff, so if the wiring is apparently wrong at R65, you no doubt changed
it and tried it again, I would think but I saw no comment on that point.
I don’t have an S-85, but, for any others with an S-85: does it have the
same alignment problem?, and poor sensitivity below 1Mc? ….and is it
wired as per the schematic? as I highlighted before? ?I don’t believe
they BUILD them using a schematic, instead they use a more practical
physical wiring drawing; so it is hard to believe that they went out the
door wired, and working incorrectly, but I have seen worse cases when I
was in industrial electronics manufacturing, so impossible things do
happen, then I had to find and fix the impossible out in the field. The
big boss says “ship it anyhow”, and QA succumbs.
Emanuele mentioned the S-99 is an exact copy in *some detailed
respects*, so I looked and found that the S-99 eliminates all capacitors
for the 1^st RF tanks and the slugs for bands 3,4.? ?It is interesting
that? they still list C3 with L3, but C3 itself has vanished..
???typical copy and paste draughting [drafting if you’re in USA]
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Emanuele Girlando
via groups.io
*Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2025 12:56 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem
during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Guys,
one of the reasons I wants to give up with this one is the poor design
in the ANT RF circuitry.
I noticed the schematic diagram anomalies, both the 1&2 bands wiring
error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout, at the same time as Don did. I was
shocked and disappointed by that.
Days ago, while approaching the refurbishing project of my S-85, I did
read that the SX-99 is a S-85 plus IF-XTAL and S-Meter. So I download
the SX-99 schematic diagram to compare with but I discovered:
1.the 1&2 bands wiring error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout are? exactly
the same in SX-99 as in S-85; that was shocking and disappointing for
the second time (!!).
2.the ANT RF circuitry design has been completely reviewed in SX-99
eliminating TRIMCAPs and introducing a more useful antenna trimmer you
can adjust while switching between? bands and/or connecting different
antenna types input socket.
My conclusion was that the S-85 ANT circuit doesn't worth any additional
effort to be understood or further analyzed: The Hallicrafters it self
changed its design in successive projects..
Furthermore, IMHO, there is no point in having a ANT tuned circuit
inside the radio when, in everyday use, you would have to retune it
every time you change bands or the type of antenna connected to the
radio. Consequently? I got the conclusion that leaving it as "wide" as
possible sounds like a good choice.
In the hope of modifying my S-85 by reproducing the solution found in
the SX-99, I also checked if the coils part numbers were the same but,
unfortunately, they are not.
The only remaining test I want to do on this one is to align ANT and MIX
RF stages with the chassis inside the cabinet.
In other words I want to check if the service manual statement:
should be read as: "RF alignment *_MUST_* be made with chassis in the
cabinet. ...".
Thank you all once again.
--
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
<>
< <>
< <>
<> <>
< <>
< <>
< <>
<> <>
--
don??? va3drl
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Hi, Don,
I measured my S-40B's antenna terminals with an old analog VOM, so don't
take the measurements to be exceedingly precise, but I think that they
do tell the story:
Band A1-A2 A1-G A2-G
1 540-1680 kHz OPEN 1200 ohms OPEN
2 1680 kHz - 5.4 MHz OPEN 4 ohms OPEN
3 5.3 - 15.5 MHz 0.4 ohms OPEN OPEN
4 15.5 - 44 MHz 0.5 ohms OPEN OPEN
I conclude from this:
1. My S-40B (top of chassis stamped "AUG 3 1953"; back of chassis
stamped "70E937") does not have the input coils reversed as shown in the
schematic diagram;
2. My S-40B does feature the curious input wiring that would make a
balanced line input useless on bands 1 and 2.
Added to this, my S-40B is quite sensitive and usable on Bands 1 and 2.
I use it for CW QSOs on 80 meters (and 40 on Band 3). I have always
used it with the A2-G link in place and with an unbalanced input, so I
haven't previously noticed the curious input wiring.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/10/25 05:43, Maynard Wright via groups.io wrote: Hi, Don,
I did check the S-40A schematic and it shows all the input coils wired
so that on all bands they can function as balanced input circuits unlike
the S-40B and S-85 that leave terminal A2 open on Bands 1 and 2.
Now, is the receiver really wired that way or is the schematic wrong?
Later today (or tomorrow) I'll turn my S-40B around and measure terminal
A2 (DC continuity to A1 and G) with the bandswitch in all 4 positions.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
On 2/9/25 23:57, don Root wrote:
Maynard
<>
<
<>
I did not get that far. My coils between the hears are smoked now, How
it works or doesn’t gets more mysterious by the hour.
