I'll gladly test one for free! I figure it should take, oh, about 18-24
months to really put an Orion through it's paces...
...hey, it's worth a try...
73, ron wn3vaw
And now, the 2002 Version of the Jack Bogut Memorial Joke:
Why are they serving beer at PNC Park this year?
Because for the first time in 9 years, the Pirates DIDN'T lose the Opener!
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Ellington <N4LQ@igLou.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>; John Rippey <w3uls@3n.net>
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Performance Measures in QST
One thing TenTec can do to spread the word on the Orion is make sure they
somehow put the Orion in the hands of some top Dxers. If the rig is as good
as it appears to be, those guys will be the best, world wide, advertising
you could hope for.
Of course nowdays, news spreads so fast via the internet that advertising is
almost unnecessary. Maybe what we need is a "Consumers Report" for ham radio
equipment.
Steve
N4LQ
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Rippey" <w3uls@3n.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 12:04 AM
Subject: [TenTec] Performance Measures in QST
> In a recent posting, N4NT wrote:
>
> "The ARRL can run all the tests in the world comparing rigs but the only
> true test is to sit two rigs side by side in the shack and use them."
>
> I broached the subject on the 1000MP qth.net reflector recently of the new
> QST review (May 2002) of the IC-746PRO. From the specs, and reading
between
> the lines, this clearly is an ordinary rig. But the review by Rick
> Lindquist all but says it is the latest and greatest. Some respondents to
> my posting suggested they long ago adopted a skeptical attitude toward the
> purple prose in QST reviews and basically ignore them. Some also pointed
> out there have been, and are, major (and purposeful) deficiencies in the
> lab work-ups as well.
>
> This is troubling on at least two counts. First, it creates a major
> problem for Ten-Tec's introduction of the ORION. IF the ORION proves
itself
> to be truly a significant improvement over existing high-end rigs, as
Scott
> Robbins promises, how will hams learn this fact? So many previous QST
> reviews of lesser rigs, such as the IC-746PRO, have been laced with
> superlatives that if QST uses lots of superlatives to describe the ORION
> there is no reason why the new rig should not be viewed by skeptical hams
> as just one more radio that has gotten the QST puff treatment. In other
> words, for such a high-end rig as the ORION, a good review in QST is not
> worth much. Conclusion: it's going to be devilishly hard for Ten-Tec to
get
> the word out IF the ORION turns out to be a truly superior radio.
>
> Second, for new hams. What are brand-new hams to think when they pick up
> the May QST and are told in so many words they need look no further than
> the IC-746PRO if they want a state-of-the-art rig? In a few years they
> probably will find out the truth, but by then the ARRL will have sown more
> skepticism.
>
> 73,
> John, W3ULS
>
> 73,
> John, W3ULS
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|