eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

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


Reviews Categories | Filters, RF: bandpass, duplexer, lowpass, highpass, RFI/EMI, e | Morgan Mfg (formerly ICE) Bandpass and BCB filters Help


Reviews Summary for Morgan Mfg (formerly ICE) Bandpass and BCB filters
Morgan Mfg (formerly ICE) Bandpass and BCB filters Reviews: 16 Average rating: 4.6/5 MSRP: $35 to 228
Description: RF Filters either mono-band (4xx series) or Multi-Band (419A) as well as BroadCast band, LowPass, etc
Product is in production.
More info: http://www.morganmfg.us
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this review.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

You can write your own review of the Morgan Mfg (formerly ICE) Bandpass and BCB filters.

Page 1 of 2 —>

W5UM Rating: 5/5 Nov 10, 2014 13:39 Send this review to a friend
M-402X FILTER  Time owned: 6 to 12 months
I live in the New Orleans area and there are numerous AM broadcast stations here.

The broadcast band interference (front end overload) on 160 meters was so bad that it was almost impossible to operate on 160 meters.

I had read about the ICE BCB filter and was able to find a new-old stock unit. However it had problems. I contacted Bob Koss at Morgan Manufacturing , who I understand took over ICE from his brother. Bob sent me a new M-402X filter to replace the old one. My broadcast band interference problem went away.

I was amazed. Without this filter it wasn't worth operating 160 meters. It attenuates signals below 1.800 kc. You can transmit 300 watts through it. I leave it in line and believe that it also helps reduce spurious signals on the other bands.

I highly recommend the Morgan Manufacturing M-402X Broadcast band filter.The filter is great. The service is outstanding.

 
K4VUD Rating: 4/5 Jun 2, 2012 03:08 Send this review to a friend
watch out for old instructions  Time owned: more than 12 months
Got 2 Model 419 and installed in 1998. The instructions that came with the units showed the rear DIN socket with a pin-out that was UPSIDE DOWN AND BACKWARDS. Took a NASA engineer to find that problem. Note, when both matters are involved, both upside down AND backwards, the idea that I just read the socket reversed is just not true. Otherwise, great product which interfaces with TopTen and other decoders.
Too bad the 419 lacks WARC band positions.
 
K0EJ Rating: 4/5 Apr 7, 2010 05:42 Send this review to a friend
419  Time owned: more than 12 months
I own several and all work fine except the 419's occasionally flake out on 10M - ICE customer service has been great at fixing/turning them around. They don't always answer the phone but they ALWAYS answer my e-mails.
 
VA2UP Rating: 4/5 Feb 25, 2010 20:37 Send this review to a friend
419b very good  Time owned: more than 12 months
I've been using 2x 419b multiband filters at the station for quite sometime now. In SO2R configuration and working mostly in contests (rtty) they put in a strong attenuation. The antennas are very close together and despite that, even when using a full Kw I can rely on the 419b to protect the radios front end. Had an issue with caps letting go on 10 and 15M and the folks at I.C.E. were kind enough to promptly send me replacement caps...fast and FREE on time for the next contest! Appreciate the service guys!
To my knowledge they are the most affordable 6 band bandpass filters available today and built with good quality materials. I give it a 4 and not a 5, simply because I know there are some more efficient multiband filters out there but at a higher price.
73, Fabi va2up
 
WB9BDZ Rating: 5/5 Jan 25, 2010 19:34 Send this review to a friend
I.C.E. Model 401/U Excellent!  Time owned: 0 to 3 months
I just purchased the I.C.E. model 401/U filter (receive only). I received it in 10 days of my order and was packed very well.

I have it installed and it's doing an excellent job at filtering the fundamental overload from a local broadcast station. I AM amazed at how effect this filter is! I've had problems with several of my receivers from this local commercial station overload. Looking at the rating of the filter and the effectiveness, it's operating at well beyond it's rating in my situation, so I've rated it at 5. I would highly recommend this filter for local BCB interference.
 
KG6AOH Rating: 4/5 Dec 5, 2008 12:32 Send this review to a friend
Good filtering characteristics  Time owned: 6 to 12 months
I purchased a few of the 400 model series 10m bandpass filters for use on some 10m beacons.

First impressions with the build quality is good. All the ICE filters are built using slices of aluminum extrusions with flat aluminum sheet top and bottom covers sandwiched using nuts/screws.

Looking inside the filters, you see copper coils and small epoxy dipped capacitors.

These filters provide not only RF filtering, but also isolation for your equipment. There is no DC path from the center conductors of one coax cable connector to the other. Also, each coax connector has a direct DC path from center conductor to ground. This is helpful for those of you in lightning prone areas.

Using an IFR 1200 service monitor with tracking generator, I swept each filter for bandpass characteristics and found them to be quite capable of attenuating out of band signals by many dB. Insertion loss across the 10m band was negligible, less than 0.2 dB. As you get up into the VHF and UHF range, signals are not attenuated as much. By the time you get to the 800 MHz. area, there is little attenuation at all (if that concerns you).

