19K6400 Repro boards?

This is all great discussion! I have a burn free G07 tube sitting in a K6100 frame just waiting for these boards to get reproed, along with the heatsinks and yoke, of course. 😃

Has anyone discussed the specifics between the K6400, K6401, and K6402? Seems like some of the pictures referenced the K6401, but I could have that wrong.

Scott C.
 
This is all great discussion! I have a burn free G07 tube sitting in a K6100 frame just waiting for these boards to get reproed, along with the heatsinks and yoke, of course. ��

Has anyone discussed the specifics between the K6400, K6401, and K6402? Seems like some of the pictures referenced the K6401, but I could have that wrong.

Scott C.

Have a look at Page 32 of the manual Chad Posted
http://arcadecup.com/documents/19k6400_S.pdf
Go to Miscellaneous

From this thread
https://forums.arcade-museum.com/showthread.php?t=395350

19K6401 Uses a Rauland 19VNJP22 CRT (CR23)

19K6402 Uses an RCA 19VLTP22 CRT (CR23)

19K6400 would be the series (Either of the above)
 
Have a look at Page 32 of the manual Chad Posted
http://arcadecup.com/documents/19k6400_S.pdf
Go to Miscellaneous

From this thread
https://forums.arcade-museum.com/showthread.php?t=395350

19K6401 Uses a Rauland 19VNJP22 CRT (CR23)

19K6402 Uses an RCA 19VLTP22 CRT (CR23)

19K6400 would be the series (Either of the above)
Thanks for the clarifications. I pulled the manual and thoroughly enjoyed the read. Obviously still some questions regarding why WG made certain design choices, but still a nice improvement over the K6102. Looking at the P325 board, I can't help but think a remote adjustment board would have been a nice addition (not that any other WG had these yet).

Scott C.
 
Last edited:
Check this out!

This is the WG6400 Silk screen laid over a WG6400 HV board in reverse (From earlier in the thread)


This is the same WG6400 Silk screen laid over a WG6100 HV board in reverse


The boards are the same except for C901 being 1/2" over and lots of holes in the WG6400

This means we can use the existing WG6100 HV boards already

The only difference between WG6100 early P316, & later model WG6100 P329 is the latter has a HV cutout and it's adjustment.

Not a bad thing really

I could simply write up a checklist of what to do to use as a WG6400 HV

IE: link this, remove that.
I can drill the holes etc prior to shipping
 
all those extra holes had to be for better air flow, yes? I wonder if it would be worth while to do this to existing 6100 HVU's?

Its also interesting to see that the 6400 cage only runs off of the positive voltage from the deflection board. I wonder if thats got anything to do with the HVU's on the 6400's never blowing up.

FWIW, in the 3-5 years that we had 30+ 6400's in operation I only had to repair cold solder on them. Never once did a HVU blow up, no deflection issues, nothing.

That is a rock solid monitor.
 
all those extra holes had to be for better air flow, yes? I wonder if it would be worth while to do this to existing 6100 HVU's?

Its also interesting to see that the 6400 cage only runs off of the positive voltage from the deflection board. I wonder if thats got anything to do with the HVU's on the 6400's never blowing up.

FWIW, in the 3-5 years that we had 30+ 6400's in operation I only had to repair cold solder on them. Never once did a HVU blow up, no deflection issues, nothing.

That is a rock solid monitor.

Good point
The voltage is actually lower I guess
Instead of 54VDC (27/0/27), it runs on 46V (46/0)
IE: Less heat . . .
 
Good point
The voltage is actually lower I guess
Instead of 54VDC (27/0/27), it runs on 46V (46/0)
IE: Less heat . . .
Yes, less heat is usually a good thing. For these monitors it's a killer. It would be great if the K6100 P329 HV units could be succesfully modded to be K6400 P324 HV units, with the idea of them being more reliable.

Scott C.
 
Dez, FWIW, I've repaired several P329 HV units. They do exist. I see one of them for about every 20 other HV units
 
Dez, FWIW, I've repaired several P329 HV units. They do exist. I see one of them for about every 20 other HV units
Yes, and Dez's repro boards are based on the P329, so there are options for getting some of these converted.

