BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Steve Forst <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:10:31 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (68 lines)
Steve,

Well I did take a deep breath before ordering.   While I have never had 
a lot of MFJ stuff, the stuff I've had over the years has all worked 
fine.   I know others haven't been so lucky, but I've had this one over 
2 years with  no problems.

I can't compare to the LDG since I've never owned one.   At the time of 
purchase I did compare the specs for both.   The LDG had 6 meter 
coverage, but I work very little 6M and no amp, so no big deal.   The 
MFJ offered higher power (1.5K vs. 1K)  as well as the ability to 
automatically lower rf drive and change to cw for tuning, while the LDG 
required you to do all that manually.   The MFJ also had the amp relay 
connections.   Of course LDG may have  something out today with more 
features.

Truth is, I've switched the MFJ and the Palstar manual tuner in  and out 
of the system a number of times over the past 2 years.   Each has it's 
benefits.   I would have loved a Palstar auto tuner, but too rich for 
me.    The Palstar auto had a motor driven roller inductor and either 1 
or 2 moter driven caps.    It just went out of production, but a new one 
is coming soon, although I've not seen any specs on it.

73, Steve KW3A

On 9/17/2010 10:25 AM, Steve Dresser wrote:
> Steve,
>
> How do you think your MFJ auto-tuner stacks up against LDG's AT-1000?  I'm
> sure the MFJ is cheaper, but based on things I've heard about other MFJ
> tuners, I wonder how reliable the internal components are.
>
> Steve
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Forst"<[log in to unmask]>
> To:<[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 10:05
> Subject: Re: auto antenna tuner
>
>
>> Butch,
>>
>> I have a MFJ-998 in the shack.  I'd give it a 4 out of 5 rating.   It
>> will handle 1500 watts, which is more then  my AL-80B or THP solid state
>> amp will put out.  The problem I think you will find with  auto tuners
>> including the ones built into the radio is limited matching range due to
>> the fixed values of L and C. You won't be able to load your
>> grandmother's walker on 40 meters.
>> It has a ton of memories and up and down L and C buttons so you can find
>> a match manually if the auto function can't.   An optional 20$ cable
>> will interface to many rigs, and when connected this way hitting the
>> auto tune button on the rig bypasses the internal tuner, puts the rig
>> into cw mode at low power for the tune  process, then returns to
>> original mode and   power when tuning is complete.  If the amp relay
>> jacks on the tuner are connected between the amp and radio,  the amp
>> will be bypassed during tune up.   This relay is also supposed to
>> prevent the amp from keying in the event of a high swr, but I can't say
>> that I've really  tested this function fully.
>>
>> There are some menus for which sighted help would be needed, but they
>> are the set it and forget it type of stuff.   Things like swr point at
>> which it should  start looking for a better match, and swr point for the
>> amp relay to bypass the amp.
>>
>> 73, Steve KW3A
>>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2