Marshall JCM800 2205 Circuit Breaker

[bobloblaws]

I have a Canadian version of the Marshall JCM800 2205 (50W head) here and the owner says the breaker is tripping anytime he uses it with any sort of attenuator. I'm not sure about the current rating though. In the picture below it appears to be either 6A (which seems high to me) or 1.6A (which seems low). Any opinions on what the proper replacement would be?

[g1]

It's a 1.6A Hold. They are generally slower than a slow-blow so it's maybe rated a bit lower than what a fuse would be there.

[bobloblaws]

It's a 1.6A Hold. They are generally slower than a slow-blow so it's maybe rated a bit lower than what a fuse would be there.

Awesome, thanks!

[Tom Phillips]

It's a 1.6A Hold. They are generally slower than a slow-blow so it's maybe rated a bit lower than what a fuse would be there.

I agree. However, is the amp set up for 240V line voltage? 1.6A would seem to be correct for 240V line but low for 120V line. Maybe something strange occurred during this amp's history.

[g1]

1.6A would seem to be correct for 240V line but low for 120V line.

Maybe lowish but it is what they used here.
The schematic shows a 2A mains fuse for CSA/Semko versions (1A for 240V).
https://www.drtube.com/schematics/marshall/4210.gif

If he is running it hard into an attenuator and it is blowing because of the rating, I would suggest he dial it back a bit, rather than upping the breaker. They don't exceed that rating during regular use.

[Tom Phillips]

Maybe lowish but it is what they used here. The schematic shows a 2A mains fuse for CSA/Semko versions (1A for 240V)...

I agree that he shouldn't just increase the Fuse/Circuit breaker value.
There is that fact that CSA reduced the original value of the fuse as originally used by Marshall.
The best practice would be to do some investigations to make sure that everything else is right in the amp. Could also determine that the circuit breaker is performing properly.

[g1]

Could also determine that the circuit breaker is performing properly.

Agree. That's what I meant about 'exceed that rating', rather than just the breaker popping. I did think that the 'with any sort of attenuator' requirement was kind of a giveaway.
But I'll refer myself to my signature line.