HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Dual Units and Dual Antennas
Keywords: Just an idea
Date: 9 Apr 92 19:13:36 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Apr8.124424.1268@acsu.buffalo.edu> bphdarcy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (SJ Roc D'Arcy, MBP) writes:
>I was wondering if anyone had tried or could provide some feedback on the 
>following idea:
>
>I have two spare mobile rigs.  I also have a spare base station antenna.
>What I was wondering, is what would be the results if I rigged up the 
>microphone so that it was connected to both rigs and transmitting from
>two attennas on top of the house (one on each end of the roof). 
>
>         --rig one ------------------ first antenna      
>         |  
>Mike------
>         |
>         --rig two ------------------ second antenna
>
>First, would it be legal?  I am still running under 4 watts, but on
>two different rigs.

I doubt that it is legal, though I can't quote a rule against it.

>Second, would it help performance?  This is like twin whips times two.
>I don't think the antenna would have to be matched (they are quite close
>though), since they come from different units. 

It definitely *won't* help performance. While the audio is the same,
the RF signals are *incoherent*. They will not add. If you were to
additionally take the RF from a single synthesizer in one of the 
rigs and use it to drive both, *then* it would add. But then you wouldn't
be running two rigs anymore and would definitely be illegal since two
PA strips in parallel are still *one* rig as far as the FCC is concerned.

Go ahead and try the experiment. A listener will hear the most godawful
hetrodyning on your signal, even with SSB, due to the incoherency of
the RF signals.

Gary KE4ZV
Xref: sparky rec.radio.cb:474 news.answers:1049
From: comptec91006@camins.camosun.bc.ca
Subject: Re: AM or SSB
Organization: Camosun College
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 23:25:07 GMT

In article <7APR199213413423@venus.tamu.edu>, ami9667@venus.tamu.edu (IACOVIDES, ANDREAS MICHAEL) writes:
> What's the "max" range you can talk with two AM CB's and what about
> SSB, when the one will be at the base and the other mobile? What are
> some good antennas for base and for mobile?
> 
> Andreas 

With CB the maximum range varies greatly.  One minute you may be able to
talk to someone 20 miles away and later you might have trouble communicating
with someone half a mile away.  At night you should get pretty good range.
This is because the ionized layers of the atmosphere change and the skip
goes away.  Skip just refers to signals which are bouncing of the ionisphere
(usually from somewhere far away).  If there is nothing to block your signal
and no skip to interfere you should be able to communicate over great distances.

If you need a reliable communication system you should look into a VHF or UHF
radio of some sort.  If you wan't any more info then give me a few details
regarding what you want to be able to do with your radios.
                                                /\/\ike
Xref: sparky rec.radio.cb:471 news.answers:1046
From: bphdarcy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (SJ Roc D'Arcy, MBP)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Dual Units and Dual Antennas
Summary: The idea is illegal
Keywords: Just an idea
Date: 10 Apr 92 13:35:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr9.191336.25599@ke4zv.uucp>, gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes...
>In article <1992Apr8.124424.1268@acsu.buffalo.edu> bphdarcy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (SJ Roc D'Arcy, MBP) writes:
> 
>I doubt that it is legal, though I can't quote a rule against it.
> 

Since my signal would be the same going into both of the final amp stages
it would qualify it as 8 watts.


>additionally take the RF from a single synthesizer in one of the 
>rigs and use it to drive both, *then* it would add. 

This was what I had in mind.  I really botched the question and the
diagram (hard to draw in the editor).  I talked to an official in my
area who said no go on the legality.  So scrap an interesting idea.
I'm going to give the extras to a few friends.

Thanks for the feedback.  The more I though of the idea the worse it 
sounded.

Take care,

SJRD
Xref: sparky rec.radio.cb:473 news.answers:1048
From: bphdarcy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (SJ Roc D'Arcy, MBP)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Subject: Dual Units and Dual Antennas
Keywords: Just an idea
Date: 8 Apr 92 13:43:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

I was wondering if anyone had tried or could provide some feedback on the 
following idea:

I have two spare mobile rigs.  I also have a spare base station antenna.
What I was wondering, is what would be the results if I rigged up the 
microphone so that it was connected to both rigs and transmitting from
two attennas on top of the house (one on each end of the roof). 

         --rig one ------------------ first antenna      
         |  
Mike------
         |
         --rig two ------------------ second antenna

First, would it be legal?  I am still running under 4 watts, but on
two different rigs.

