Tube tester, which one's the best?

[morzh]

There was just now a 539 on ebay that had a history of being a piece of NASA.
It was over 2,100 last time I looked today and it had sold. I am sure it ended up in mid-2K - 3K
Total nuts, if you ask me.

[morzh]

Well, I did it. I bought Hickok 600A, according to the seller fully recapped etc and calibrated.
I figure, it will do ll I need.
Waiting....

[Alan Douglas]

Timing is everything. My 539C came from NASA too; it still has cal stickers from Langley on it. I paid $25 at an AWA Canandaigua meet and it sat in the flea market all morning before I bought it.

[Bob Andersen]

Good luck with the Hickok 600A. I picked one up a couple months ago and have been very happy with it.

[morzh]

Question to you then

It just came. The roll chart has no tubes like 6J5 for instance: how do I set up for those missing types?

And on more general note, how do I check for the basic functionality, short of "Line test" which works?

[codefox1]

Somebody has probably compiled a list of settings for older tubes for the 600. I have a 533 and scrounged around the net enough to get a really good set of test settings, put 'em in a database/spreadsheet, and printed it out. Don't know if they are same for the 600 series, but if you or anyone else needs, just ask. As a side not the 6J5 was probably considered obsolete and not worthy of a line by the time your tester was made.

If you need instruction manual for the tester, I'm sure you can get one in a few minutes on the net.

You shouldn't have to spend a penny for any of this information.

Some interesting background here: http://6007.us/

[morzh]

Codefox

Thanks, I have the manual and the tube commercial-to-military booklet, came with the tester.
I never tested tubes before, so if anyone has a link to older tubes settings data for H600A, I will appreciate it.

BTW, speaking of "considered obsolete. Why consider obsolete octal tubes for gthe tester that still has 4-pin socket in it? (this is the reason I did not buy 6000A, it has no 4-pin socket in it.)

[John R]

Here is a comprehensive listing of data for the Hickok 600A:
http://www.saegerradio.com/downloads/Con...esters.pdf

Taken from his website...the tube number arrangement may be a little strange but the shear # of tubes is more than I have seen in one location before. I have a 600A also & it works great.
Went through it when I got it and replaced a few out of tolerance resistors etc. Be sure the lamps are the correct # as they act as the fuses. John

[morzh]

John

Thanks, this is it!

1. Q: So the lamps should stay OFF normally, right?
2. When a tube has a grid cap, I should connect it to the "G" socket?
3. Can I manipulate the knobs (Grid/screen/cathode/filament) while the tube has been inserted, provided I set correct filament voltage? Or should I first set the knobs and then and only then insert the tube?

4. Not sure when to use English scale (I take it it is Good/Bad scale) vs. the uMho conductivity scale.

[John R]

1. Not necessarily...they may glow depending upon the amount of current being drawn by a particular tube...not a problem unless they blow.
2. Yes
3. Yes, on multisection tubes you'll change the settings with the tube inserted normally. However, I always do a complete initial setup of the tester before inserting the tube in the socket...that's just me but good practice. Always perform the shorts test first.
I leave the switch in the shorts postitions before inserting a new tube for testing.
4. Yes
John

[Bob Andersen]

My 600A came with a setup chart for all the obsolete tube types tucked into the lid. Here's a copy from BAMA: http://bama.edebris.com/download/hickok/...0chart.pdf

I generally use the English scale. The only reason I would bother with the uMhos is if I was selling an audio type tube.

[morzh]

Thanks

good file from BAMA.

Couple more questions:

1. So, the English is only used when the setup says "Star" i/o Mhmo value?
2. When testing rectifier tubes, do they fall in the "diodes good" scale or they should fall in the Green on English scale? (they are diodes but I have a feeling they only mean detector tubes and not power rectifiers in "Diodes good").
3. My tubes are mostly good but many will test way higher than the value in the table. Is the value in the table a) typical, b) minimum, c) other ?
4. Should I buy at least one calibration tube with a known mutual conductance and check if it will read the correct value?
5. The seven-pin socket for the miniatures is very loose, won't hug the pins. Any replacements? What the heck is a socket-saver? Is this what I need?

[codefox1]

OK, my turn
1. You can read English instead of actual to emulate a drug store tube tester. Nothing wrong with that, just a conversion red to green.
2. Diodes good should read as diodes good on meter.
3. Values are for bogy tubes, many will read a bit higher, or a bit lower and still perform perfectly well. Those that read a lot better are not nececissarily superior. And mismatched pairs sharing same envelope are not always suspect.
4. No, you should get a handle on known good tubes. If you are talking about a bogy 6L6, well, unless you have university budget I would skip it.
5. The right way to do it is to replace the socket, but you will see it is a little busy underneath. A socket saver is a half *ss way to do it. First try to blast the original out with a litle deoxit, and retention the socket a bit with a dental explorer or whatever you can get into the little contact blades.

Chances are most of the sockets on the tester can benefit from same inspection and treatment.

[morzh]

Codefox

1. So, when you said "4. No, you should..." considering the question, did you mean "yes you should" or "no you should not"?
2. Bogey - does this mean "iffy / bad?". Remember, English, although I know it fairly well, is not my first language So in "3" by "values are for bogy tubes" did you mean "it is a minimally acceptable value it should test to, anything lower is bad?"


Here's why I am a bit suspicious: in my Zenith I have recapped everything, and re-resistorized also. It has some AM reception with not the greatest antenna but it is a sizeable piece oif wire, plus a local station comes really loud, and I mean - really loud. Superloud. I have to bring the volume down quite a bit.
However my eye indicator does not close the sector all the way. I put a NOS 6E5 in, and it is a more sensitive tube than 6U5/6T5, so if anything, it should close better. Especially on the local station. But it does not.

Now, when I move my finger to the 2nd detector's grid cap I have very significant increase in volume and the sector also will close. I fully expected either the first RF or the 2nd detector tube to be a bit under the line, but they are OK and quite good at that.
Even the tube that was marked bad measures very good.

So I think I may want to measure a calibration tube first, but for that I have to get one first.

So, which one would be a good calibration tube?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/CALIBRATION-TUBE...2c67765c75

Is this good for the price, what do you think?

[jerryhawthorne]

OK, I'm new to the hobby but a friend got me a Precision 9-12. Certainly not what anyone would want for the ultimate testing of a tube. But, if a tube reads dead, it probably is. If a tube tests weak, it will probably work. Nothing like tube subbing a good tube. I have a pile of tubes that tested weak and replacements that tested great made no difference. Other than defining a "dead" tube, which is nice, I don't care what you buy for a tube tester. Some are better and most better than mine, all test shorts (important) some test other things better. Let's face it, the readings given are not really indicative how it will work in the radio. Weak may well work very well and most of the times do. I have found the oscillators at least as tested on my tester, are a crap shot. Due no doubt to my cheap tester. Subbing in a known good tube is the best.
Just my dumb opinion. And everyone has one.
As a side note, I have bought a number of tubes from associates that give me their readings on their very nice tube testers. I can't relate to the numbers they supply but my little 9-12 gives me a very nice reading. That is to say, if they say tested strong with numbers I know nothing about, the 9-12 reads the tube to be well into the good range. This little cheapy will measure any tube you could possibly come up with. It came with adaptors for compactrons and other wierd tubes.
Jerry