Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Receiver\s+Performance\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Receiver\s+Performance\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Receiver performance (score: 1): Author: earlham@radiks.net (Iowaguy); Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 11:33:47 -0600; Have been watching the thread on receiver performance. . . this is an important item of interest to virtually all of us. I, along with many others, use the FT1000MP. Generally speaking, it's a good r; /archives//html/Topband/2000-01/msg00239.html (7,093 bytes)
2. Topband: Receiver Performance (score: 1): Author: kn4lf@webtv.net (Thomas Giella); Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2000 08:22:45 -0500 (EST); On the subject of receiver performance, my old FT-101EE hears weaker signals better on 160 meters (lower noise floor) then any PLL or DDS rig I've ever owned. Thomas Giella KN4LF Plant City, Fl. kn4l; /archives//html/Topband/2000-01/msg00252.html (6,981 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]