Second, would it help performance?  This is like twin whips times two.
I don't think the antenna would have to be matched (they are quite close
though), since they come from different units. 

Let me know. 

SJRD
From: ami9667@venus.tamu.edu (IACOVIDES, ANDREAS MICHAEL)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Subject: AM or SSB
Date: 7 Apr 92 18:41:00 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

What's the "max" range you can talk with two AM CB's and what about
SSB, when the one will be at the base and the other mobile? What are
some good antennas for base and for mobile?

Andreas
From: tad@ssc.wa.com (Tad Cook)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: GMRS radio
Date: 10 Apr 92 15:55:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: very little

In article <1992Apr01.044618.17521@ecst.csuchico.edu> nomad@ecst.csuchico.edu (Michael Larish) writes:
>
>	I have also HEARD (not known as fact yet) that GMRS is being slowly
>phased out.  I've heard that while you don't have to test for it, the FCC
>is no longer granting licenses to use it.

I think they have stopped granting licenses to BUSINESSES, to leave
this band for personal communications for individuals.  GMRS is
alive and well.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Tad Cook     |  Phone:  206-527-4089  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544   
 Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   3288544@mcimail.com 
              |  USENET: tad@ssc.wa.com          or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Tad Cook     |  Phone:  206-527-4089  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544   
 Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   3288544@mcimail.com
From: fisher2557@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: AM or SSB
Date: 8 Apr 92 10:55:09 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <7APR199213413423@venus.tamu.edu>, ami9667@venus.tamu.edu (IACOVIDES, ANDREAS MICHAEL) writes:
> What's the "max" range you can talk with two AM CB's and what about
> SSB, when the one will be at the base and the other mobile? What are
> some good antennas for base and for mobile?
> 
> Andreas 

well, that's tough to answer 100%.  I like getting flamed, so I'll let you know
what I've done.  Last week, on SSB, I had a little chat with Belgium. (my FIRST
contact in Europe, YEA!) Two minutes later, I had a short chat with a chap in
the Bahamas.  This is DEFINITELY not normal skip.  I got LUCKY.  Anyway, it's
FUN!!!  Normal for me here is California, Florida, and Washington.  (two months
ago, Oregon was pouring in, along with the east coast)  The moral of the story:
with skip, ANYTHING'S possible.  Point-to-point (ground waves; the reliable
ones) normal for me is 30 miles.  That's my base (ground plane just abouve my
house) to a mobile with a k-40.  If I had a beam, and was talking with another
base with another beam, I could expect in excess of 100 miles.  When you get
going THAT far, though, you're not really throwing the signal thru the air;
your signal is almost totally on your ground-plane, so if you don't have a WELL
grounded antennae, you're S.O.L....  Hope that helps. (I recommend a 40 ch SSB
to ANYONE serious about CB.  Don't settle for less -- +get the best+)

later,
 Nathan
  FISHER2557@ISCSVAX.UNI.EDU      (this tag line is umop ap!sdn)
 --------------------------------- -------------------------------
| "I'd challenge him to a battle  |  University of Northern Iowa  |
|  of wits, but I don't fight     |    where men are men,         |
|  the unarmed...."               |       and sheep are nervous   |
 --------------------------------- -------------------------------
Hi! I am a .signature virus.  Copy me into your .signature to join in!
From: mikego@tekig5.pen.tek.com (Gerald Goodwin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Subject: Maxon 27sp $129.00
Date: 13 Apr 92 14:51:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.


 	FORSALE: MAXON  40 CHANNEL CB WALKIE TALKIE

	FEATURES:
		EARPHONE/MICROPHONE earphone is microphone and speaker
		REMOTE PUSH-TO-TALK BUTTON 
		BACKLIT LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAY
		4 WATT RF POWER
		REMOVABLE BATTERY PACKS (COMES WITH 2, 1 FOR NICADS
		THE SECOND FOR ALKALINE BATTERIES) 
		RUBBER DUCKIE ANTENNAE WITH BNC CONNECTOR
		CAN CONNECT ANY OTHER ANTENNAE WITH BNC CONNECTOR.
	GREAT FOR HUNTING, YOU CAN COMMUNICATE WITH HUNTING PARTNERS
	WITHOUT MAKING ALL THE TYPICAL NOISE WITH NORMAL WALKIE TALKIES.

