Yo can count on qst to brag about any new Yaecomwood whether it deserves it or
not.
They also don't take manufacturers to task for mediocre transmitter imd figures
and
key clicks. This is inexcusable in light of today's crowded bands.
They will happily go on about useless bells and whistles though.
But, qst is about all we have and people need to do like you and read the
numbers
before believing any hype.
I thought my FT-100d had a decent [way better than expected] receiver [used at
home],
but small controls and menu this and menu that convinced me it wasn't that
useful in
my home station.
73,
Steve wd0ct
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Geiger" <johngeig@yahoo.com>
To: <yaesu@mailman.qth.net>; <yaesu@contesting.com>; <ft100@yahoogroups.com>;
<ft-100@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 1:33 PM
Subject: [Yaesu] FT897 Review-kind of confusing
> Was happy to hear that the FT897 review was up on the
> ARRL website, as I have been interested in this radio.
> After reading it, I dont think that I will be
> replacing my FT100D with it anytime soon. Yes the
> clamp on tuner and built in PS would be nice, and the
> extra CW keyer memories would also be nice, but that
> is about it. I spoke with a couple of Yaesu
> representatives at hamcomm last year about the FT897,
> and they said that the receiver performance would be
> about equal to the FT920. If the ARRL numbers are
> right, that was a great overstatement.
>
> Here is the most confusing statement in the QST
> review:
>
> "The two-tone, third-order IMD dynamic range comes in
> at about 90db at 20 khz signal spacing and the preamp
> off. When the spacing drops to 5 khz, the IMD DR
> measurement drops to around 67 db. Compare this 5 khz
> measurement to Yaesu's other recent 100 W radio with a
> handle, the high-end and much heavier FT1000 MP Mark V
> Field, and you will find similar performance. For a
> radio of its price class, the FT-897 does a very nice
> job of pulling out the weak ones in the presence of
> strong ones."
>
>
> Well, I didn't believe that bit about the 5 khz DR
> being comparable to the FT1000 MP MKV, so I went and
> looked at that review. Here is the actual comparison"
>
> 80m 20m
> Preamp OFF ON OFF ON
>
> FT897 68 67 67 65
> FT1000MP MKV 69 74 73 72
>
> I am not sure that those numbers are that comparable.
> For both bands with the preamp on the difference is
> 7DB, as the difference on 20 with the preamp off is
> 6DB. The Blocking DR difference at 5khz is 10 db or
> more, and the 3rd order IP difference is huge.
>
> With these differences, how in the world can the ARRL
> say that these rigs show similar performance? What am
> I missing? When the Kenwood TS2000 was first
> reviewed, and the ARRL started the 5khz testing, its
> 3rd IMD at 5 khz came in at 69db, and everyone started
> slamming it for having the worst performance ever on
> that measure. It did come out better than the FT897
> in that respect.
>
> Unfortunately the ARRL did not do a 5KHZ testing on
> the FT100, but look at the numbers for the FT100 vs
> FT897 at 20khz.
>
> Blocking DR
>
> 80m 20m 6m
> Preamp off on off on off on
> FT100 128 121 130 125 116 107
> FT897 111 109 109 106 116 107
>
> 3rd IMD DR
>
> 80m 20m 6m
> Preamp off on off on off on
> FT100 92 88 94 91 94 90
> FT897 91 90 89 86 89 95
>
>
> 3rd order IP
>
> 80m 20m 6m
> Preamp off on off on off on
> FT100 6.3 -5.7 10 4.2 20 1.2
> FT897 5.6 -1.9 1.3 -6.7 -3.5 -12
>
>
> I think the numbers speak for themselves. I will keep
> the FT100D over the FT897. In fact, the numbers for
> the FT897 are worse than the numbers for the FT847 in
> many areas, and I didn't think that was possible.
>
> 73s John NE0P
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
> http://platinum.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Yaesu mailing list
> Yaesu@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/yaesu
>
|