SX-38

Hallicrafters, The; Chicago, IL and Arlington/Grand Prairie, TX

Data
Forum
Pictures
Collections

  • Year
  • 1944
perfect model
  • Category
  • Commercial Receiver (may include amateur bands)
  • Radiomuseum.org ID
  • 76465

 Technical Specifications

  • Main principle
  • Superheterodyne (common)
  • Material
  • Metal case
  • from Radiomuseum.org
  • Model: SX-38 - Hallicrafters, The; Chicago,
  • Shape
  • Tablemodel, low profile (big size).
  • Notes

  • Despite being mentioned in the publication "Communications Receivers" by Raymond S. Moore, there is no evidence whatsoever that such model (SX-38) existed.

    We assume without proof that there was a typing error in the book, indicating "SX-38" instead of "SX-28 Super Skyrider" or "SX-28A" (with a similar price). If we don't act according to our knowledge and list what's in the book, some collectors may think we are in error not listing the model and even might list it again one day, not knowing the facts. See also the sticky forum thread below with the two pictures out of the mentioned books.

     

  • Price in first year of sale
  • 255.00 $
  • Author
  • Model page created by a member from D. See "Data change" for further contributors.

 Collections | Museums | Literature

 Forum

Forum contributions about this model: Hallicrafters, The;: SX-38

Threads: 1 | Posts: 5

This is in reply to one of the administrators upon my request to have this model (Hallicrafters SX-38) removed.

Raymond Moore's Communication Receiver book, which this model's existance on this forum is founded, is a great reference tool and often the first book I turn to as a collector of communications receivers. However, the book is full of errors (the 4th edition less so).  In the mid-90s, I wrote an article on the National section, correcting many errors and adding several models. Mr. Moore used that information for the 4th edition (see that I am cited in the National section).

Much of Mr. Moore's research was done through vintage catalog and advertisements of these radios, as well as second-hand information. Some of that information is unreliable.  For instance, I was recently researching the National NC-44 receiver and ran across an ad for Henry Radio Sales showing a NC-44 in a configuration I hadn't seen. Looking at the NC-510 in the same ad, I noticed the NC-44 picture and then realized that the pictures and descriptions of the NC-44 and NC-510 were reversed. A typographical, or typesetting error, not a new version of the NC-44!

It would be easy to see how an ad for the Hallicrafters SX-28 might be erred as a "SX-38". And in this case, the "SX-38" would indeed seem "similar to the SX-28" (Moore's words). 

Secondly, the reference is to the model being from 1944 is strange.  During 1944, Hallicrafters was producing radios for the military and not civilian use. A few radios were available to "war effort" civilians, one of which was the SX-28. (See QST of that era.) And Hallicrafters was definitely not coming out with new civilian models at that time, which the "SX-38" would have been, since the "SX" was a civilian model designation and not a military designation.

Also, Hallicrafters did not make a habit of using the same model number for different radios except for variations of the model.  For example, the S-38, S-38A, S-38B, etc were all variations of the same radio.  Also, the "S" and "SX" models were the same, except the "SX" models had crystal control.  However, the "SX-38" version in question would have been a sizable difference compared to a S-38 receiver, if indeed it was similar to the SX-28.

Finally, a close examination of the Chuck Dachis book on Hallicrafters, which is a more thorough work on Hallicrafters, will find no mention of a SX-38 receiver.

So,with no reference given the "SX-38" entry in Moore's book, we may never know for certain. However, it seems likely that Mr. Moore was referencing a misprint, and not actually an existing radio. Also, just because it's in a book, doesn't make it so.  I can find lots of books saying there were (or weren't) multiple shooters in the Kennedy assassination, but it does not make it true. Without further verification, it would seem that this model should not be allowed, and at the very least, should be noted as being unsubstantiated.

 

Wayne Childress, 02.Sep.14

Weitere Posts (5) zu diesem Thema.