	$129.00 

	POSTED FOR A FRIEND 

	CALL STEVE HUGHES @ 206-834-0209 AFTER 6-PM FOR INFO
From: carl@Cayman.COM (Carl Heinzl)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Infiniti M30
Date: 16 Apr 92 15:03:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Cayman Systems Inc., Cambridge, MA
In-reply-to: molly@execu.execu.com's message of 15 Apr 92 19:31:10 GMT
bcc: carl


>If you have other suggestions for cars I should consider, I am open
>to those, too.  I want something sporty, with an airbag, sunroof, ABS
>brakes, no motorized seatbelts!, two doors, preferably a back seat,
>and preferably 5-speed (yes, I know the M30's come only in automatic).
>And, it goes without saying...reliability, safety, etc. are important,
>as well.  I'd like to stay under $22-23,000 if possible.  Not asking
>for much, eh?  :-}

I think I would steer clear of the M30 since it will probably be
discoutinued soon.

What would I consider??? 

The Maxima SE fits your criteria EXCEPT for the motorized belts.

The Acura Vigor meets ALL of your criteria EXCEPT that it's a 4 door.

I'm sure that there are others out there in this ballpark...

-Carl-
--
From: carl@Cayman.COM (Carl Heinzl)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Accord lease program
Date: 14 Apr 92 15:23:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: atlantis.CARL.92Apr14112317
Distribution: usa
Organization: Cayman Systems Inc., Cambridge, MA
In-reply-to: jdi@postgres.Berkeley.EDU's message of 14 Apr 92 00:10:27 GMT
bcc: carl


John,

>  Also, if anyone has seen a good manufacturer sponsered lease deal
>on a comparable car (Maxima, Camry, etc)...

The current Maxima lease program (at least around here) is pretty
good.  The money factor was around 3.01, which translates to an
effective interest rate of approximately 7.2%.  This is on a 3 year
lease, which is usually the best lease arrangement to go with.  Longer
leases will have higher money factors.  On the Maxima there is no drop
off cost and gap insurance is included with the lease.

Acura also has an excellent lease program on the Vigor (again, around
here) which translates to about 6.3% !!!  The Vigor is a pretty nice
car, especially the stereo in the GS, a little more luxurious than the
Maxima.  It handles pretty nice too.

I suspect that these programs are country wide, but I'm not 100% sure
about that.

Note that when you lease, you can negotiate the price of the car just
as though you were going to buy it, then tell them that you're going
to lease.  What you end up doing is effectively taking a loan out and
paying the loan down so that the remaining principle is what they call
the "residual" value at the end of the lease period.

-Carl-
--
From: mpe@shamash.cdc.com (Mike Ebsen)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Mazda B2200 pickup - stupid CHECK ENGINE idiot light
Date: 7 Apr 92 14:55:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: shamash.40603
Organization: Control Data, Arden Hills, MN

Inside of my owners manual, under the maintance section, a little
paragraph states that the check engine light will turn on after
60,001 miles are clocked and every 20,000 there-after.
 
I've looked all throughout the different maintance manuals available
for the model type and model year.  None of the available texts state
how to reset the warning light but all of them mention that it is to
remind the user of the regular and period maintance required.
 
I'm certain of the fact that nothing is seriously wrong because several
friends and I drove around one night couple weeks ago just to watch the
light turn on when the odometer clicked from 60,000 to 60,001. 
 
This whole thing seems like a game dreamed up by the Mazda corp to 
extract a couple of bucks ($49.99) every 20,000 miles after their 
50,000 bumper-to-bumper warranty expires. 
 
QUESTION: Does anyone out there know how to reset the light without
buying a hand-held computer to read out and reset the error codes.  I've
tried disconnecting the battery hopeing to kill whatever memory the 
computer might have.  No luck.  Any ideas you might have are welcomed.
 
I'm new to this group so if this question has been asked 1,000,000,000 
times before ---- sorry! 
 
mpe@shamash.cdc.com
From: u1705@JSP.UMontreal.CA (Southiere Alain)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Why can't they
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:09:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Universite de Montreal

In article <1992Apr13.200237.8989@CS.ORST.EDU> averys@jasper.cs.orst.edu (Scott Avery) writes:
>What I would like is a new car, about the same weight, with a little
>more power, say 130-150HP.  It has to be light and nimble.  I really
>want a car that is designed as a sports car.  I like the Nissan
>Sentra SE-R quite a lot, but it is an econobox that was hopped up
>to be a fun car.  I would like to have a car, under $17,000, that
>was designed to be a sports car, and that fits me.( I am 6'2")
>So far the only thing that comes close is a 240SX.  A Miata is
>underpowered, an MX-3 is too small for me and I really like 
>rear wheel drive, CRX si is too small, Eclipse/Laser/Talon has
>no headroom at all.  

