Re: 7904 problem

 

Hi David,
There are several reasons the 7B92 is superior to the 7B71.
1) The 7B71 was designed to be used in conjunction with the 7B70 to provide
delayed sweep capability. The 7B92 (and 7B92A) does this in one plugin (with
a few restrictions). This frees up a slot for other uses.
2) The 7B92 has superior triggering capability compared to the 7B70 and
7B71. It will trigger up to and beyond 500MHz which is desirable in a 500MHz
scope.
3) The 7B92 (and 7B92A) have faster sweep speeds which come in handy when
measuring the kind of fast signals the 7904 can display.
Dennis Tillman W7PF

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 11:03 AM
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7904 problem

Is there really that big of a difference? I have never used a 7B70 or 7B71
(or 7B50 or 7B51) (I guess none of these are that common which makes sense
since they were produced for a shorter time then their replacements) but
except where the delay line length is an issue, I rarely see any difference
between a 7B53A and 7B92A except of course where the fastest sweep speeds
are needed.

I like the 7B92A more for its alternate delayed sweep and I prefer the
7B80/7B85 for their automatic peak-to-peak triggering and delta delayed
sweep. In both cases, their higher frequency triggering and fastest sweep
speeds are of secondary importance.

On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 22:10:43 -0700, you wrote:

Assuming that you will eventually get this scope working I would like
to suggest you buy a timebase that is a better match to the 500+MHz
capability of your 7904. The 7B92A would be ideal. The 7B71 is a very
old plugin and not great at triggering or capable of triggering at the
higher frequencies the 7904 can display.

Dennis Tillman W7PF
------------------------------------
Posted by: David <@DWH>
------------------------------------

Join TekScopes@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.