Tek 2236 or 475a for HAM use?

[nick]

I have no experience with oscilloscopes but want to
experiment/play/educate myself re electronics and radio pricipals,
etc.

The ARRL handbook stated "For ham use get the highest bandwidth
scope you can afford. An old, wider bandwidth scope is better
than a new, narrower scope.".

So, I'm considering these two dual channel scopes:

* Tek 475a with DMM - 250 mhz with digital multimeter
* Tek 2236 100 mhz with fancier integrated multimeter

They are similar pricewise with the 2236 being a bit higher.

Any suggestions?

Thank you,
Nick

 

[Michael Black]

I have no experience with oscilloscopes but want to
experiment/play/educate myself re electronics and radio pricipals,
etc.

The ARRL handbook stated "For ham use get the highest bandwidth
scope you can afford. An old, wider bandwidth scope is better
than a new, narrower scope.".

So, I'm considering these two dual channel scopes:

* Tek 475a with DMM - 250 mhz with digital multimeter
* Tek 2236 100 mhz with fancier integrated multimeter

They are similar pricewise with the 2236 being a bit higher.

I know nothing of those scopes. But surely if the only difference
was bandwidth, then the 250MHz one is of better use. You're buying it
for the scope, not a digital voltmeter (that must be a newfangled addition,
since no scope I knew when growing up had a voltmeter, beyond being
able to use the scope for such things). If you need a voltmeter, you
can buy one separately, but if you choose the scope with the fancier
voltmeter you lose the extra bandwidth.

You need to be looking at other specs. Perhaps these are priced the
same because the seller(s) have decided the voltmeter is more important
than bandwidth. But maybe there are limitations that come with that higher
bandwidth, that will affect your use of it.

Michael

 

[[email protected]]

I have no experience with oscilloscopes but want to
experiment/play/educate myself re electronics and radio pricipals,
etc.

The ARRL handbook stated "For ham use get the highest bandwidth
scope you can afford. An old, wider bandwidth scope is better
than a new, narrower scope.".

So, I'm considering these two dual channel scopes:

* Tek 475a with DMM - 250 mhz with digital multimeter
* Tek 2236 100 mhz with fancier integrated multimeter

They are similar pricewise with the 2236 being a bit higher.

Any suggestions?

Thank you,
Nick

I have a couple Tek 475s, and they are nice scopes. I thought the
bandwidth was only 200 MHZ, but I could be mistaken. Make sure you read
the operators manual before operating any scope.

 

[Jim Yanik]

[email protected] (Michael Black) wrote in

I know nothing of those scopes. But surely if the only difference
was bandwidth, then the 250MHz one is of better use. You're buying it
for the scope, not a digital voltmeter (that must be a newfangled
addition, since no scope I knew when growing up had a voltmeter,
beyond being able to use the scope for such things).

465DM43 and DM44,were around since maybe 1975,IIRC.

If you need a

voltmeter, you can buy one separately, but if you choose the scope
with the fancier voltmeter you lose the extra bandwidth.

IMO,separate DMMs are better and more versatile. The 2236 DMM was Ok,but
nothing special. I'd rather have a HP14401A.

You need to be looking at other specs. Perhaps these are priced the
same because the seller(s) have decided the voltmeter is more
important than bandwidth. But maybe there are limitations that come
with that higher bandwidth, that will affect your use of it.

Michael

IMO,it all depends on the condition of each scope.I'd go for the newer one
unless I knew the older 475 was in really good condition with low operating
hours.

 

[Jim Yanik]

[email protected] wrote in news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

I have a couple Tek 475s, and they are nice scopes. I thought the
bandwidth was only 200 MHZ, but I could be mistaken. Make sure you read
the operators manual before operating any scope.

475 is 200Mhz,but the 475A is 250Mhz.