   Well, the Grand Am Quad 4 seems to be much of what you want.
There's also the Grand Prix GT (but I dont' know hao much it
costs... Should be around this price)

   But If your ready to wait a few month (might even be weeks), you
could get the new Daytona IROC R/T... 2.2 turbo III, 224 hp and
very lignt.

-- 
u1705@jsp.umontreal.ca                           | If you want to make an apple
                   _                             | pie from scratch, you have
 /\  |  _  .  _   (_   _      _|_ |_  .  _  _  _ | to create the universe.
/--\ | (_| | | |   _) (_) |_|  |_ | | | (= |  (= |                - Carl Sagan
Xref: sparky rec.autos:11320 rec.autos.tech:5803
From: ssave@ole.uucp (Shailendra Save)
Newsgroups: rec.autos,rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: ***ANOTHER QUESTION ABOUT ALIGNMENT***
Date: 14 Apr 92 00:32:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: ole.1992Apr14.003245.29627
Organization: Cascade Design Automation, Bellevue, WA

In article <92103.203941DST1@psuvm.psu.edu> DST1@psuvm.psu.edu (David Tascarella) writes:
>This past weekend, when I was putting my summer wheels back onto my 82 Regal, I
>noticed some very strange wear patterns on the front tires.  These tires are
>205/70R14's on rims with about 1/2 an inch offset (out) from the stock rally
>rims.  As you can see, the tires are wearing on opposite edges.
>
>                          front of car
>                  _____                 _____
>                 lx    l               lx    l
>                 lx    l               lx    l
>                 lx    l               lx    l
>                 lx    l               lx    l      x = area of wear
>                 lx    l               lx    l
>                 lx    l               lx    l
>                  -----                 -----
>
>Now, these tires have 22000 miles on them.  I had new tie rods ends (all four)
>put on when I had it aligned immediately after putting these wheels on.  At
>about 12000 miles on the tires, I noticed the wear on the front left as I have
>shown above, but the right front looked fine.   I took the car to a different
>place and had the alignment re-done.   Now, the other tire has noticeable wear.
>MY question is WHY??????    any suggestions.   I do not want to trash the tires
>before I really need to.   My driving consisted of bi monthly trips from PA to
>KY  on the interstates PLUS a lot of twisty road driving in PA where I live. I
>like to drive hard too.  What may be causing the front to wear on the left edge
>s while the rears are fine??????????
>
>
>                                           DAVE
>                                            DST1@PSUVM.psu.edu


 Just means you turn left more often than you do right. (way, way too often) :-)



 Check your toe spec. and alignment figures.  I have a feeling that your toe
is off, and while that will make the car drive straight, it will still affect tire 
wear.

-S

PS: Most car alignment places don't do toe, only camber and caster.
From: sinclair65@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: NEW F40?
Summary: I need info
Date: 17 Apr 92 04:43:07 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


	I am wondering if anybody has heard about the ferrari that will
replace the F40. I have heard that it is going to be a topless version with
the same v-12 but lighter! If anyobody knows anything, please post.
thanx.

JTS
From: vinay@sail.LABS.TEK.COM (Vinay Sathe)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Using the horn
Date: 10 Apr 92 22:15:03 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <MATT.92Apr10133140@world.std.com> matt@world.std.com (Matt Saucier) writes:
>
>If I'm
>second in line, and the car in front of me waits five seconds, and
>we're making left turns, I have *NO* chance at making the turn legally
>in one light-cycle.  I generally will give a polite "toot" after
>about two seconds... 

	I have to agree with you, Matt. There are some signals here 
	in Beaverton which are 'car triggered'. If the car in front 
	doesn't move, the protected green changes to red in less than 
	5 seconds. I have to kill my engine becuase it takes about 2 
	minutes for it to become green again. 

	To avoid this, I generally do "pattern matching" of the 
	car and driver ahead of me by my 
	"stereotype" algorithm (Tm) and keep my finger on the horn 
	for a (not so) polite request to the person in front to get 
	moving. 

