How long has Kenwood been out of the running for the "preferred rig status"
for contesting?
Was there ever a model that was good for a *real* work out?
TNX,
Bob
KE5CTY (old calls WB5ZQU - WY5L)
http://www.qsl.net/ke5cty/
Code may be dying but the pioneering spirit that put the code there in
the first place is still going strong.
----- Original Message -----
From: "KE5CTY Bob" <rtnmi@sbcglobal.net>
To: "'David Thompson'" <thompson@mindspring.com>; "'CQ Contest'"
<cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] FT-920 - IC-718
>
> I want to thank *everyone* for *all* the responses to this question.
> >From them I have continued on with my own research as well - which has
> lead me to some *very* interesting conclusions:
>
> I am not sure I have made a final decision on a rig yet, however, one
> thing has become apparent through the evidence presented:
>
> According to the following link
> (which tells what year a model was manufactured):
> http://www.ozgear.com.au/amateurinfo/equipment_ages.htm
> which in turn references this link as it's primary resource:
> http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/prodrev.html
>
> Coupling the feedback I got from you guys (which I consider to be a
> *very* good source if not then - THE TOP SOURCES - of bottom line
> experience and knowledge of equipment operation) *with competition
> scores to prove out the claims if nothing else does*
>
> "figures don't lie - but liars figure" --
>
> Along with the fact that contesting is the most grueling test of
> operator and machine therefore the most calibrated meter.
>
> Meaning who cares what the spec sheet says and the marketing boys (who
> most of which have never even tweaked a knob except on their Mercedes
> car radios) say - if it can't be *proved* out in the field.
>
> Conclusion:
>
> The Amateur Community has been *FAILED MISERABLY* by the manufactures
> and suppliers and for many years.
>
> According to the manufacture dates and the demand (preferred radios) -
> there has been no *practical* noticeable change in equipment (change
> worth having from a practical - operational standpoint) for almost 9
> YEARS only smoke and mirrors (cosmetics) with the *most* preferred rig
> being almost 10 years old in technology according to manufacture output:
>
> Kenwood; TS-830S HF Transceiver;Manfact'd approx May 1981
> Kenwood; TS-850S 160-10 Meter Transceiver;Manfact'd approx Jul 1991
> ICOM; IC-728 MF/HF Transceiver;Manfact'd approx Feb 1993
> Yaesu; FT-1000MP MF/HF Transceiver;Manfact'd approx Apr 1996
> Yaesu; FT-920 MF/HF/6 Meter Transceiver;Manfact'd approx Oct 1997
>
> (((The Dead Years)))
>
> ???? 2005 ????
>
> As a result from what I can see the price for these rigs has stayed
> inflated (due to demand) to a ridiculous market value - which really
> instead should be money a Ham would be spending on *new* technology not
> 10 year old technology over and over again and again.
>
> I also conclude and assume from the data (since) only HF rigs have been
> preferred) contesting is not *really* done at the VHF/UHF or SHF levels
> interestingly enough which is where most of the manufacturers with newer
> technology (newer rigs) seems to be focusing their output.
>
> 7&3 fer nw,
> Bob
> KE5CTY (old calls WB5ZQU - WY5L)
> 10X# 37210
> FP#-1141
> http://www.qsl.net/ke5cty/
> Code may be taking a back seat for now, but the pioneering spirit that
> put the code there in the first place is out front of it all.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of David Thompson
> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 12:04 PM
> To: CQ Contest
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] FT-920 - IC-718
>
>
> The IC-718 is (as described ) an entry level rig. A casual op will find
> it great.
>
> The FT-920 is another story. Having a built in monitor, DVK/speech
> processor for SSB, and dual frequency readout make a good economy
> contest/DX transceiver. Its one of two rigs of choice on 6 too. With
> filters available from Yaesu and INRAd it hold its own and it seems to
> have good overload sensitivity so nearby loud signals don't affect it.
> Its far better for 75 and 40 SSB split than my older FT-980 or several
> ICOMs I have used. The clicks problem that shows up in the 1000MP
> series does not appear to be a problem either.
>
> The problems are there (its an ecomony rig) such as limited menu
> selection, hidden menus that are not well publized, the DVK is hidden
> behind the VFO B tuning, and on SSB I find that you need to turn off the
> equalizer and add bass for best results. K4EA told me it sounded thin
> and high pitched with the EQ on. (using the Heil HC-4 element which
> works great on the FT-980, FT-1000D and MP).
>
> Don't know about the TS850. I remember GW3YDX saying it was terrible on
> 160 in QRM and loud signals (something the TS870 cures). But W4AN swore
> by his so I guess its what you are used too.
>
> Dave K4JRB
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|