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Maynard Wright
via
groups.io
*Sent:* Monday, February 10, 2025 12:04 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem
during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Hi, Don,
Oops! I lost track of who was doing what here.
I have only your diagram, not the S-85 manual, but note that when the
bandswitch is set to Band 1 or Band 2, antenna terminal A2 is not
connected to anything that provides continuity except for some possible
stray coupling. The manual for my S-40B shows the same circuit but with
Bands 1 and 2 as they should be.
The alignment instructions for the S-40B specify connection of A2 to G
using the supplied link, so they are ok. The operating instruction,
though, specify removal of the link when a doublet antenna with a
balanced feedline is used without pointing out that this would lead to a
connection of one side of the transmission line to A1 and the other
side, connected to A2, open.
If the S-85 manual is similar, it might be important to take into
account the disconnect of terminal A2 on Bands 1 and 2, depending on how
you are using the receiver or feeding it signals for adjustment.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
On 2/9/25 13:46, don Root wrote:
Emanuele, no need to reply to this, it is more for others that have an
S-85. I don’t blame you for being fed-up with this radio, and giving up;
we all have had that feeling, ?but for the benefit of others we wonder
if ?yours is wired as per the schematic, or is it actually wired like I
suggested it should be. You seem to be very good at tackling all this
stuff, so if the wiring is apparently wrong at R65, you no doubt changed
it and tried it again, I would think but I saw no comment on that point.
I don’t have an S-85, but, for any others with an S-85: does it have the
same alignment problem?, and poor sensitivity below 1Mc? ….and is it
wired as per the schematic? as I highlighted before? ?I don’t believe
they BUILD them using a schematic, instead they use a more practical
physical wiring drawing; so it is hard to believe that they went out the
door wired, and working incorrectly, but I have seen worse cases when I
was in industrial electronics manufacturing, so impossible things do
happen, then I had to find and fix the impossible out in the field. The
big boss says “ship it anyhow”, and QA succumbs.
Emanuele mentioned the S-99 is an exact copy in *some detailed
respects*, so I looked and found that the S-99 eliminates all capacitors
for the 1^st RF tanks and the slugs for bands 3,4.? ?It is interesting
that? they still list C3 with L3, but C3 itself has vanished..
???typical copy and paste draughting [drafting if you’re in USA]
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Emanuele Girlando
via groups.io
*Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2025 12:56 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem
during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Guys,
one of the reasons I wants to give up with this one is the poor design
in the ANT RF circuitry.
I noticed the schematic diagram anomalies, both the 1&2 bands wiring
error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout, at the same time as Don did. I was
shocked and disappointed by that.
Days ago, while approaching the refurbishing project of my S-85, I did
read that the SX-99 is a S-85 plus IF-XTAL and S-Meter. So I download
the SX-99 schematic diagram to compare with but I discovered:
1.the 1&2 bands wiring error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout are? exactly
the same in SX-99 as in S-85; that was shocking and disappointing for
the second time (!!).
2.the ANT RF circuitry design has been completely reviewed in SX-99
eliminating TRIMCAPs and introducing a more useful antenna trimmer you
can adjust while switching between? bands and/or connecting different
antenna types input socket.
My conclusion was that the S-85 ANT circuit doesn't worth any additional
effort to be understood or further analyzed: The Hallicrafters it self
changed its design in successive projects..
Furthermore, IMHO, there is no point in having a ANT tuned circuit
inside the radio when, in everyday use, you would have to retune it
every time you change bands or the type of antenna connected to the
radio. Consequently? I got the conclusion that leaving it as "wide" as
possible sounds like a good choice.
In the hope of modifying my S-85 by reproducing the solution found in
the SX-99, I also checked if the coils part numbers were the same but,
unfortunately, they are not.
The only remaining test I want to do on this one is to align ANT and MIX
RF stages with the chassis inside the cabinet.
In other words I want to check if the service manual statement:
should be read as: "RF alignment *_MUST_* be made with chassis in the
cabinet. ...".
Thank you all once again.
--
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
<>
< <>
< <>
<> <>
--
don??? va3drl
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Hi, Don,
I did check the S-40A schematic and it shows all the input coils wired
so that on all bands they can function as balanced input circuits unlike
the S-40B and S-85 that leave terminal A2 open on Bands 1 and 2.
Now, is the receiver really wired that way or is the schematic wrong?
Later today (or tomorrow) I'll turn my S-40B around and measure terminal
A2 (DC continuity to A1 and G) with the bandswitch in all 4 positions.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/9/25 23:57, don Root wrote: Maynard
<>
I did not get that far. My coils between the hears are smoked now, How
it works or doesn’t gets more mysterious by the hour.