Scott C.
 
Dez, FWIW, I've repaired several P329 HV units. They do exist. I see one of them for about every 20 other HV units

I was wondering if the P324 HV existed Pat :)
It's shown in the 6400 manual Chad posted

But all the pics shown seem to have a P316 fitted

So I asked the question, do the P324s actually exist given they are so close to the P316 design

Hopefully that was clearer
 
Has this been confirmed through other sources (IE. Other K6100/K6400 gurus here)? I think you're correct, but it never hurts to confirm.

Scott C.
 
Last edited:
Has this been confirmed through over sources (IE. Other K6100/K6400 gurus here)? I think you're correct, but it never hurts to confirm.

Scott C.

Mark Shostak from Cinelabs references the 6400 right alongside the 6100 in the installation guide for the replacement flyback he developed, and that's good enough for me.

Tom McClintock also sprinkles references to the 6400's similarity to the 6100 throughout his FAQ.

Finally, I just received one of those NOS flybacks, and it is labeled with part number 53X0487-2, which exactly matches the part number in the WG 6400 Service Manual.

So, as the magic 8 ball might say, "signs point to YES"

Now the final question is the impedance and resistance of the yoke. I think we need a direct measurement for that. Hopefully the inner windings are normal, and it's just the outer winding that would need to be redone by hand (nice work on counting the turns).
 
Last edited:
Mark Shostak from Cinelabs references the 6400 right alongside the 6100 in the installation guide for the replacement flyback he developed, and that's good enough for me.

Tom McClintock also sprinkles references to the 6400's similarity to the 6100 throughout his FAQ.

Finally, I just received one of those NOS flybacks, and it is labeled with part number 53X0487-2, which exactly matches the part number in the WG 6400 Service Manual.

So, as the magic 8 ball might say, "signs point to YES"

Now the final question is the impedance and resistance of the yoke. I think we need a direct measurement for that. Hopefully the inner windings are normal, and it's just the outer winding that would need to be redone by hand (nice work on counting the turns).
Great to hear. Thanks.

Scott C.
 
Mark Shostak from Cinelabs references the 6400 right alongside the 6100 in the installation guide for the replacement flyback he developed, and that's good enough for me.

Tom McClintock also sprinkles references to the 6400's similarity to the 6100 throughout his FAQ.

Finally, I just received one of those NOS flybacks, and it is labeled with part number 53X0487-2, which exactly matches the part number in the WG 6400 Service Manual.

So, as the magic 8 ball might say, "signs point to YES"

Now the final question is the impedance and resistance of the yoke. I think we need a direct measurement for that. Hopefully the inner windings are normal, and it's just the outer winding that would need to be redone by hand (nice work on counting the turns).

Thanks for this Douglas
I also wonder about the T901.
Seeing the P316 HV board is used in the 6400 & 6100 you would think it's pretty likely they're the same
 
Last edited:
Hi Guys
Years ago I mapped out the early WG6100 "P314" Deflection, but never released it.
But I still had the PCB file

The WG6400 Deflection is derived from that P314 board
It is very close in design

Here is both silkscreens at once on top of the OLD WG6100 P314 Deflection board
Yellow if the P314
Orange is the P322


Then we have the P314 Silk screen removed, so only the silkscreen from Chad's Manual, over the top of the OLD P314 board from years ago


They are very close, so easy to modify and make a new WG6400 version

Only the top end is different :)
 
That is wonderful news!

I assume the later P327 IP changes can be integrated into the P322 K6400 deflection PCB. It seems strange that WG would redesign the deflection board to remove the IP.

Scott C.
 
It looks to me like it's on the interface board.
Ah, that makes sense. I looked at the schematics previously, but when responding to you I completely forgot about the interface board. 😐

Scott C.
 
Over the last few nights I have been working on the new LV section for the deflection board

Even though the WG6400s are seen as reliable, I think the LV section should still be modernized
The old design is still the unstable design like in the WG6100 but with a larger voltage zener

It's relative I think, there are a lot less 6400s out there to hear any horror stories

I have a solution I think. I would like to test it before posting up the circuit
 
Back
Top Bottom