On the 10 watt beacons, the filters are a dream come true! Since the beacons are located at heavily populated hilltop commercial radio sites, all the RF at the site can be a concern. Using the ICE bandpass filters in series with lowpass filters, the beacons are unaware of any other RF in the area, so there is no intermod produced, and they can actually be used to receive with no interference from anything else at the sites.

For the 100 watt beacon, I had some problems. Although the filters are rated for 200 watts power, the 100 watt beacon tends to heat up the filters. The CW beacon is only transmitting about 35% of the time, and off the air 65% of the time. However, the ICE bandpass filter gets uncomfortably warm. I even mounted the filter to a blank rack panel, using heatsink grease between the filter and the panel to try and reduce the heat buildup. But, the filter still gets warm. Not hot, but warm. Which is still quite disturbing!

If you run low power (less than 50 watts), the ICE filters will work great! If you run 100 watts or more, look elsewhere.

If the filter said it was good up to 50 watts, I would have given it a 5! Since it says it is good for 200 watts, but runs hot at only 100 watts (intermittent), it gets a 4.
 
WA1SEO Rating: 5/5 Jan 26, 2008 06:43 Send this review to a friend
Great product, great price  Time owned: 0 to 3 months
I was referred to I.C.E. by some people on one of the bulletin boards because of an interference problem at my QTH.

The price seemed too good to be true since the box, connectors, and any parts had to be worth that.

I ordered the 404 (80M BPF) on a Wednesday and it was at my home on Friday via priority mail...total cost was $42. Total reduction in generated noise, over 1 S-unit, which is what I needed.

For the sake of curiosity, I used my HP Network Analyzer and measured the performance. It was perfectly aligned.

I highly recommend the I.C.E. Bandpass filter to anybody who may need that "edge" with a less expensive receiver.

Mike, WA1SEO
 
K9YC Rating: 4/5 Jul 28, 2006 14:41 Send this review to a friend
Good, but Flaky QC  Time owned: more than 12 months
I own a half dozen ICE filters -- two BCB's, and individual bandpass filters for 80, 40, 6, and 2M. I own an HP generator and spectrum analyzer, so I put all on the bench to test them. The HF filters tested fine, but both the 6M and 2M filters were significantly out of alignment.

I had considerable difficulty contacting ICE to get instructions for sending them for repair -- they weren't very good at answering their phone (like for a week at a time). Eventually I did contact them, sent the filters for rework, and got them back in good shape. But there's no good excuse for stuff like this being bad "out of the box." Both were purchased new.

On the positive side (and the reason for my rating being 4 rather than 2), the filters do have decent curves when they're properly aligned, and when used within their ratings with my 100W radios, haven't shown signs of overheating. No, I haven't tried them at higher power.
 
N1XBP Rating: 5/5 Jul 28, 2006 13:39 Send this review to a friend
Model 400X exactly what I needed..  Time owned: 0 to 3 months
I'm very close by several BCB stations, with the closest being WRKO Boston (680 Kc). Not only was I receiving WRKO over absolutely every signal, I also had an amazingly high bacground noise level (S9+10). I was ready to pack it in and try some other hobby but I decided to try the filter in a last ditch effort.

Why didn't I start there in the first place?!? Noise levels on 20 and 40 meters dropped to a usable S5-S8. I think the BCB was overloading and desensing the radio (on top of all the other urban noise). Things roll off nicely below 3.5 Mhz as they should, with WRKO making it through on 680 but at a very diminished level and not affecting anything else.. I didn't think that would be possible.

As far as construction, it's "bomb proof" as my dad would say. That's somewhat better than just bullet proof. :)

This will be in my shack for a LONG time.

- Jason, N1XBP, Boston
 
K8DIT Rating: 5/5 Jun 4, 2004 10:24 Send this review to a friend
402x BCB filter  Time owned: more than 12 months
A nearby ham showed me on his communication monitor's scope how strong the local BC signals were. The spikes were much higher in db. than my Jupiter's front end's ability to suppress. The resultant energy made the rig go blotto on the top band with imaging repeating in multiples all through the lower bands. There's nothing wrong with the design of the front end of the Jupiter just that in the presence of near field energy, the excess energy blows past the front end distorting resulting mixing products as the rig is tuned. See those spikes? You need to lop the heads off those spikes with a high pass filter, he said. The 402x was just the ticket. Now the top band is image free and just as sweet as are the higher bands. I passed this info along to nearby hams using other rigs during our get togethers and have heard nothing but positive results. The thing is if you ignore this problem, the characteristic dynamic range and sensitivity is compromised througout the entire hf spectrum and you dont get nearly the reciever performance on any band the rig is capable of delivering. While this is an absolute necessity on general coverage rigs, I tried it on a ham-band-only rig, my Omni 6+, with interesting improvement on imaging on the lower bands resulting in better close in IMD on the ham bands.
 
Page 1 of 2 —>


If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions about Reviews, please email your Reviews Manager.