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Maynard Wright via
groups.io
*Sent:* Monday, February 10, 2025 12:04 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem
during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Hi, Don,
Oops! I lost track of who was doing what here.
I have only your diagram, not the S-85 manual, but note that when the
bandswitch is set to Band 1 or Band 2, antenna terminal A2 is not
connected to anything that provides continuity except for some possible
stray coupling. The manual for my S-40B shows the same circuit but with
Bands 1 and 2 as they should be.
The alignment instructions for the S-40B specify connection of A2 to G
using the supplied link, so they are ok. The operating instruction,
though, specify removal of the link when a doublet antenna with a
balanced feedline is used without pointing out that this would lead to a
connection of one side of the transmission line to A1 and the other
side, connected to A2, open.
If the S-85 manual is similar, it might be important to take into
account the disconnect of terminal A2 on Bands 1 and 2, depending on how
you are using the receiver or feeding it signals for adjustment.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
On 2/9/25 13:46, don Root wrote:
Emanuele, no need to reply to this, it is more for others that have an
S-85. I don’t blame you for being fed-up with this radio, and giving up;
we all have had that feeling, ?but for the benefit of others we wonder
if ?yours is wired as per the schematic, or is it actually wired like I
suggested it should be. You seem to be very good at tackling all this
stuff, so if the wiring is apparently wrong at R65, you no doubt changed
it and tried it again, I would think but I saw no comment on that point.
I don’t have an S-85, but, for any others with an S-85: does it have the
same alignment problem?, and poor sensitivity below 1Mc? ….and is it
wired as per the schematic? as I highlighted before? ?I don’t believe
they BUILD them using a schematic, instead they use a more practical
physical wiring drawing; so it is hard to believe that they went out the
door wired, and working incorrectly, but I have seen worse cases when I
was in industrial electronics manufacturing, so impossible things do
happen, then I had to find and fix the impossible out in the field. The
big boss says “ship it anyhow”, and QA succumbs.
Emanuele mentioned the S-99 is an exact copy in *some detailed
respects*, so I looked and found that the S-99 eliminates all capacitors
for the 1^st RF tanks and the slugs for bands 3,4.? ?It is interesting
that? they still list C3 with L3, but C3 itself has vanished..
???typical copy and paste draughting [drafting if you’re in USA]
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Emanuele Girlando
via groups.io
*Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2025 12:56 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem
during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Guys,
one of the reasons I wants to give up with this one is the poor design
in the ANT RF circuitry.
I noticed the schematic diagram anomalies, both the 1&2 bands wiring
error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout, at the same time as Don did. I was
shocked and disappointed by that.
Days ago, while approaching the refurbishing project of my S-85, I did
read that the SX-99 is a S-85 plus IF-XTAL and S-Meter. So I download
the SX-99 schematic diagram to compare with but I discovered:
1.the 1&2 bands wiring error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout are? exactly
the same in SX-99 as in S-85; that was shocking and disappointing for
the second time (!!).
2.the ANT RF circuitry design has been completely reviewed in SX-99
eliminating TRIMCAPs and introducing a more useful antenna trimmer you
can adjust while switching between? bands and/or connecting different
antenna types input socket.
My conclusion was that the S-85 ANT circuit doesn't worth any additional
effort to be understood or further analyzed: The Hallicrafters it self
changed its design in successive projects..
Furthermore, IMHO, there is no point in having a ANT tuned circuit
inside the radio when, in everyday use, you would have to retune it
every time you change bands or the type of antenna connected to the
radio. Consequently? I got the conclusion that leaving it as "wide" as
possible sounds like a good choice.
In the hope of modifying my S-85 by reproducing the solution found in
the SX-99, I also checked if the coils part numbers were the same but,
unfortunately, they are not.
The only remaining test I want to do on this one is to align ANT and MIX
RF stages with the chassis inside the cabinet.
In other words I want to check if the service manual statement:
should be read as: "RF alignment *_MUST_* be made with chassis in the
cabinet. ...".
Thank you all once again.
--
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
<>
< <>
--
don??? va3drl
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Maynard I did not get that far. My coils between the hears are smoked now, How it works or doesn’t gets more mysterious by the hour. ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Maynard Wright via groups.io
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2025 12:04 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!? Hi, Don,
Oops! I lost track of who was doing what here.
I have only your diagram, not the S-85 manual, but note that when the
bandswitch is set to Band 1 or Band 2, antenna terminal A2 is not
connected to anything that provides continuity except for some possible
stray coupling. The manual for my S-40B shows the same circuit but with
Bands 1 and 2 as they should be.
