Speaking of the color screen (a non problem in my opinion), the following
new rig from ICOM might throw more gasoline on this fire . . .
http://www.qsl.net/ab4oj/icom/ic7000.html
73, Duane
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 04:19:08 +0200 "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
<gsm@mendelson.com> writes:
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 08:45:45PM -0500, Ron Notarius wrote:
> > For example: Remember the Argosy. Back in the day, I could put
> an Argosy
> > and a TS-430S side by side. I'd estimate that about 90% of the
> time, if you
> > gave it an honest evaluation on receive, it was at worst a wash,
> but usually
> > the Argosy could hear things better with less noise. And if you
> put both
> > rigs on the same station & antenna & switched back and forth, I
> can not ever
> > recall a single time that the guy on the other end said the 430
> sounded
> > better than the 525; either there was no difference or the other
> way around.
> > So why did we sell about ten or more 430's to every 525? Power
> output. 100
> > W out vs. 50. And don't bother telling me that it's only a 3dB
> difference,
> > and that you probably wouldn't notice that on the air -- because
> it's true.
> > But people who were willing to accept the lack of bells &
> whistles, or of a
> > digital readout (until the 525D came out), or of 12 & 17 meter
> coverage kept
> > stopping dead at the power output. Maybe it was a convenient
> excuse for
> > some, but the bottom line is that I kept hearing "if only the
> Argosy put out
> > a 100 Watts!"
>
> Ron, I disagree completely. The 430 was an entirely different rig.
> The
> Argosy was an old timer by that time. It was a PTO tuned, analog
> rig
> while the 430 was a digital, PLL synthesized rig, with many more
> features.
>
> The 430 had a general coverage receiver, the Argosy did not. The
> 430
> had two "VFOs" built in and could work split the Argosy could not.
> The 430 received and transmitted in AM and FM the Argosy could not.
> The 430 had 8 memories the Argosy had none.
>
> Quite simply the 430 was the future of ham radio at the time and
> the
> Argosy was its past.
>
> I'm not saying the Argosy was a bad rig, I'm just saying that
> comparing
> it to a 430 was not fair. The 430 had in one box features that an
> Argosy
> user could only dream of.
>
> It's a matter of company focus. Kenwood went with the do everything
> you can and do some of them well concept, TenTec went with the do
> few things, but be the best.
>
> Geoff.
>
> --
> Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com
> N3OWJ/4X1GM
> IL Voice: 972-544-608-069 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice:
> 1-215-821-1838
> VoIP (Email to schedule) Free World Dialup: 523178 Skype:
> gsmendelson
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
--------------------------------------
Duane Calvin, AC5AA
Austin, Texas
http://home.austin.rr.com/ac5aa
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|