Ford Peterson's recent posting lists some variables that can affect A/B
transceiver comparisons, and have prompted the following observations..
It probably is a practical impossibility to come up with a valid real-world
ranking of transceivers, given the limited resources of the typical ham.
Time of year, propagation conditions, location, antenna types and
condition, operator skills and preferences, modifications made, all play a
critical role. We are not the U.S. military, for instance, which can spend
hundreds of thousands of dollars on extensive field testing of new equipment.
The best that can be expected, perhaps, is for each of us to try out
several transceivers over a considerable period of time and see which ones
work best for us. The choices we make may not be consistent with the
choices of other hams, and they may not reflect the numbers and opinions
published by the ARRL or other labs, which are of limited value in any
event. No, our choices of "favorite" transceivers simply represent what
works best over time, at a particular location, for each of us.
To attempt to make anything more out of such personal findings, to arrange
the transceivers into a "ranking" that ostensibly may have general
applicability, would seem to take us well beyond our competence.
73,
John, W3ULS
|