The alignment instructions for the S-40B specify connection of A2 to G
using the supplied link, so they are ok. The operating instruction,
though, specify removal of the link when a doublet antenna with a
balanced feedline is used without pointing out that this would lead to a
connection of one side of the transmission line to A1 and the other
side, connected to A2, open.
If the S-85 manual is similar, it might be important to take into
account the disconnect of terminal A2 on Bands 1 and 2, depending on how
you are using the receiver or feeding it signals for adjustment.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
On 2/9/25 13:46, don Root wrote: Emanuele, no need to reply to this, it is more for others that have an
S-85. I don’t blame you for being fed-up with this radio, and giving up;
we all have had that feeling, ?but for the benefit of others we wonder
if ?yours is wired as per the schematic, or is it actually wired like I
suggested it should be. You seem to be very good at tackling all this
stuff, so if the wiring is apparently wrong at R65, you no doubt changed
it and tried it again, I would think but I saw no comment on that point.
I don’t have an S-85, but, for any others with an S-85: does it have the
same alignment problem?, and poor sensitivity below 1Mc? ….and is it
wired as per the schematic? as I highlighted before? ?I don’t believe
they BUILD them using a schematic, instead they use a more practical
physical wiring drawing; so it is hard to believe that they went out the
door wired, and working incorrectly, but I have seen worse cases when I
was in industrial electronics manufacturing, so impossible things do
happen, then I had to find and fix the impossible out in the field. The
big boss says “ship it anyhow”, and QA succumbs.
Emanuele mentioned the S-99 is an exact copy in *some detailed
respects*, so I looked and found that the S-99 eliminates all capacitors
for the 1^st RF tanks and the slugs for bands 3,4.? ?It is interesting
that? they still list C3 with L3, but C3 itself has vanished..
???typical copy and paste draughting [drafting if you’re in USA]
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Emanuele Girlando
via groups.io
*Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2025 12:56 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem
during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Guys,
one of the reasons I wants to give up with this one is the poor design
in the ANT RF circuitry.
I noticed the schematic diagram anomalies, both the 1&2 bands wiring
error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout, at the same time as Don did. I was
shocked and disappointed by that.
Days ago, while approaching the refurbishing project of my S-85, I did
read that the SX-99 is a S-85 plus IF-XTAL and S-Meter. So I download
the SX-99 schematic diagram to compare with but I discovered:
1.the 1&2 bands wiring error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout are? exactly
the same in SX-99 as in S-85; that was shocking and disappointing for
the second time (!!).
2.the ANT RF circuitry design has been completely reviewed in SX-99
eliminating TRIMCAPs and introducing a more useful antenna trimmer you
can adjust while switching between? bands and/or connecting different
antenna types input socket.
My conclusion was that the S-85 ANT circuit doesn't worth any additional
effort to be understood or further analyzed: The Hallicrafters it self
changed its design in successive projects..
Furthermore, IMHO, there is no point in having a ANT tuned circuit
inside the radio when, in everyday use, you would have to retune it
every time you change bands or the type of antenna connected to the
radio. Consequently? I got the conclusion that leaving it as "wide" as
possible sounds like a good choice.
In the hope of modifying my S-85 by reproducing the solution found in
the SX-99, I also checked if the coils part numbers were the same but,
unfortunately, they are not.
The only remaining test I want to do on this one is to align ANT and MIX
RF stages with the chassis inside the cabinet.
In other words I want to check if the service manual statement:
should be read as: "RF alignment *_MUST_* be made with chassis in the
cabinet. ...".
Thank you all once again.
--
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
<>
--
don??? va3drl
-- don??? va3drl
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Hi, Don,
Oops! I lost track of who was doing what here.
I have only your diagram, not the S-85 manual, but note that when the
bandswitch is set to Band 1 or Band 2, antenna terminal A2 is not
connected to anything that provides continuity except for some possible
stray coupling. The manual for my S-40B shows the same circuit but with
Bands 1 and 2 as they should be.
The alignment instructions for the S-40B specify connection of A2 to G
using the supplied link, so they are ok. The operating instruction,
though, specify removal of the link when a doublet antenna with a
balanced feedline is used without pointing out that this would lead to a
connection of one side of the transmission line to A1 and the other
side, connected to A2, open.
