Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: cw transcievers  (Read 2283 times)
WB7DDI
Member

Posts: 4




Ignore
« on: March 21, 2017, 05:37:16 PM »

Does any know what company makes cw only transcievers with 100 watts and up
Logged
KA4LFP
Member

Posts: 253




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2017, 06:32:45 PM »

I'd say an excellent choice would be anything Ten-Tec made --

The older Triton/Omni/Pegasus/Orion rigs are among the best CW rigs that were ever made, and you can get one for less than $200, if you look around.

There is absolutely _nothing_ wrong with a used rig, when it comes to CW, because you simply don't need most of those fancy DSP filters and all that -- the notch/narrow filters in my Omni actually far outperform my FT-857D DSP....

The same can't be said for SSB -- but we are talking CW here.

And, you absolutely don't need 100+ watts for CW --- Look in the QRP forums -- you will see people regularly making CW contacts for thousands of miles, on less than 10 watts.

I routinely hear stations running 5 watts from several continents...
Logged
KA4LFP
Member

Posts: 253




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: March 21, 2017, 06:37:09 PM »

Does any know what company makes cw only transcievers with 100 watts and up

And if you really want CW only --

I have my original Novice rig - a Heathkit HW-16  -- it's one month younger than I am -- 53 years old.
And, a Ten-Tec Century 21 was the classic solid state CW rig for Novices

But the SSB/CW line Ten-Tec put out are just as good at being CW rigs.
Logged
KE6EE
Member

Posts: 1764




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2017, 07:00:38 PM »

Elecraft K2/100
Logged
AK4YH
Member

Posts: 28


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #4 on: March 22, 2017, 03:06:55 AM »

Indeed there is no real need for 100W CW. It would be nice however if someone made a 25W CW transceiver with a switchable power output of 5 or 25W. Adding a small amp does that but adds a board and complexity.

Gil.
Logged
KC8Y
Member

Posts: 459




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2017, 04:57:54 AM »

The HW-16 was my first intro into this hobby (I'm 65); loved it, sure wish I still had it!
 
There is NO need for a high powered CW rig.  Even now, I never go above the 15 watt level on CW.

Looking for the HW-16 or even the Ten-Tec Century (both, great CW rigs).

Ken KC8Y
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 4395




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: March 28, 2017, 02:46:38 PM »

If you want something currently made - build or buy a K2/100.

Some say you don't need 100 watts - well, that all depends on what you want to do and what antenna(s) you have.

The old Century 21 and the Heathkit HW-16 are great rigs - BUT....

Neither runs 100 watts.

The C21 has a good receiver but it is a form of direct conversion - you hear signals on either side of zero beat, doubling the QRM.

The HW-16 covers only 3 bands (80/40/15 in original form, although many convert them to 80/40/20) and needs an external VFO.

The HW-16 isn't really a transceiver in the modern sense - it's actually a transmitter and receiver in the same box, using a common power supply and a neat control system.

Decades ago, I wanted a CW transceiver that would put out 100 watts on 80/40/20 and didn't cost the earth. I would up designing and building it.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Logged
N3QE
Member

Posts: 4759




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: March 29, 2017, 04:34:29 AM »

The HW-16 isn't really a transceiver in the modern sense - it's actually a transmitter and receiver in the same box, using a common power supply and a neat control system.

That's what makes it so fun to use on the air! Couple that with a low group delay CW-only crystal receive filter, and lack of AGC in the receiver, and it is such a joy.
Logged
N4OI
Member

Posts: 337




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: March 29, 2017, 04:45:54 AM »

Indeed there is no real need for 100W CW. [...]

True.  But it sure keeps getting harder and harder with condx as they are these days....

73   Grin
Logged
KE4OH
Member

Posts: 121




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: March 29, 2017, 06:07:18 AM »

Indeed there is no real need for 100W CW. [...]

True.  But it sure keeps getting harder and harder with condx as they are these days....

73   Grin

No gripe with the QRP crowd. But I do like to put out a strapping CW signal. My yardstick is whether or not I can work most of the stations that I can hear. Having said that, I think that 100w or so with a decent antenna is probably the maximum power ever necessary on the lower bands. Less power needed on 20m and above when those bands are open.

HW-16 with and HG-10 VFO is a pretty dang good setup, especially for 80m/40m...
Logged

73 de Steve KE4OH
W3TTT
Member

Posts: 236




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: March 29, 2017, 12:27:01 PM »

Does any know what company makes cw only transcievers with 100 watts and up

Just about all transceivers will do this.  Just disconnect the mic and throw it away.  Instant CW only rig!  Grin

W3TTT
 Grin
(Yes I am trying to be funny)
Logged
K3STX
Member

Posts: 1571




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: March 29, 2017, 06:35:26 PM »

Does any know what company makes cw only transcievers with 100 watts and up

Just about all transceivers will do this.  Just disconnect the mic and throw it away.  Instant CW only rig!  Grin

W3TTT
 Grin
(Yes I am trying to be funny)

That's what I did with my TS-590S, but I actually SOLD the mic and got some $$$ for a new key! Smiley

paul
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!