BTW,that guy who has the 475M has a really rare model.I never saw ONE in
21.5 years with TEK.I recall seeing the microfiche for that model,but never
saw one,or a manual for one,or any sales literature for them.
But the 455/465M and 475M aren't really related to the 465/475
series,they're *very* different inside,all based on the 455A2B2.

 

[Glenn Gundlach]

I have a couple Tek 475s, and they are nice scopes. I thought the
bandwidth was only 200 MHZ, but I could be mistaken. Make sure you read
the operators manual before operating any scope.

You're right about the 475 but the 475a is 250MHz. The DM44 is very
useful for measuring time delays. Triggering is good but quirky.
Adjusting vertical position changes the trigger level. That aside, its
a fine scope and I've made a lot of money using it.
GG

 

[Jim Yanik]

[email protected] (Glenn Gundlach) wrote in

You're right about the 475 but the 475a is 250MHz. The DM44 is very
useful for measuring time delays. Triggering is good but quirky.
Adjusting vertical position changes the trigger level. That aside, its
a fine scope and I've made a lot of money using it.
GG

Sounds like your scope needs calibration.

 

[Jim Adney]

These are both good scopes and either would serve you well. Don't be
swayed by the DVM feature. The bandwidth is more important, but don't
buy more than you need.

I have a couple Tek 475s, and they are nice scopes. I thought the
bandwidth was only 200 MHZ, but I could be mistaken. Make sure you read
the operators manual before operating any scope.

The 475 is a 200 MHz scope, but the 475A is 250 MHz.

-

 

[Dr. Anton T. Squeegee]

I have no experience with oscilloscopes but want to
experiment/play/educate myself re electronics and radio pricipals,
etc.

The ARRL handbook stated "For ham use get the highest bandwidth
scope you can afford. An old, wider bandwidth scope is better
than a new, narrower scope.".

So, I'm considering these two dual channel scopes:

* Tek 475a with DMM - 250 mhz with digital multimeter
* Tek 2236 100 mhz with fancier integrated multimeter

They are similar pricewise with the 2236 being a bit higher.

Any suggestions?

Most definitely! I would go with the 475A any day over the 2236.
The reason is that many of the 2200 series, including (as I recall) the
2236, has had serious failure rate issues with some of the proprietary
(and near-irreplaceable) hybrid modules controlling vertical input and
horizontal deflection.

I have a 475A with the DM44 option as my 'field' 'scope. The thing
is built like the proverbial tank, and I feel a lot more confident about
my ability to repair it, should something fail, than I ever would about
the 2200/2300/2400 series.

Happy hunting.

--
Dr. Anton T. Squeegee, Director, Dutch Surrealist Plumbing Institute.
(Known to some as Bruce Lane, ARS KC7GR,
kyrrin (a/t) bluefeathertech[d=o=t]calm -- www.bluefeathertech.com
"If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped
with surreal ports?"

 

[Glenn Gundlach]

[email protected] (Glenn Gundlach) wrote in




Sounds like your scope needs calibration.

You're probably right but it worked that way since the day I got it.
It was used but had just been calibrated and had 2 new Tek probes. The
actual triggering is very good. It just appears that the trigger
happens after the V position so that changing V pos changes the
trigger level. The 465 at work does not work this way. I just assmed
it was a minor difference between models.

Dang, now I'm almost interested enough to dig out the manual. Oh, I'm
better now. Whew.
GG

 

[Jeff W]

Sorry, Anton, you are not correct. The 2200 series have very few
proprietary parts in them; & no hybrid modules at all. You are
confusing the 2200 with the 2400 series. ( The 2400 series have a
horrible problem with the horizontal and vertical channel switch
hybrids)

I have fixed literally dozens of 2200 series scopes, and they are a
breeze compared to the 475A. Very easy to fix, and I hardly saw any
proprietary parts go bad, a couple of vert amp IC's perhaps. I
replaced loads of electrolytics, many prereg FET's & the TL594's that
drive them, but little else.