If the S-85 manual is similar, it might be important to take into
account the disconnect of terminal A2 on Bands 1 and 2, depending on how
you are using the receiver or feeding it signals for adjustment.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/9/25 13:46, don Root wrote: Emanuele, no need to reply to this, it is more for others that have an
S-85. I don’t blame you for being fed-up with this radio, and giving up;
we all have had that feeling, ?but for the benefit of others we wonder
if ?yours is wired as per the schematic, or is it actually wired like I
suggested it should be. You seem to be very good at tackling all this
stuff, so if the wiring is apparently wrong at R65, you no doubt changed
it and tried it again, I would think but I saw no comment on that point.
I don’t have an S-85, but, for any others with an S-85: does it have the
same alignment problem?, and poor sensitivity below 1Mc? ….and is it
wired as per the schematic? as I highlighted before? ?I don’t believe
they BUILD them using a schematic, instead they use a more practical
physical wiring drawing; so it is hard to believe that they went out the
door wired, and working incorrectly, but I have seen worse cases when I
was in industrial electronics manufacturing, so impossible things do
happen, then I had to find and fix the impossible out in the field. The
big boss says “ship it anyhow”, and QA succumbs.
Emanuele mentioned the S-99 is an exact copy in *some detailed
respects*, so I looked and found that the S-99 eliminates all capacitors
for the 1^st RF tanks and the slugs for bands 3,4.? ?It is interesting
that? they still list C3 with L3, but C3 itself has vanished..
???typical copy and paste draughting [drafting if you’re in USA]
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Emanuele Girlando
via groups.io
*Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2025 12:56 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem
during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Guys,
one of the reasons I wants to give up with this one is the poor design
in the ANT RF circuitry.
I noticed the schematic diagram anomalies, both the 1&2 bands wiring
error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout, at the same time as Don did. I was
shocked and disappointed by that.
Days ago, while approaching the refurbishing project of my S-85, I did
read that the SX-99 is a S-85 plus IF-XTAL and S-Meter. So I download
the SX-99 schematic diagram to compare with but I discovered:
1.the 1&2 bands wiring error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout are? exactly
the same in SX-99 as in S-85; that was shocking and disappointing for
the second time (!!).
2.the ANT RF circuitry design has been completely reviewed in SX-99
eliminating TRIMCAPs and introducing a more useful antenna trimmer you
can adjust while switching between? bands and/or connecting different
antenna types input socket.
My conclusion was that the S-85 ANT circuit doesn't worth any additional
effort to be understood or further analyzed: The Hallicrafters it self
changed its design in successive projects..
Furthermore, IMHO, there is no point in having a ANT tuned circuit
inside the radio when, in everyday use, you would have to retune it
every time you change bands or the type of antenna connected to the
radio. Consequently? I got the conclusion that leaving it as "wide" as
possible sounds like a good choice.
In the hope of modifying my S-85 by reproducing the solution found in
the SX-99, I also checked if the coils part numbers were the same but,
unfortunately, they are not.
The only remaining test I want to do on this one is to align ANT and MIX
RF stages with the chassis inside the cabinet.
In other words I want to check if the service manual statement:
should be read as: "RF alignment *_MUST_* be made with chassis in the
cabinet. ...".
Thank you all once again.
--
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
<>
--
don??? va3drl
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
This all just doesn't sound right. Did this receiver EVER work? If
it did its not miswired. If it didn't how did it get through factory
alignment and QC? How did it get sold in the first place? If I
understand the complaint correctly half the broadcast band does not
work. That is a very big failure. This was a medium low priced receiver,
on the order of $90 when new. Not a cheap set and not a toy. In general
Hallicrafters did not make junk (with some exceptions) and usually
offered good value if not world class performance.
The comments about recieivers with antanna trimmers is just not
correct. Generally the trimmer or compensator is there to allow the use
of a variety of antennas while the lack of a trimmer means the input
wants something close to the impedance presented by the dummy antenna
prescribed. Generally, these receivers were meant to work from poor
antennas especiallay at the MF broadcast band, a couple of feet of wire
should be enough for local stations. It is certainly not going to be so
critical that the set won't work over half the band.
We are being led to believe that Hallicrafters design engineers
didn't know what they were doing and that their production engineers
didn't either. That no one on the line ever came to their supervisor
saying the set would not work over part of its range.
It IS possible for the schematic to be wrong. This is not what the
sets were build from, but what is in the set should work.
What is going on here?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/9/2025 9:55 AM, Emanuele Girlando via groups.io wrote: Guys,
one of the reasons I wants to give up with this one is the poor design
in the ANT RF circuitry.
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
SKCC 19998
|
?
Thanks Larry! I really appreciate it. Our domestic and International
clients seem to grow every day. Vintage HI-Fi restoration also seems to be
hot.
?
Pete, wa2cwa
?
?
