I got one of these original vintage ole dogs in with some blown up
outputs. I know on the CS 800 i used to use the Motorola MJ15024's
with no problem (SJ6343). But i cannot remember on the CS400
if that's an approved sub. Since The 15024 should handle more current
and have a higher voltage breakdown, it seems ok on paper. Don't know if
the HFE is in the ballpark, although i assume so.
Anyone got any thoughts on this? I am going to get the transistor
checker out later and check the gain on the good devices.
I am guessing the typical 20/60.

Bob


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

BOB URZ wrote:
I got one of these original vintage ole dogs in with some blown up
outputs. I know on the CS 800 i used to use the Motorola MJ15024's
with no problem (SJ6343). But i cannot remember on the CS400
if that's an approved sub. Since The 15024 should handle more current
and have a higher voltage breakdown, it seems ok on paper. Don't know if
the HFE is in the ballpark, although i assume so.
Anyone got any thoughts on this? I am going to get the transistor
checker out later and check the gain on the good devices.
I am guessing the typical 20/60.

Bob



I know that peavey now uses finals of the same HFE and different
voltage values as can be depicted from the last 3 digits of the part
number, And they are selected MJ150XX devices.

I DO think they moved the amp designs over to this system and that the
original CS400's do not cross reference. I also believe the CS800 had
the same drive, I may be wrong though, If this is the case the 15024's
should be fine.

Your best bet is calling Peavey, that have great tech support. Max
used to be the guru but I recently found out that he moved over to
Crest after calling for crest parts. It's a shame because Peavey had a
lot of investment in him. He may play double duty but I doubt it.

DANG, I worked on Sooo much Peavey not too long ago and switched jobs,
how quickly we forget

BOB URZ wrote:

I got one of these original vintage ole dogs in with some blown up
outputs. I know on the CS 800 i used to use the Motorola MJ15024's
with no problem (SJ6343). But i cannot remember on the CS400
if that's an approved sub. Since The 15024 should handle more current
and have a higher voltage breakdown, it seems ok on paper. Don't know if
the HFE is in the ballpark, although i assume so.
Anyone got any thoughts on this? I am going to get the transistor
checker out later and check the gain on the good devices.
I am guessing the typical 20/60.

It's quite possible it may originally have used the lower voltage MJ15022 and 23 ( are
these not complementary output stages ? )

I'm sure the 250V parts will be just fine though. In fact the SOA is a little larger
IIRC. I can't believe that 2 amps in the same series would have radically different
designs, noramlly it's just the supply volts and number of devices that change most.

Graham

Pooh Bear wrote:


BOB URZ wrote:


I got one of these original vintage ole dogs in with some blown up
outputs. I know on the CS 800 i used to use the Motorola MJ15024's
with no problem (SJ6343). But i cannot remember on the CS400
if that's an approved sub. Since The 15024 should handle more current
and have a higher voltage breakdown, it seems ok on paper. Don't know if
the HFE is in the ballpark, although i assume so.
Anyone got any thoughts on this? I am going to get the transistor
checker out later and check the gain on the good devices.
I am guessing the typical 20/60.


It's quite possible it may originally have used the lower voltage MJ15022 and 23 ( are
these not complementary output stages ? )

I'm sure the 250V parts will be just fine though. In fact the SOA is a little larger
IIRC. I can't believe that 2 amps in the same series would have radically different
designs, noramlly it's just the supply volts and number of devices that change most.

Graham

I found one source on line that said they were MJ15003's, which were
150V 20A device as i recall. I can get either from distributors for
about the same price. Its a all NPN output.

Bob

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Bob Urz wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:


BOB URZ wrote:


I got one of these original vintage ole dogs in with some blown up
outputs. I know on the CS 800 i used to use the Motorola MJ15024's
with no problem (SJ6343). But i cannot remember on the CS400
if that's an approved sub. Since The 15024 should handle more current
and have a higher voltage breakdown, it seems ok on paper. Don't know if
the HFE is in the ballpark, although i assume so.
Anyone got any thoughts on this? I am going to get the transistor
checker out later and check the gain on the good devices.
I am guessing the typical 20/60.


