Just wondering what you guys think of this radio? Some think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. I finally found a good one for sale in New Mexico, on Craigslist - but the guy won't let me buy it! Said he wants cash. I'm in Seattle, so offered to send him some cash by Fedex, but now he's gone silent. Too bad. It was a beauty, including the speaker and original documentation. Just wondering if anybody had some suggestions, or advice. Thanks!

Nice receivers, both performance-wise and esthetically. I've had several of them (I still have two of them with R-46A speakers), and of the ones that I have owned, the MK II has always been the best version.

GL,

Terry

SX-100s are pretty common. If you really want one, here are a few ideas:

1. Go to your local hamfests and radio swapmeets;

2. Place a WTB ad on qth.com or amfone.net.

You shouldn't have too much trouble finding one at a reasonable price.

I've never had an SX-100 because I like the older Hallicrafters receivers (SX-42 and before), but I've seen SX-100s pop up at hamfests.

The SX-100 is a very nice receiver indeed. Like a general coverage version of the famous SX-101 in a lighter, more compact package. I had one a few years ago and it's a good band cruiser and no slouch at all as a ham receiver. When new it sold for around $300 1960 dollars. Nice gear drive tuning mechanism and double conversion. If you get a good one, you'll like it. If you need to work on it, be aware that there's a lot of parts packed into the chassis.

A very good-performing radio, that's my impression. Can't quite figure out if the SX-96 is basically the same but with fewer features. Manual says "gear driven" tuning, but pictures show a bunch of strings. There's a "working" one on ebaby but it's kind of expensive.

So... QWL classifieds show 2 people looking for SX-100s, with none for sale. There seems to be a raging bull market for antique shortwave radios, especially the high-end ones. I'd get in line, except I need to answer the question "What number represents the phrase Best Regards" to register. Hate to ask, but does anybody know? Hope I don't need an IQ test!

"Best regards?"

I have no idea.

73,
Norm


The SX 100 is a very nice receiver--one of the better receivers Hallicrafters made. It would be a fine radio for regular use. I got mine pretty cheap but it was in terrible shape. I cleaned it up and spent some extra time and work on the meter, fixing cracks, polishing, trying to get it as nice as I could--then at the very last, I mounted it into the face of the radio and didn't install the fasteners. I got distracted. Next thing I do is tilt the radio forward on the bench and the meter falls right out and hits the floor. Cracked it much worse. A month later I came across a meter on EBay as part of a group of stuff someone was selling. I got a VTVM, a set of antique headphones in their original box and a brand new meter in its box for $15. The meter was so pristine, I never put it in the old SX 100--it would have looked completely out of place.

The SX 96 is essentially the same radio except it lacks an extra tube in the second IF and a notch. It also does not have the calibrator.

Norm

A good receiver, just a GC version of the 101 in a cheaper chassis, so not quite as stable. Pretty styling, and they sold a ton of em. Not much of a fan of "wide, plus Band spread" two dial receivers.

As Mike noted it isn't quite as mechanically stable as the heavier constructed and single variable tuning capacitor SX-101 series and it also lacks the electrical stability features of the later SX-101 production ("damp chaser" always on resistor to heat the chassis, constant filament voltage to the converter tube via a separate filament transformer). But it is a decent general coverage receiver and brings the excellent selectivity into that design resulting in an excellent set for general coverage use.

The SX-100 was the second model in the electronically selectable sideband series and replaced the earlier SX-96 which had brought most of the selectivity performance of the SX-88 into a much more affordable package. The SX-100 added a calibrator, antenna "trimmer", and notch control to the SX-96 package. The SX-122 could be considered the later replacement for the SX-100 but it was in many ways a step down with only 3 choices of bandwidth, no electronic selection of sideband, and no notch control so although it looks nice and does have a product detector I consider it far inferior to its older relatives.

All of this family of receivers has a 1650 Khz. first IF. When they were developed the AM broadcast band stopped below this frequency and if you have a local station on that frequency you will need a tuned trap to prevent it from riding into the first IF via the antenna on the lower bands, it is a simple process to add one externally at the antenna connection.

One of the receiver books shows a photo of a never produced SX-100 replacement that would have been built with styling like the SX-101. It had large horizontal dial scales like the SX-101 with separate general coverage and ham band stacked vertically. Too bad it wasn't produced because it would have been a handsome receiver likely bringing the stability of the SX-101 to a general coverage package.

Prior to acquiring a SX-88 I used a SX-100 with my Ranger/Desk KW station for a couple of years because I found it did a much better job than the HRO-50T1 featured in Johnson advertising for the Desk KW. Much of the use was for a net control station where I wasn't tuning around much so the band set/band spread nature wasn't a major pain and its versatile selectivity made it possible to pull many weak stations out of the QRN and QRM of 75 meters. The calibrator takes some of the pain out of using band set/band spread types of two dial receivers and that is the one major item lacking from the SX-96 although that is an easy external accessory to add/use.

Rodger WQ9E

Thanks for some great info! And pictures! Back when I was 12, we used to get these old radios in wooden cabinets for either 99 cents, or $1.99 for the good ones. I got to be pretty good at fixing them. Was less successful at "improving" the circuitry, but it was a lot of fun! Once I sent a letter to Radio Peking, and they sent a copy of the famous Little Red Book. I'm probably on an FBI list somewhere. Tried but failed to get my license - couldn't muster the Morse Code requirement. Never went much further with that side of it, distracted by electric guitars, transistors, girls, etc.

Lacking a better idea, I worked in TV repair in high school. Mainly we replaced 6GH8s (worst tube ever), and resoldered the PCB tube sockets which would develop circular cracks around the pins. After that I spent about the next 50 years doing PCBs with transistors and ICs, eventually working for Linear Technology Corporation designing circuits for customers. It was a good deal, I would just send them a design, and the engineers had to do all the work! I actually got paid to have people take me out to lunch, where I would wax extemporaneously about obscure analog circuit topics. Of course, it was too good to last. One day I was sitting there watching the stock trade (a slow moment) and suddenly it jumped by about 50%. About an hour later the news came out: We were being acquired by our arch-rivals, Analog Devices Inc. Things stayed the same for about 6 months, then started going downhill in a big way. People started quitting in droves, like rats deserting a sinking ship. I would have joined them but could only find worse jobs for less money - so now I'm just going to retire. Just trying not to get fired for another 18 months or so.

That's where this is heading. I've come full circle. Feel like I'm returning to my roots, as if some strange force is pulling me home again. Started with a Heathkit GR-54, a tube tester (Heathkit TT1A), a 400MHz Tektronix scope (overkill) and a Fluke 8842A from the dumpster at Siemens Ultrasound. Too bad those old junk radios are $400 now. I should have stocked up. Times have changed, but tubes still work the same.

Best regards! 73,
Phil

Managed to post the same message twice, so now I'm editing the 2nd one for brevity. No way to delete it I guess. This stuff's going down in history!

Might want to revisit the amateur radio license idea..... the CW code requirement was dropped some time ago.

Getting your ham license has never been easier. I used the following website http://www.hamtestonline.com/study.jsp? ... 8l1nwvya94.

Norm