[Jeffhs]

I bought a solid state RCA XL-100 19" TV new in 1999, and have had it repaired twice (at my expense; the warranty did not cover the cost of these repairs) for the same problem: the RF port snapped off the tuner PC board. (By contrast, I have a Zenith 19" color set which has had no problems whatsoever in eight years.) My RCA has another problem, which I have chosen to ignore for now since the set works well enough on digital cable with a cable box: the EEPROM IC is defective, causing poor pictures on certain channels. When a technician from the local TV shop told me it would cost over $100 to replace the defective chip, reprogram it and all, I decided to leave the set as it is, since it makes a good picture using the cable box.

I used to think RCA television sets were among the best on the market, since RCA pioneered monochrome television in the late '40s and color TV in the mid-'50s. Now, I'm not so sure, especially after reading Chad Hauris's post a few minutes ago. The original XL-100s, while probably not as bad as Thomson's new sets, were apparently not of the same high quality as RCA's earlier TVs. Chad mentioned that the slide potentiometers on the early XL-100s wear out quickly and that the lever on which the control knob fits has a tendency to snap off after a period of time, not to mention the picture quality of the original XL100s being inferior to RCA's tube-powered receivers and the circuit-board problems. And this was in the '70s! I think RCA was on the downgrade long before Thomson stepped in and moved the company overseas; the downhill run began with the first XL-100s and has continued ever since.

RCA was obviously proud of its original XL-100 line, in which the XL-100 stood for extended life, 100-percent solid state. Today, the XL-100 label means nothing, as I found out several years ago from an RCA representative at the company's U. S. headquarters in Indianapolis, Indiana. The term "XL-100" on my set, and all other RCA televisions of the same era (late 1990s), was simply a model designation; it was dropped shortly thereafter.

I believe RCA may find itself out of business eventually if the company does not shape up and start building their TVs to last, as they once did when RCA's headquarters were in Camden, New Jersey, U. S. A. and until the XL-100 era began. I have read on RCA's website how great the pictures are on their TVs, especially the digital models. Sure, the pictures are probably good (excellent, even) when the sets are brand new, but a few weeks or months later the problems begin--and often do not stop; some of these problems are catastrophic failures as well. A friend of mine told me his parents' late-1990s vintage RCA table model, with Guide Plus and all the bells and whistles, blew a picture tube after only two years. They wound up getting a new set, since the repair technician told them the cost of replacing the CRT, with labor and all, would be as much as or more than what they would pay for a new TV.

I just purchased a three-year service contract for my already nearly 4-year-old RCA XL-100. I am hoping I don't have to use it but, given the number of repair problems these sets, not to mention current production models, have had and continue to have, I think the odds are against me all the way.