John,
I've done extensive CW contesting with two Pro2s (and before that a Pro).
In general, they do very well. However, I've also operated a number of CW
contests with a K3 and a Pro2 in SO2R, and then it's clear that the K3 is a
much better run radio. The main difference is the digital artifacts (maybe
IMD products) that you hear in the passband on the Pro or Pro2 in crowded
conditions; by contrast, the K3 is absolutely clean, and you just don't hear
anything unless it's really in the passband (e.g., sometimes keyclicks from
an adjacent station). The difference is less noticeable on SSB, where most
of the junk that you hear really is splatter in the passband of the
receiver.
73, Andy, AE6Y, P49Y
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of John Geiger
>> Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2011 8:47 PM
>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com; ICOM Reflector; okdxa@mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Icom 756PRO as a CW contest rig
>>
>> How does the Icom 756PRO do under heavy CW QRM? Some of the eham.net
>> reviews weren't very flattering in terms of CW performance.
>>
>> 73s John AA5JG
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|