06-27-2014, 10:15 PM
I was looking over the schematics of both models and noticed that the front end was significantly simplified on the later 38-116 code 125. Most of the short wave band trimmer adjustments were eliminated.
Where each band on the 37-116 had individual adjustments for dial calibration and tracking at both the low and high freq ends of each band, some SW bands on the 38-116 have no antenna or RF trimmer adjustments at all. So, at least on paper the 37-116 front end looks far superior with the ability to optimize dial calibration and sensitivity on all bands.
The 38-116 (125) front end looks like an attempt at cost cutting, both in parts and labor to align. What makes it more puzzling is that they also chose to use this simplified design for the top of the line 38-690.
Does anyone have experience using both models who can comment on how the short wave dial calibration and sensitivity compares between the models? I was considering getting a 38-116, but after seeing the RF section schematic, I am a bit disappointed by the changes from the earlier model.
Where each band on the 37-116 had individual adjustments for dial calibration and tracking at both the low and high freq ends of each band, some SW bands on the 38-116 have no antenna or RF trimmer adjustments at all. So, at least on paper the 37-116 front end looks far superior with the ability to optimize dial calibration and sensitivity on all bands.
The 38-116 (125) front end looks like an attempt at cost cutting, both in parts and labor to align. What makes it more puzzling is that they also chose to use this simplified design for the top of the line 38-690.
Does anyone have experience using both models who can comment on how the short wave dial calibration and sensitivity compares between the models? I was considering getting a 38-116, but after seeing the RF section schematic, I am a bit disappointed by the changes from the earlier model.
![[-]](https://philcoradio.com/phorum/images/bootbb/collapse.png "[-]")
