See my post on the difference between the two.
IMHO (and I think most of the nets HO too) the Omni V
Better phase noise.
Better crystal filtering close to the fist mixer (the advantage of a
low IF compared to a high IF).
E.g. the OMNI's (including the B, V, VI, VI+ and VII) are in the
Sherwood Engineering table but the Paragons aren't. That may be just
that the sort of folks that make the measurements don't use Paragons.
<http://www.sherweng.com/table.html>
Though that said the measurements in the ARRL review show the Paragon
is no slouch either:
3OIP is +18dBm; SFDR 101dB@20kHz; BDR 136dB@20kHz.
For the Omni V these are
3OIP is +7dBm; SFDR 97dB@20kHz; BDR 136dB@20kHz.
The Paragon wins on the numbers but I suspect the Omni V is better on
the air especially for weak-signal work in a close-in strong-signal
environment (DX chasing and contensts). I suspect for closer in
numbers the Omni would look better as the Paragon wilts once the
interfering signal comes inside the roofing filter.
For those who have compared their circuits are there any significant
differences? Or do they share common designs. I suspect they must be
similar but not identical.
I've noticed TT will share design ideas but not identical components
(e.g. Jupiter and the RX-320 are very similar but the diode ring
mixers are schottky in the Jupiter and switching PN in the RX-320).
73 Kevin
On Nov 29, 2007, at 5:00 AM, hamradio@twcny.rr.com wrote:
Thanks for the info, what was a better rig, the Paragon or the Omni V?
--
73 DE N7WIM / G8UDP
Kevin Purcell
kevinpurcell@pobox.com
|