would you buy this meter

[K9LPK]

Absolutely! These units are highly accurate better than any Bird meter I have ever used in the 52 years of my RF experience. They are NIST calibrated for 3 years. I have the LP-100A with 2 couplers. They are truly the more accurate than any analog or digital Bird meter.

 

[The20poundhammer]

Good luck on finding a used Bird for under 200 that doesn't look like it's been drug down a gravel road. I have 2 43's and half a dozen slugs and bought them used and have as much in them as that. Like Nomad said they are more than just a power meter. If I were going to buy a new meter t I day I would seriously look at this one or a Power Master from Array Solutions.

 

[AudioShockwav]

Why? Outside CB land the Bird meters have no magical qualities and in fact there are more accurate meters out there. Bird is versatile and rugged but no more accurate than a lot of meters out there.

My problem with used slugs is they can be opened and "adjusted" by whoever had them before.
They are calibrated when made, but who knows what happens after that.
We used Telewave at the county so no need for slugs.
Yes we were limited to 500 watts, but for that work it is all we needed.
I use a Heathkit HM-102 for HF and have been happy with it all these years.
And I paid 80 bucks for it.
Yes these newer meters provide lots of info, but
with the cost of little antenna analyzers now days I don't need a expensive meter to do all that when I have other tools.
And I am cheap.

73
Jeff

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

yes like driving an Acura but still a honda driving a Lexus but still a Toyota just my 300 watts cent LOL

That would only apply if Bird actually made the LP meters or vice versa.

 

[Enterprise312ok]

Rite now I run a dosy tc-4002-sw and a workman hp202s cross nedle. I would chose the lp over a bird setup, many more features. I would calibrate all my meters to an lp if I had one.

 

[nomadradio]

Bird is versatile and rugged

Before antenna analyzers were affordable the Bird 43 was how an antenna would get tuned after a mobile installation. Its claim to fame was that it would survive being dropped more times other wattmeters.

Nothing magic about it. Just a familiar tool that does what it claims decade after decade.

73

 

[Pez]

Personally, I would (and did) get the LP-100A and a good scope, over the LP-700. I have the LP-100A in line with a 43P, and it's a great combo.

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

Before antenna analyzers were affordable the Bird 43 was how an antenna would get tuned after a mobile installation. Its claim to fame was that it would survive being dropped more times other wattmeters.

Nothing magic about it. Just a familiar tool that does what it claims decade after decade.

73

Exactly. There is no magic to a Bird meter. There are more accurate meters out there today, but as far as versatility and ruggedness, that is where the Bird shines.

 

[unit_399]

I use a Heathkit HM-102 for HF and have been happy with it all these years.
And I paid 80 bucks for it.
Yes these newer meters provide lots of info, but
with the cost of little antenna analyzers now days I don't need a expensive meter to do all that when I have other tools.
And I am cheap.

73
Jeff

I don't understand why everyone is so concerned with meter accuracy. A rig that shows 500W on a Bird 43 may show 475 or 525 on other 43s. It all depends on the calibration. At that power level a difference of 25 watts one way or the other is not gonna be discernible on the receive end. As long as the output is in the ballpark of what I expected, I'm happy. Always check the signal on a scope to make certain it's clean and you're good to go. My Drake W-4 (with PEP kit) and Transel Mark II have served me well for decades. So I can't see spending big bucks for something that provides nothing over what I already have. And I am cheap too !! 73.

J.J. 399