However, I will say that the 475A is a much better instrument than the
2236. (and it commanded more than double the price new) If it was my
only scope, I would choose the 475A over the 2236, depending on
condition comparison as well. However, I will also say that I use my
2235A over the rest of my scopes for general troubleshooting work.
Lightweight, quick, easy to use (my favorite scope in my collection
is my mint 485, but it is mostly a closet queen)

Jeff

 

[Kevin Carney]

Try putting your trigger coupling in "AC" mode. The trigger level won't
shift when you move the trace vertically.

 

[Jim Yanik]

Most definitely! I would go with the 475A any day over the 2236.
The reason is that many of the 2200 series, including (as I recall) the
2236, has had serious failure rate issues with some of the proprietary
(and near-irreplaceable) hybrid modules controlling vertical input and
horizontal deflection.

I believe you are thinking of the 2400 series.I know of no "failure rate
issues" with the 2200 series.And the 2200's do not have any hybrids in the
horizontal deflection circuits,but the 2400 series do have them.

 

[Jim Yanik]

Sorry, Anton, you are not correct. The 2200 series have very few
proprietary parts in them; & no hybrid modules at all.

Not true.The 2200s do use a couple of hybrids in the vertical input
circuitry,although unlike the 2400 hybrids.
Hybrids defined as thick-film ceramic substrates with semiconductors on
them,made only by TEK.

 

[nick]

Thank you all for your input on these scopes. Lots of good info
for an oscope virgin like myself.

Well I went and bought a Tek 475a!! So you folks are in for a lot more
questions when it gets here...

I think I've wanted one of these ever since the old "Outer Limits" TV
Show. Remember the scope at the beginning of every show?

Thank you,
Nick

 

[Jim Adney]

Thank you all for your input on these scopes. Lots of good info
for an oscope virgin like myself.

Well I went and bought a Tek 475a!! So you folks are in for a lot more
questions when it gets here...

I think I've wanted one of these ever since the old "Outer Limits" TV
Show. Remember the scope at the beginning of every show?

I remember the show, and the intro, but I don't remember that it was a
scope. I thought we were (supposed to be?) looking at a TV screen.

I think that show preceeded the 465/475/485 scopes. If it was an
oscilloscope it was probably a 500 series.

-

 

[Jim Yanik]

I remember the show, and the intro, but I don't remember that it was a
scope. I thought we were (supposed to be?) looking at a TV screen.

It WAS a TV screen,where they collapsed the vertical,then collapsed the
horizontal,while saying "we control the video,we control the audio....."

But there are a lot of TEK scopes on TV,right now there's an auto
commercial showing with a 465DM44,a 7704A,and I believe some 2200 digital
scope that I can't identify.
The origianl Battlestar Galactica's TV show's bridge and computer graphics
were all TEK equipment;TM500 mainframes and plug-ins,and 4051 graphic
terminals,they even got credits and the end of each episode.

I think that show preceeded the 465/475/485 scopes. If it was an
oscilloscope it was probably a 500 series.

The worst one was a Telequipment scope that was allegedly a "lie
detector",and even had the characteristic skewed trace rotation of those
crappy scopes.

 

[Sam Goldwasser]

The origianl Battlestar Galactica's TV show's bridge and computer graphics
were all TEK equipment;TM500 mainframes and plug-ins,and 4051 graphic
terminals,they even got credits and the end of each episode.

Aside from the mediocre plots, one of the reasons I detested Battlestar
Galactica was that it attempted to use contemporary equipment for props
in a far-in-the-future setting. We will NOT recognize the user interfaces
50 or 100 years in the future! The original Star Trek was better
but the later versions fell back into the same trap, though not nearly
as bad. Everything will probably be direct neural interfaces, which I
suppose would be pretty boring on TV.

--- sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ Home Page: http://www.repairfaq.org/
Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/
+Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasersam.htm
| Mirror Site Info: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/F_mirror.html

Important: The email address in this message header may no longer work. To
contact me, please use the feedback form on the S.E.R FAQ Web sites.