It's quite possible it may originally have used the lower voltage MJ15022 and 23 ( are
these not complementary output stages ? )

I'm sure the 250V parts will be just fine though. In fact the SOA is a little larger
IIRC. I can't believe that 2 amps in the same series would have radically different
designs, noramlly it's just the supply volts and number of devices that change most.

Graham

I found one source on line that said they were MJ15003's, which were
150V 20A device as i recall.

I've used the 15003s and 4s in lower powered amps.

250W 140V

I can get either from distributors for
about the same price.

Figures. Check the guide prices on the ON Semi site. There's very
little betwen members of
that family.

Its a all NPN output.

Oh yuk ! That explains why they sounded *so* agricultural. :-(


Graham

"Bob Urz" wrote in message
...


Pooh Bear wrote:


BOB URZ wrote:


I got one of these original vintage ole dogs in with some blown up
outputs. I know on the CS 800 i used to use the Motorola MJ15024's
with no problem (SJ6343). But i cannot remember on the CS400
if that's an approved sub. Since The 15024 should handle more current
and have a higher voltage breakdown, it seems ok on paper. Don't know if
the HFE is in the ballpark, although i assume so.
Anyone got any thoughts on this? I am going to get the transistor
checker out later and check the gain on the good devices.
I am guessing the typical 20/60.


It's quite possible it may originally have used the lower voltage MJ15022
and 23 ( are
these not complementary output stages ? )

I'm sure the 250V parts will be just fine though. In fact the SOA is a
little larger
IIRC. I can't believe that 2 amps in the same series would have radically
different
designs, noramlly it's just the supply volts and number of devices that
change most.

Graham

I found one source on line that said they were MJ15003's, which were 150V
20A device as i recall. I can get either from distributors for about the
same price. Its a all NPN output.

Comparing

http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/MJ15022-D.PDF

to

http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/MJ15003-D.PDF



The MJ15003 seems like the better choice:

(1) Higher Ic(max) 20 amps versus 15 amps

(2) SOA pretty much the same within the range of voltages that the devices
are likely to see - slight edge above 50 volts to the MJ15022.

(3) MJ15003 has Higher gain

The 15022 is the faster device, but depending on the amp, this could be a
liability.

"Army Krueger"

Comparing

http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/MJ15022-D.PDF

to

http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/MJ15003-D.PDF



** Those data refers to chip designs sold more than 20 years ago - since
when many revisions and upgrades have occurred. It does NOT represent
current performance characteristics for either type number.

Eg, for contemporary data for MJ15023/4 badged types see the MJ21193/94
data:

http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/MJ21193-D.PDF


ON (ie Motorola) do not generally continue to make legacy chip types after
a revised or ungraded chip is in full production.

ON ( ie Motorola ) DO however, deceitfully supply the new and revised
parts badged with the old familiar part numbers to keep sales going as
before.

Repairers must BEWARE of the changes when attempting to substitute or mix
old and new MJ150xx devices !!!



......... Phil

Phil Allison wrote:
"Army Krueger"


Comparing

http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/MJ15022-D.PDF

to

http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/MJ15003-D.PDF




** Those data refers to chip designs sold more than 20 years ago - since
when many revisions and upgrades have occurred. It does NOT represent
current performance characteristics for either type number.

Eg, for contemporary data for MJ15023/4 badged types see the MJ21193/94
data:

http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/MJ21193-D.PDF


ON (ie Motorola) do not generally continue to make legacy chip types after
a revised or ungraded chip is in full production.

ON ( ie Motorola ) DO however, deceitfully supply the new and revised
parts badged with the old familiar part numbers to keep sales going as
before.

Repairers must BEWARE of the changes when attempting to substitute or mix
old and new MJ150xx devices !!!



........ Phil




Can you relate any specific problems you had with the newer devises?
Perhaps faster and causing stability problems? Run across any
counterfeits?

Bob

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Several years ago someone designed a complete replacement PCB set to
replace about everything but the sheetmetal and power transformer in
the CS400 and CS800 with a supposedly much better design based on
Toshiba mosfets, which fit the heatsinks with minimal metal rework.
Does anyone remember who was doing that?