jaymen

Hello all,
I'm trying to repair an 1963 F&M Matador transmitter and need the schematic if anyone has it.

Thanks in advance,
Jay

grotto2

My Feedback: (2)

That's a tough one, Jay. I've never been able to locate one.
But as I recall, the RF section is very similar to the Digital 5.
I presume that's the trouble area, yes?
The AF oscillators usually run okay.
-Ron

W.E. Fan

Hello Jay,

Please don't hold your breath, but I may be able to provide the very schematic you are looking for. I should know how it will pan out within the next few days.

Doug

grotto2

My Feedback: (2)

I'm interested, too, Doug!

jaymen

Rf good, AF good, modulator bad! I replaced a small impeadance matching transformer(open secondary) and it worked for several hours before another stage after it quit. But it has something to do with the balance transformer which mixes the high and low tones in sumultanious opperation, and I need the schematic to see how it works and the signal path ( board is really tight layout, and has more transistors than most designs).

W.E. Fan

Jaymen/Grotto 2,

I have the schematics now (jpg file), plus some extra article info from the Swedish language magazine where this info was printed. I am new to RCU and could not find your email addresses.If you can post them hereit would help.

Doug

Live Wire

You probably have a filter Cap bad by the transformer. Most of these old caps go bad with age! (electrolitic) (spl) and some swell or leak, Just something to check.

ukengineman

Doug, I have two F&M Matador Tx's and would also appreciate copies of the schematic plus any other information. I have sent you a PM with my email address.

Thanks, Alan

jaymen

My e-mail is [email protected]

I am currently at the bench working on the Matador, got the Pace desoldering iron and soldering pencil along with my Tektronix scope fired up. Any help is greatly appreciated. I'll look at the 2.5 uF ( love those obsolete values, eh? ) cap that is tied to the line between the Oscillator and RF amp stages as suggested above......

And found a bad cap at the output of the transformer (open/ weak) but replacing it it only improved the modulation from 10% to 30% , and it needs to be 95% so something else is still wrong.

TIA Jay.

grotto2

My Feedback: (2)

WE Fan:
Sent you PM.

grotto2

My Feedback: (2)

W.E. Fan :
Thanks for the schematic! I can assure you it is being put to good use.
Please pass our thanks to your source.
-Ron

ukengineman

Doug, thanks to you and all parties involved. The schematics will be a big help in the servicing of my two Matadors.
Alan

jaymen

Thanks,
I was not able to get enough resolution on them, as when I blew them up to read them, they pixelated.......oh well!
I have never seen those odd-ball symbols for transistors used before,; something new every day!

W.E. Fan

Jay,

I thinkI know the answer to your query regarding the odd transistor symbols. There are two notes on the Tx schematic. They read...

Transmitter- Matador offers so much of interest that Bo Dryséllus has taken the liberty to draft the schematics shown here with reservations against any errors. Such (errors) can as you are awareeasily be done considering the variety of ingredients.

Receiver- The schematics for the Midas receiver.The uninitiated may not have that much use of the drawing, but should at least be able to notice the new transistor symbols.

If the reviewer (Mr. Dryséllus) could "reverse engineer" the Tx board, I would suspect he was not your average hobbyist. I do believe he was (is?) a rather competent engineer, quite possibly working for ASEA. I believe this, since he mentions "the new transistor symbols". I know that when transistors began to see industrial use in this country that there was some uncertainty about how to draft them in a schematic. I also seem to recall that ASEA, as a manufacturer of utility control and protection systems,did indeed at one time usea peculiarsymbol like this- while perhaps nobody else did. The ASEA-concept was that it should be evident the transistor could be used as a "valve" (or switch if you like). I also seem to recall the "ASEA" transistor symbol was used for arather short time, and that ASEA did indeed later on adopt the more normal looking symbols we use today.

Doug

grotto2

My Feedback: (2)

I have this alternate schematic drawn by Alan Holmes. It disagrees with the Bo Dryséllus schematic in some areas.

Who knows which one's right?

As Jay has pointed out in the past, RC schematics were often protected by on-purpose errors.

W.E. Fan

Alan,

I suppose if two different people "reverse egineer" the same product that differences should be expected. I cannot tell which schematic that is correct since I don't have any Matador Tx that I can check. What I can say is that I am 100% sure (and then some) that Mr. Dryséllus would not deliberately have altered or changed his schematic. He had no reason to, but he did have a motive to make it as accurate as he could for publication purposes. Then again, if there were two or more versions of the Matador produced, then you could certainly expect the schematics to differ.

Doug

iflyj3

My Feedback: (7)

RC transmitters in the 60's often had different circuits in the same case and called the same model. ACE had at least three versions of the Pulse Commander, a single channel pulse trany. I have seen schematics with on-purpose errors in the schematics. However, those errors didn't hamper repairing one.

W.E. Fan

Dan,

Thanks for your comment. It may seem odd that e.g. ACE would manufacture different versions without changing the model name, but at that time it probably made sense. I don't think there were that many ACE authorized service/repair centres then. If a customer had a problem he would probably send his radio to ACE R/C. ACE in turn would not have had any problems in identifying which particular version it was. It was not just ACE that did this, World Engines in Cincinnati did it too. I believe there were at least a dozen differentversions of the S-16 servo, but they were all designated at S-16.Some of the S-16 amplifiers I have seen have used eitherNE543K, XR2261, XR2262, NE544 orJapanese made (Mitsumi?) IC's. Then there were different amplifierversions based on the same type of IC. As an example,I believe I have seen three different configurations of amplifiers based on the NE543K.Combine this with different motors, different pots and different gear trains, and you get a mess. But......all these various servos were all designatedas S-16!!!!!

Doug

ukengineman

You may find there are not as many differences between my schematic and the one provided by Doug as at first appears. Much of the apparent difference is due to the different ways we laid out the schematics. The difference that caught my eye was the resistor to ground connected to the junction of the RFC and the 10uF capacitor on the PA stage (missing on my schematic). When I get a moment I will take another look at one of my Matadors. Of course manufacturers often make changes to the design of products during their lifetime.
Alan