On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 23:57:51 +0000 (UTC) "Larry Knapp via groups.io" < kc8jx@...>
writes:
Pete - I have ordered several
manual reprints via your company.? I find the product to be just as good
(if not better) than an original.? The Heathkit manuals are sort of a
benchmark for me and your reprints definitely are high quality.?? I
hope you continue to provide this service for us hams and all the other
clients you may have.? 73, Larry KC8JX
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Emanuele, no need to reply to this, it is more for others that have an S-85. I don’t blame you for being fed-up with this radio, and giving up; we all have had that feeling, ?but for the benefit of others we wonder if ?yours is wired as per the schematic, or is it actually wired like I suggested it should be. You seem to be very good at tackling all this stuff, so if the wiring is apparently wrong at R65, you no doubt changed it and tried it again, I would think but I saw no comment on that point. ? I don’t have an S-85, but, for any others with an S-85: does it have the same alignment problem?, and poor sensitivity below 1Mc? ….and is it wired as per the schematic? as I highlighted before? ?I don’t believe they BUILD them using a schematic, instead they use a more practical physical wiring drawing; so it is hard to believe that they went out the door wired, and working incorrectly, but I have seen worse cases when I was in industrial electronics manufacturing, so impossible things do happen, then I had to find and fix the impossible out in the field. The big boss says “ship it anyhow”, and QA ?succumbs. Emanuele mentioned the S-99 is an exact copy in some detailed respects, so I looked and found that the S-99 eliminates all capacitors for the 1st RF tanks and the slugs for bands 3,4.? ?It is interesting that? they still list C3 with L3, but C3 itself has vanished.. ???typical copy and paste draughting [drafting if you’re in USA] ?? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Emanuele Girlando via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2025 12:56 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!? one of the reasons I wants to give up with this one is the poor design in the ANT RF circuitry. I noticed the schematic diagram anomalies, both the 1&2 bands wiring error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout, at the same time as Don did. I was shocked and disappointed by that. Days ago, while approaching the refurbishing project of my S-85, I did read that the SX-99 is a S-85 plus IF-XTAL and S-Meter. So I download the SX-99 schematic diagram to compare with but I discovered: 1.???? the 1&2 bands wiring error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout are? exactly the same in SX-99 as in S-85; that was shocking and disappointing for the second time (!!). 2.???? the ANT RF circuitry design has been completely reviewed in SX-99 eliminating TRIMCAPs and introducing a more useful antenna trimmer you can adjust while switching between? bands and/or connecting different antenna types input socket. My conclusion was that the S-85 ANT circuit doesn't worth any additional effort to be understood or further analyzed: The Hallicrafters it self changed its design in successive projects.. Furthermore, IMHO, there is no point in having a ANT tuned circuit inside the radio when, in everyday use, you would have to retune it every time you change bands or the type of antenna connected to the radio. Consequently? I got the conclusion that leaving it as "wide" as possible sounds like a good choice. In the hope of modifying my S-85 by reproducing the solution found in the SX-99, I also checked if the coils part numbers were the same but, unfortunately, they are not. The only remaining test I want to do on this one is to align ANT and MIX RF stages with the chassis inside the cabinet. In other words I want to check if the service manual statement: should be read as: "RF alignment MUST be made with chassis in the cabinet. ...". Thank you all once again. -- don??? va3drl
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Guys,
one of the reasons I wants to give up with this one is the poor design in the ANT RF circuitry.
I noticed the schematic diagram anomalies, both the 1&2 bands wiring error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout, at the same time as Don did. I was shocked and disappointed by that.
Days ago, while approaching the refurbishing project of my S-85, I did read that the SX-99 is a S-85 plus IF-XTAL and S-Meter. So I download the SX-99 schematic diagram to compare with but I discovered:
- the 1&2 bands wiring error and the fancy S1A-REAR layout are? exactly the same in SX-99 as in S-85; that was shocking and disappointing for the second time (!!).
- the ANT RF circuitry design has been completely reviewed in SX-99 eliminating TRIMCAPs and introducing a more useful antenna trimmer you can adjust while switching between? bands and/or connecting different antenna types input socket.
My conclusion was that the S-85 ANT circuit doesn't worth any additional effort to be understood or further analyzed: The Hallicrafters it self changed its design in successive projects..
Furthermore, IMHO, there is no point in having a ANT tuned circuit inside the radio when, in everyday use, you would have to retune it every time you change bands or the type of antenna connected to the radio. Consequently? I got the conclusion that leaving it as "wide" as possible sounds like a good choice.
?
