IIRC
The ARRL reviewed a Argonaut II and a Delta II and found big
difference between the receiver numbers (they're supposed to be
identical). So there seemed to be large unit to unit variations. And
even inconsistent variations (look at the BDR numbers).
The measured numbers on their Argonaut were mediocre.
It wasn't too clear if the Delta which was 7dB deafer than the
Argonaut in MDS so it got a better intercept but had poorer (and
noise limited) BDR.
The composite noise figures show a noisey PLL (around -95dBc at 2kHz)
There seemed to be variability in the variable crystal filters loss.
The rings lost senstivity (the MDS went up) as the filters were narrow.
Read the review on the ARRL website if you are a member (or perhaps
not if you already own one :-)
I just realized that this is a WTB thread ...
On Oct 21, 2007, at 1:54 PM, Steve Berg wrote:
> Why is it that the Argonaut II and the Delta II
> seem to get so little respect? What am I missing here?
--
Kevin Purcell
kevinpurcell@pobox.com
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|