homemodder said:
The Japanese manufacturers likely made a lot of private deals amongst themselves.
Original A1075/C2525 RET manufacture was by Fujitsu.
Surprise surprise : Toshiba releases the higher powered A1095/C2565 years after the introduction of the Fujitsu devices, and for some reason the series numbers look like close cousins.
The US industry never had an us-against-them mindset.
Attachments
Nice Jacco, You seem to be able to dig up these pics from I have no idea where, a semiconductor museam perhaps ???
The us was not against them in the sense of the word, but they sure had the +buy american its better+ policy for financial reasons and for years had policy of exporting their goods and claiming excellence but had trading restrictions for preventing goods with superior characteristics being imported by claiming they were inferior. They are learning the hard facts of life at the moment.
Some of their industries still try to do this, look at their car industry, highly unefficient, inferior quality and retro design characteristics are still advertised as being better. ???? What :bs:
BTW who or what is the fred campain, or should I rather not ask
The us was not against them in the sense of the word, but they sure had the +buy american its better+ policy for financial reasons and for years had policy of exporting their goods and claiming excellence but had trading restrictions for preventing goods with superior characteristics being imported by claiming they were inferior. They are learning the hard facts of life at the moment.
Some of their industries still try to do this, look at their car industry, highly unefficient, inferior quality and retro design characteristics are still advertised as being better. ???? What :bs:
BTW who or what is the fred campain, or should I rather not ask
I call it at home with a cold.
As i still spend way more on commercial audio gear than on electronic parts i haven't reached the pathetic stage, yet.
I merely meant technical exchange/interaction.
A factor for the US semi-industry to be catching up looks to be that the Japanese manufacturers seem to be loosing their interest in discrete semi-conductor parts, high power components in particular.
Just some rebellious support for my friend Phreddie-D.
As i still spend way more on commercial audio gear than on electronic parts i haven't reached the pathetic stage, yet.
I merely meant technical exchange/interaction.
A factor for the US semi-industry to be catching up looks to be that the Japanese manufacturers seem to be loosing their interest in discrete semi-conductor parts, high power components in particular.
Just some rebellious support for my friend Phreddie-D.
Attachments
I checked Toshiba's web site and the replacement for 2SA968/2SC2238 pair is 2SA1837/2SC4793 which has the same SOA. As pointed before by AndrewT, 2SA1930/2SC5171 pair doesn't have comparable SOA to 2SA968/2SC2238 pair. My bad...
The logo on Filburt's 2SC2238 is the same as the one on all Toshiba devices I purchased in Japan in recent years. My 20 years old 2SC2238 (and others) have the logo same as what jacco posted. One concern about Filburt's 2SC2238 is the order of markings:
Many of TO-220 devices (if not all), like 2SA1837/2SC4793, has markings as follows:
T (new Toshiba logo, as seen in Filburt's image)
Device name (with omission of "2S")
Lot #
Line for Pb free device
I only checked the spec sheets and acutual devices for a couple of TO-220 devices but all were the same. Does anybody know more on this issue??
Thanks!
The logo on Filburt's 2SC2238 is the same as the one on all Toshiba devices I purchased in Japan in recent years. My 20 years old 2SC2238 (and others) have the logo same as what jacco posted. One concern about Filburt's 2SC2238 is the order of markings:
Many of TO-220 devices (if not all), like 2SA1837/2SC4793, has markings as follows:
T (new Toshiba logo, as seen in Filburt's image)
Device name (with omission of "2S")
Lot #
Line for Pb free device
I only checked the spec sheets and acutual devices for a couple of TO-220 devices but all were the same. Does anybody know more on this issue??
Thanks!
Filburt,
sorry, I did not mean to blame you, just was wondering why 2SC2238/2SA968 were originally chosen here. 2SC5171/2SA1930 are faster, have lower Cob, widely preferred and surely better sounding. On the other hand, with 2SC2238/2SA968 you don´t risk running into oscillation problem.
sorry, I did not mean to blame you, just was wondering why 2SC2238/2SA968 were originally chosen here. 2SC5171/2SA1930 are faster, have lower Cob, widely preferred and surely better sounding. On the other hand, with 2SC2238/2SA968 you don´t risk running into oscillation problem.
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.