In the hope of modifying my S-85 by reproducing the solution found in the SX-99, I also checked if the coils part numbers were the same but, unfortunately, they are not.
?
The only remaining test I want to do on this one is to align ANT and MIX RF stages with the chassis inside the cabinet.
In other words I want to check if the service manual statement:
?
?
should be read as: "RF alignment MUST be made with chassis in the cabinet. ...".
?
Thank you all once again.
--
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Maynard, the arrows inside the wafers do the trick for me, together with the “shown in band 4 position” general note. One of my first obstacles was understanding the first wafer; it was mucking me up.
End image
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Maynard Wright via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2025 3:35 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!? Another interesting thing about the diagram: The S-40B diagram has
"(FRONT)" and "(REAR)" but not "(FRONT) VIEWED FROM REAR" as for the
S-85. The S-40B diagram does show both clockwise and counterclockwise
rotations as does the S-85.
For the rotation to be correct when both counterclockwise and clockwise
directions are specified, the two sides of the wafer must be viewed from
different directions, the "FRONT" presumably from the front and the
"REAR" presumably from the rear.
Just be careful to keep track of which contacts are in use for a
particular position of the switch.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP -- don??? va3drl
|
Pete - I have ordered several manual reprints via your company.? I find the product to be just as good (if not better) than an original.? The Heathkit manuals are sort of a benchmark for me and your reprints definitely are high quality.?? I hope you continue to provide this service for us hams and all the other clients you may have.? 73, Larry KC8JX
On Thursday, February 6, 2025 at 08:31:21 PM EST, Peter A Markavage via groups.io <pmarkavage@...> wrote:
Thanks Pete. I appreciate the complement.
?
I find it very gratifying that my work helps someone bring a piece of
equipment back to life. It also provides me with the joyful option of bringing a
possibly bug invested, stored in a garage or basement for 50 of 60 years into a
worthwhile and useful document that others can read, use and enjoy.
?
Of course, one can find poorly scanned, incomplete, and highly marked up
pages all over the Internet, but even when printed, crap is crap, and stuff is
always lost in the transition.
?
I just finished a military manual for a customer. Roughly 200 pages but
easy to do even though every page, because of age, was brown. My machine can
remove background paper color. But the hicker and hard part, were the five
schematics. They were 14 inches high and 52 inches wide. And I decided these
were to be done full size. A customer never has to assemble and tape any of my
manual pages.
?
This entire project started back in the mid 90's as a bonding project
between father and son. Son was in his second high school year but didn't seem
to have any idea about his future life endeavors. Since I was dragging
boatanchors home to repair and get up and running,?from every hamfest I
went to, my collection of manuals for this stuff started to become a pain to
manage.? My son created database to manage all the manuals that I also kept
collecting. He also suggested creating a catalog booklet, advertising in
Electric Radio and a few other publications, and send out the catalog to all
interested parties.? I firmly believe this gave him a sense of business
activities and helped firm up (or at least give direction) to his future. He
also created my first web site and credit him for giving it its name.
?
After? high school he worked for a year before applying and being
accepted at Boston Bible College at Hyde Park, MA. He felt he should earn the
money to pay for college rather then taking it for granted. For 3 summers while
in his college years, he worked at Lucent Technologies as a contractor and used
the money earned for tuition.
?
My apologies to the group for rambling, but I'm very proud of my son. I
gave him a license manual when he was around seven. When he turned around 27, he
finally found the time to become KB1JTP.
?
Pete, wa2cwa
?
?
?
Pete,
As a loyal customer of yours, who has purchased numerous manuals from
you,over the decades, I find your quality, pricing and delivery
outstanding!
Keep up the good work and thanks for all the free advice you have
provided,and continue to provide, to the amateur community regarding vintage
gear!
73's
Pete
W8AA
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Hi Maynard? , this was my posting not the OP Emanuele’s but I will convey my understanding. First off: this is one manual version or copy. Perhaps there are others that look correct.. And/or there could have been an addendum issued ?with each radio manual. Hoonoes??? Secondly, Emanuele’s ?actual radio might be wired OK. Emanuele did indicate that bands 3 ?and 4 were very good, but 1 and 2 suffered ?badly in the low half. Your reasoning about this is as good as any IMO .??? ? I was asking before if L3 is physically one coil form with 2 separate windings, which it seems to be; and like you say would likely have stray coupling magnetically. The second wafer shorts out? the “other not in use” coils, ?but ?the closeness of band 1 and 2 ??may well allow some coupling. In all probability this is just a drawing error, but somebody might have fixed It to match a drawing??? ???
