Welcome Guest! Be sure you know and follow the Phorum Rules before posting. Thank you and Enjoy! (January 12) x

Thread Closed
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

New Project - 39-55
#30

Hmmm. All this talk of 6A8 vs. 6J8 tubes has me curious. I have a 39-55 out in the garage; I picked it up really cheap to have an extra stepper unit in case I find the one in my 41-616 is bad once I get started restoring it. I'll have to see what kind of det-osc tube it has in it.

Overly simplified comparison of the 6A8 and 6J8:

The 6A8 does not have a separate oscillator section, but the first two grids in the 6A8 perform the same function as the grid and plate of the triode section of the 6J8. In the 6A8, G1 is the oscillator grid and G2 is the oscillator "plate." The local oscillator signal produced here is mixed with the incoming RF signal from G4 to produce a third signal, or intermediate frequency.

In the 6J8, the (separate) oscillator grid G1 is connected to G3 of the heptode (mixer) section in order to inject the local oscillator signal; this is mixed with the incoming RF from G1 of the heptode section to produce the IF frequency.

In the 6A8, G3 and G5 are dual screen grids; in the heptode section of the 6J8, G2 and G4 are the screens. The heptode section of the 6J8 has an additional suppressor grid (G5), tied to the common cathode.

Compare both and you will see they have essentially the same pinout. Pins 2 and 7 - filament; 3 - plate; 4 - screen; 5 - oscillator grid; 6 - oscillator plate; 8 - cathode.

Can they substitute for one another? The tube substitution guides say "yes." While they might pass in an AM-only set, if the set has SW you should stick with the tube the set was designed for. Some even advocate using a 6K8 (a triode-hexode converter similar to the 6J8 but without the suppressor grid) in place of the 6J8.

Remember, any substitutions will affect alignment.

--
Ron Ramirez
Ferdinand IN


Messages In This Thread
New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 02-28-2012, 04:26 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by codefox1 - 02-28-2012, 04:40 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 02-28-2012, 04:46 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 02-28-2012, 04:45 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 02-28-2012, 05:00 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Glenn Roberts - 02-28-2012, 05:45 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Bob Andersen - 02-28-2012, 07:02 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Ron Ramirez - 02-28-2012, 07:06 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 02-28-2012, 07:13 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Ron Ramirez - 02-28-2012, 07:17 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 02-28-2012, 08:01 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Ron Ramirez - 02-28-2012, 08:11 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by codefox1 - 02-28-2012, 11:23 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 02-28-2012, 11:43 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by codefox1 - 02-29-2012, 01:31 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 03-01-2012, 12:32 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by codefox1 - 03-01-2012, 07:04 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 03-06-2012, 06:37 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Arran - 03-06-2012, 09:14 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 03-06-2012, 07:04 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 03-06-2012, 11:27 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Arran - 03-10-2012, 12:52 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by codefox1 - 03-06-2012, 09:34 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Bob Andersen - 03-07-2012, 12:03 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 03-07-2012, 12:21 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 03-07-2012, 01:42 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Ron Ramirez - 03-11-2012, 08:51 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 03-10-2012, 11:59 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Arran - 03-10-2012, 09:15 PM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 03-11-2012, 01:45 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Ron Ramirez - 03-11-2012, 08:38 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by Ron Ramirez - 03-11-2012, 10:51 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by w4rtc - 03-11-2012, 11:03 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 04-06-2012, 01:04 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 04-11-2012, 01:10 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by ipwizard - 04-13-2012, 01:47 AM
RE: New Project - 39-55 - by codefox1 - 04-13-2012, 02:11 AM



Users browsing this thread: 7 Guest(s)
[-]
Recent Posts
91H Code 126 Restore
Well I'm making good progress. All the bakelite blocks have been recapped.  I found that using a heat gun and skinny ...RealRider — 02:35 PM
Philco model 60
>>and found that the field coil is bad. Should be 1140 ohms, tests at 1.1k ohms. You have one stringent crit...morzh — 02:07 PM
Philco model 60
Yes I was there. I got some real bargains there. Plus a Zenith 7G605 clipper that I have been trying to find for a fair ...Radios1340 — 01:46 PM
The speaker table error?
G  10-1/2"       65, 76, 87, 95 Push-Pull 45's 2766 0.7 550 3200 H   10-1/2"    77, 96 Push-Pull...morzh — 09:26 PM
A Marconi model 86
I have a Stromberg, one of the early ones, seems early 30s. This is what I call a back breaker. None of the early Philc...morzh — 08:28 PM
A Marconi model 86
A backbreaker.....PaulPaul Philco322 — 08:12 PM
A Marconi model 86
>>What a behemoth! A Juggernaut.morzh — 07:47 PM
Philco 70 antenna lead
I am not sure I understood about the coils and the mush. I looked an more than one coil in 20, 70, 90, 60, Zeniths and ...morzh — 07:46 PM
A Marconi model 86
:e_biggrin: What a behemoth!  I hope the final result is as much a quality sounding example!  Keep us posted on your pro...GarySP — 07:32 PM
A Marconi model 86
I should add that the double conversion may only be used on the shortwave bands, but I haven't looked at the schematic t...Arran — 07:27 PM

[-]
Who's Online
There are currently 6873 online users. [Complete List]
» 1 Member(s) | 6872 Guest(s)
Avatar

>