John:

I can't believe I didn't think of this before!

This is why we need young guys with sharp minds like you around!

I can't imagine that this wouldn't work, and it will save a lot of hassle 
all the way around.

Hopefully, one of these evenings this week, I'll get the chance to try it, 
and will let you and everyone know how I do.

73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 6:57 AM
Subject: Re: reverse keying


> Maybe there's a reason but if you can reverse the paddle in the 590 but 
> not
> the 570, why not switch the wires around, then set the 590 to the opposite
> setting. that seems easiest to me, no adapter to worry about, you can use
> the key you want the way you want with either radio.
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Tom Behler" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 6:38 AM
> Subject: Re: reverse keying
>
>
>>    Howard:
>>
>> I tried using the paddle up-side-down, but found it to be rather 
>> unweildy.
>>
>> So, for the time being, I took an old MFJ paddle that I had and reversed
>> the
>> leads.  In the long run, I'm going to make an adapter as others have
>> suggested, so that I can use my Bencher either normally on the 590, or in
>> reverse on the 570.
>>
>> I just have to find the time to do it.
>>
>> Thanks to all for the great suggestions on this interesting little
>> problem.
>>
>> 73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Howard Kaufman" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 1:14 AM
>> Subject: Re: reverse keying
>>
>>
>>> Is that different than the standard bencher?  With the standard bencher,
>>> the
>>> paddle rests on the center post for the spring, and the two keying
>>> contact
>>> posts.  It balances and works in a pinch.  Field day for example.  For
>>> long
>>> term, reverse the wires, and change the paddle settings in your other
>>> radios.
>>> I actually found the idea on this list, didn't believe it but it was
>>> rather
>>> easy to try, and it works.
>>>
>