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Maynard Wright via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2025 3:14 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!? I agree that the lefthand diagram seems wrong. Note the arrows that
show rotation in opposite directions to synchronize the contacts on the
wafer as you view each side of the wafer.
It seems to me that the lefthand diagram would leave the RF path open on
bands 1 and 2. I think that you wrote that you listened to all of the
bands successfully. If I am correct in that, maybe there is a stray
coupling path around the input tuned circuits that couples enough RF to
make the receiver usable, maybe with the AVC raising the overall gain
quite a bit or with the AVC disabled.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
-- don??? va3drl
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Another interesting thing about the diagram: The S-40B diagram has
"(FRONT)" and "(REAR)" but not "(FRONT) VIEWED FROM REAR" as for the
S-85. The S-40B diagram does show both clockwise and counterclockwise
rotations as does the S-85.
For the rotation to be correct when both counterclockwise and clockwise
directions are specified, the two sides of the wafer must be viewed from
different directions, the "FRONT" presumably from the front and the
"REAR" presumably from the rear.
Just be careful to keep track of which contacts are in use for a
particular position of the switch.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/7/25 19:27, don Root wrote: **
Emanuele and all
This is from BAMA for mark 1A and 1B? and makes no sense to me, ???so I
rewired it at the right.
What say you all?? Do you go with Halligans version?
Don ?end
--
don??? va3drl
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
I agree that the lefthand diagram seems wrong. Note the arrows that
show rotation in opposite directions to synchronize the contacts on the
wafer as you view each side of the wafer.
It seems to me that the lefthand diagram would leave the RF path open on
bands 1 and 2. I think that you wrote that you listened to all of the
bands successfully. If I am correct in that, maybe there is a stray
coupling path around the input tuned circuits that couples enough RF to
make the receiver usable, maybe with the AVC raising the overall gain
quite a bit or with the AVC disabled.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/7/25 19:27, don Root wrote: **
Emanuele and all
This is from BAMA for mark 1A and 1B? and makes no sense to me, ???so I
rewired it at the right.
What say you all?? Do you go with Halligans version?
Don ?end
--
don??? va3drl
|
Thank you, Bill! This site has been very helpful to me.
73,
Maynard
W6PAP
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/8/25 06:54, Donald J via groups.io wrote: Great site - thank you Bill!
On Fri, Feb 7, 2025 at 5:52?PM waltcates via groups.io
<> <cateswa@...
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
*Thank you, Bill!*
*
*
*
*
*Walt Cates, **WD0GOF*
*_ <> _*
*A majority of acceptance is not proof of correctness. *
*
<>**
*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Bill (Group
Owner) via groups.io <>
<k2wh@... <mailto:[email protected]>>
*Sent:* Friday, February 7, 2025 1:29 PM
*To:* [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*Subject:* [HallicraftersRadios] Website Anniversary
Well believe it or not, its been 20 years, this site has been active
and strong for Hallicrafters Radios.
Started in 2005 as a lark, I am amazed we now have 1,075 members.
With thanks to all our Hallicrafters Experts on this site and they
are experts for sure.e
Regards, and have fun.
*K2WH
Bill's QRZ Biography <>
*
|
Thanks Bill, you have done a great job over seeing the site.
Skip Magnuson W7WGM
|
Great site - thank you Bill!
Thank you, Bill!
Walt Cates, WD0GOF
?
A majority of acceptance is not proof of correctness.
Well believe it or not, its been 20 years, this site has been active and strong for Hallicrafters Radios.
?
Started in 2005 as a lark, I am amazed we now have 1,075 members.
?
With thanks to all our Hallicrafters Experts on this site and they are experts for sure.e
?
Regards, and have fun.
K2WH
|
Took me a while to get here but I am happy to be a member of this group.? Thanks you!
Bob
WB9RHW?
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
? Emanuele and all This is from BAMA for mark 1A and 1B? and makes no sense to me, ???so I rewired it at the right. What say you all?? Do you go with Halligans version?
Don ?end -- don??? va3drl
|
And thank YOU, Walt
Tom Latimer
On 2/7/2025 17:52, waltcates via
groups.io wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Thank you, Bill!
Walt Cates, WD0GOF
?
A majority of acceptance is not proof of correctness.
Well believe it or not, its been 20 years, this site has
been active and strong for Hallicrafters Radios.
?
Started in 2005 as a lark, I am amazed we now have 1,075
members.
?
With thanks to all our Hallicrafters Experts on this site
and they are experts for sure.e
?
Regards, and have fun.
K2WH
|
don Root
Peter A Markavage
Emanuele Girlando
Donald J
Bob Tragesser