	Vinay Sathe 
	vinay@sail.labs.tek.com
From: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: why buy japanese?
Date: 9 Apr 92 01:53:14 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Apr8.182117.19121@interlan.Interlan.COM> powell@interlan.Interlan.COM (Glen D. Powell) writes:
>
>The best high-fidelity equipment (IMFO) manufactured today is built in the
>USA and in England. Check out any good audio dealer, you will find this to be
>true. Also, NAD manufactures televisions in the USA and their audio and video
>quality is far superior to that of any mass-produced Japanese manufacturer.
>
    NAD has all of its manufacturing overseas.  It is the SONY
    TV's which are made in San Diego.  But then Kawasaki bikes are
    made in Lincoln Nebraska.

    However your basic idea is correct...the real high end brands
    are from the USA, Canada, and the UK.  I don't know of any from
    Japan with the possible exception of VCR's and some CD
    players...     Particularly speakers--I can't think of any
    Japanese speaker considered much above mid-fi!
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: salil@igor.tamri.com (Salil Saxena)
Subject: Re: Auto Leasing !!???
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, San Francisco
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 22:19:20 GMT

In article <CARL.92Apr9114944@atlantis.Cayman.COM> carl@Cayman.COM (Carl Heinzl) writes:
>
>>        Does anyone out there lease a car...why or why not?? What are
>>the advantages/disadvantages of leasing?? How long does the lease last??
>>How many variables can you throw into lease deal??
>
>>Inquiring minds......

	stuff deleted .......
>
>Oh, btw, I was told that most (99% was quoted, but that seemed high)
>of the people who lease do NOT buy their cars at the end of the
>period.  
>
>I'm sure I skipped something here, but this is a pretty good start.
>
>-Carl-
>--

Some more food for thought:

I read an article which mentioned that somewhere around 70% of 500SL's 
(Mercs.) sold in the US are leased.

-- 
Salil Saxena		Gotta love those British Roadsters - '91 Lotus Elan SE
Toshiba America MRI, Inc.		Internet: salil@igor.tamri.com	
South San Francisco, CA  94080		Phone: (415) 872-2722 x2283
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Opionions expressed are mine and only mine <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Fabulous New RX7
Date: 14 Apr 92 01:39:41 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Apr10.153850.10406@Celestial.COM> bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) writes:
>
>Don't forget the Datsun 2000 roadster.  It sold for $2,995 in the
>late '60s, ran C Production, and would whip the average Porsche
>Carerra at the race track (well maybe not Bruce Jennings at
>Marlboro :-).
>
    No it wouldn't.  At least not a contemporary Carrera.  The 2000
    was initially a C production but went into D production where it
    did indeed dominate that series.

    They were often in love/hate relationships with the drivers....

    The 2000 engine NEVER broke!  (It was actually a street version
    of Nissan's Grand Prix engine...).  The transmission wasn't too
    bad either....but the suspension sucked canal water big time.
    If you wanted to see the world's busiest race-drivers, just go
    to any corner and watch the Datsun 2000 drivers sawing back and
    forth on the wheel to keep it out of the hay bales.  

    In stock form it would break 102 in 3rd gear...and would
    actually go MUCH faster in 4th than in 5th.  

    PS.  I owned an loved a 70 Datsun 2000 with a 180 bhp Paeco
    engine...so I am not unbiased.  I still have a (stock) fuel pump
    for one if someone is in need of it...
From: koziarz@halibut.nosc.mil (Walter A. Koziarz)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Ford Trucks
Date: 15 Apr 92 21:56:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: nosc.5351
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego

In article <1992Apr15.204911.15807@u.washington.edu> ryan@kirchoff.ee.washington.edu ( Ryan C Kearny ) writes:

>I am graduating from EE (finally) and am looking to buy a Ford
>F150 or F250 4x4 or 2x4  hopefully newer than say 1982.  Does anybody
>have any recommendations on what to look for for under $5,000 
>preferably around 4,000?  Are some of those years better than others?

recommendations would depend on what you want to do with the truck...  be aware
that the F250 will ride much harsher/firmer/harder than an F150...  if you are
looking for personal transportation, opt for the 150, unless it has been used
as a plow-truck.  from the late 1970s to the present truck components have been
steadily becoming weaker through down-sizing to save weight.  the drivetrain of
a F150 (or Dodge W100/150 or Chevy K10) would surely have taken a pounding and
potentially be in sorry condition if it had served as a plow truck.  if you are
looking for a plow truck, then consider an F350, they are somewhat sturdier
than either F150 or F250 and have a *real* fron axle instead of that bogus
TTB...

Walt K.