TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] Jupiter vs 746 PRO

To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Jupiter vs 746 PRO
From: Curt Krelic <k3ey@yahoo.com>
Reply-to: tentec@contesting.com
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:40:45 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
I read all the replies to this thread and what I find is this.

 

This thread is biased, read it again with an open mind if you believe otherwise.

 

Reminds me of a short wave info-commerical I heard once.

 

An old guy was selling magnets you wear for health problems. Callers would call 
in only to have the old timer tell them in every instance and no matter what 
the particular woe the caller was complaining about, the answer was to wear his 
magnets.

 

This thread and some others on here go the same way. I do own a TT radio and 
why I am on here, but sometimes this reflector sounds like the good old boys at 
the gun club all agreeing that gun control is terrible, this is one of those 
times.

 

There now we have some input as to what the term balance means...

 

Long Live TT

 

Curt/k3ey 


Bruce Multhup <brucem@woh.rr.com> wrote:
Need some help guys. I am think of purchasing the Icom 746 PRO but I 
have heard about all the transmit problems. So several comments have led 
me to the Jupiter radio. I have never owned a Ten Tec before so I really 
don't know much about them. My concern is that the specs for the Jupiter 
on receive sensitivity is not as good as the 746 PRO. This concerns me 
because I like to work 80 meters DX and signals are not that strong. Any 
comments folks and thanks.

Bruce
N8CZZ


_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>