In a message dated 5/5/00 7:42:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com 

>  Original Poster: "Dan Kunkel" <kunk77-at-juno-dot-com> 
>  Malcolm,
>  Although I have no personal experience in operating a Magnifier Coil as
>  of yet (it is a future project though), I have been led to believe that
>  they are many times more effeicent than a standard 1/4 wave coil for
>  several reasons...


>  1) Extremely tight coupling between Lp and Ls

It is true that the coupling between Lp and Ls is very tight, but
the overall coupling (which is what matters), is about the same
as a normal Tesla coil.

I'm sorry to report that you've been mislead about the magnifier's 
efficiency.  If a magnifier is properly built it might be 10% (ballpark)
more efficient than a normal TC, but even that has never been proven
in a working model.

>  2) Extremely low quench times (Tesla used a maggy with about 50,000 bps
>  as I understand), this is to keep as much energy in the secondary as
>  possible by reducing each bang size. For better quench you can wire a
>  multiple gap in series with the rotary.

Tesla never used 50,000 bps.  Reducing the bang size does not help
to keep energy in the secondary.  A multiple gap in series with the
rotary will indeed help the quench, but will not help the overall coil's
efficiency.  I have obtained the best results in both standard TC's and
magnifiers by using a very low bps around 120 bps.  Magnifiers and
normal TC's are actually very similar in theory, operation and 

>  3) Tuning the secondary coil to the 1/8 wave (less voltage, but a lot
>  more current), hence more overall power to drive the tertiary)

This 1/8 wave idea has no real bearing on TC design.

>  4) Tertiary is not bogged down at all by the flux from the Lp and Ls

This is incorrect also.  Flux does not cause "bogging down".  

>  5)Tertiary is responcible for all the VSWR, not the secondary

There is basically no VSWR in a TC.
>  Why would Tesla even bother building and operating these coils if he
>  didn't think that there was some advantage? These after all were the
>  coils he was going to use to send wireless electricity to power the
>  world.

I suspect that Tesla used the magnifier arrangement to more easily
fit the coil into his buildings or installations.  Keep in mind that Tesla
did not have the advanced measurement equipment to analyze his
coils in those days.  (he had to guess at times what was happening.)
We now know a *lot* more than Tesla did about these coils.
>  As far as the 22 mega volt RQ coil, those are his claims, I am just
>  repeating. Another advantage to the magnifier coil is that it is able to
>  process a much higher voltage without frying to a crisp. 

The 22 MV figure is not realistic. 
Since the magnifier uses 3 coils, the voltage is divided somewhat
between the coils, so yes, each coil can withstand a certain proportion
of the voltage, but when all the components are considered together,
there's not really much difference.  It is true that the resonator can be
smaller for a given spark length.

>  As I mentioned
>  before I have no actual hands on experience yet, so the advantages may
>  not be quite as bold...but there is only one way to find out! :-) I am
>  curious though if you have built one of these coils?

I have built a number of these magnifier coils, and what I say above
is based on my findings, and the findings of others who have also
built them and analyzed them.  The ideas you have expressed have
been disproved some time ago.  There are still a lot of TC myths
out there.  It may surprise you to hear that at one time I thought that
all the things you said were correct, but I learned otherwise.

TC's.....   a voyage of discovery.

John Freau

>  Dan