Winegard HDP269 4-Pin Amplifier Module - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 9 Old 06-16-2014, 02:37 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Calaveras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mountain Ranch
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 293 Post(s)
Liked: 116
Winegard HDP269 4-Pin Amplifier Module

I have a Winegard HDP269 that has a mostly blown out (2 dB gain) amplifier module. All other parts seem to be fine. I can replace the part if I could locate one but it is marked with only "A." It looks to be 75 ohms in/out, 4 pins - In, Out/+Supply, 2 ground pins. It is 0.16" in diameter. Anyone have an idea how to identify this part?

I realize this may be a proprietary part and not possible to identify or buy.
Calaveras is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 9 Old 06-17-2014, 03:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tylerSC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mauldin SC, 29607
Posts: 4,425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 269 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Perhaps you may have to purchase a new version if you can still find a 269 preamp available. Because I think Winegard may have replaced all of their amps with the LNA-200. But the 269 was lower gain and supposedly resistant to overload. Although perhaps a bit noisy. I guess the LNA-200 is supposed to better satisfy a variety of circumstances, with medium gain, low noise, and overload resistance. According to their description.
tylerSC is offline  
post #3 of 9 Old 06-17-2014, 05:33 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Calaveras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mountain Ranch
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 293 Post(s)
Liked: 116
The LNA200 is a disappointment. It's been measured by a few people including myself and it doesn't meet the claimed noise figure.... not even close. It's about 4 dB on low VHF, 4 to 6 dB on high VHF and averages around 2 dB on UHF. I don't know how they're claiming high input values as the 1 dB compression point is about the same as most preamps.

The selection of components for OTA is becoming smaller and smaller and high performance items are becoming scarce.
Calaveras is online now  
post #4 of 9 Old 06-18-2014, 07:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tylerSC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mauldin SC, 29607
Posts: 4,425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 269 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calaveras View Post
The LNA200 is a disappointment. It's been measured by a few people including myself and it doesn't meet the claimed noise figure.... not even close. It's about 4 dB on low VHF, 4 to 6 dB on high VHF and averages around 2 dB on UHF. I don't know how they're claiming high input values as the 1 dB compression point is about the same as most preamps.

The selection of components for OTA is becoming smaller and smaller and high performance items are becoming scarce.
The original Channel Master and Winegard preamps that were once well regarded have now been replaced with newer versions. Although the newer Channel Master 7778 and 7777 preamps have actually been analyzed as good performers, despite the change in specifications, and lack of the dual inputs. And the Channel Master distribution amps are good also,and can be used as a preamp with a remote power supply. As for Winegard, the LNA-100 inline amp was analyzed as a better performer than the 200, with more accurate low noise specs.
tylerSC is offline  
post #5 of 9 Old 06-19-2014, 09:06 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Calaveras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mountain Ranch
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 293 Post(s)
Liked: 116
Do you have a link to measurements of the new CM7777? I could not find anything, only one comment about the noise figure not being so good.

I have a CM3410 that I measured and it was very good. I only measured it on UHF but the gain was very flat at just over 15 dB and the noise figure ran 1.9 to 2.4 dB which I thought was very good. It would make decent broadband preamp and would probably be a good replacement for the HDP269.
Calaveras is online now  
post #6 of 9 Old 06-19-2014, 01:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tylerSC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mauldin SC, 29607
Posts: 4,425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 269 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calaveras View Post
Do you have a link to measurements of the new CM7777? I could not find anything, only one comment about the noise figure not being so good.

I have a CM3410 that I measured and it was very good. I only measured it on UHF but the gain was very flat at just over 15 dB and the noise figure ran 1.9 to 2.4 dB which I thought was very good. It would make decent broadband preamp and would probably be a good replacement for the HDP269.
Well the new CM-7777 is more powerful than needed in most situations, so the CM-7778 is probably a better choice. But I believe it was Adtech who has analyzed the specs of the new CM amps, and said they were decent. But I don't want to misquote for him. Perhaps an updated thread regarding the new and currently available preamps would be helpful.
tylerSC is offline  
post #7 of 9 Old 06-20-2014, 04:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Digital Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 1,753
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calaveras View Post

I have a CM3410 that I measured and it was very good. . . . . .would probably be a good replacement for the HDP269.
I find the CM3410 to be a much better performer in strong signal areas than the HDP-269. I gave up on the HDP-269 when mine died. They seem overly sensitive to static buildup & nearby lightning strikes.
Digital Rules is online now  
post #8 of 9 Old 06-20-2014, 08:49 AM
Senior Member
 
ADTech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: St Louis
Posts: 495
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Chuck,

I posted some basic numbers for the new CM7777 in the Dallas thread in Feb of 13.

I installed that particular amp on my rooftop extended 91XG last September where it's still doing its job. Yeah, I needed the extra gain, I've got a lot of coax that I strung through the house ten years ago.

If you send me your email by PM, I'll send you the data that I pulled last year.

Tech support for Antennas Direct
ADTech is offline  
post #9 of 9 Old 06-20-2014, 01:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tylerSC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mauldin SC, 29607
Posts: 4,425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 269 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Rules View Post
I find the CM3410 to be a much better performer in strong signal areas than the HDP-269. I gave up on the HDP-269 when mine died. They seem overly sensitive to static buildup & nearby lightning strikes.
The Channel Master distribution amps are supposed to be very good at dealing with a mix of both strong and weak signals, and are resistant to overload. And they can be used as a preamp with a remote power supply.
tylerSC is offline  
Reply HDTV Technical
Gear in this thread - HDP269 by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off