[wtsuppr415]

Is this bad wear? It is from a 1900 hour NEC 9PG. The other two tubes are much better.


I'm looking to buy this projector, how much do you think it is worth?



Thanks a lot for the help

 

[Clarence]

It's not BAD, but it's far from good. We've seen worse.


It will be visible in the projected image, unless you set it up so the raster stays in the worn area.


But that's the worst part of that tube... it was originally setup WAAAY too small.. only using half of the original phosphor area. If the original setup had been done correctly, more phosphor would've been available, yielding a brighter image, meaning that the contrast wouldn't have to be cranked, and that wear wouldn't be a problem after only 1900 hours.


My valuation for a 9PG with tubes like that would be ~$1000.


If you get it, it might be a good candidate to intentionally wear the unworn area to even out the phosphor... that way you can expand the raster out to the edges.

 

[Curt Palme]

Actually the area used is pretty typical as per the NEC set up book. THat's why I have to retube almost every NEC that I get in, the manuals were about 7% off on the throw distance.


Curt

 

[techman707]

While the wear pattern is very light, it's also VERY small, so it may screw up setting up the projector to maximize the phosphor use.

 

[pcCinema]

I would gamble that the wear is worse than what shows in that picture.

It looks like there is enough light on the tube face that we are not truly seeing how dark it is.


Only if the price is killer...


Troy

 

[gn2]

While the wear isn't all that bad, I'd bet its the green tube, so all your whites will be pink, no matter what you do.

A rebuilt tube is $500., maybe you shouldn't pay alot for the projector...