| To: | Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [TenTec] RX366 |
| From: | Richards <jrichards@k8jhr.com> |
| Reply-to: | Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com> |
| Date: | Sat, 18 May 2013 22:12:10 -0400 |
| List-post: | <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com> |
On 5/18/2013 8:02 PM, Cecil wrote: With such a significant difference in general coverage performance I would have liked to hear of the same test inside the ham bands
________________________________________________
Yeah... Barry, did you get an opportunity to
make any comparisons between the two on any
ham bands? From the brief description of your
test, it appears you only compared the two receivers
on AM BCB stations.
N'est ce pas?
======================= JHR =======================
_______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [TenTec] RX366, Richards |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [TenTec] RX366, PA5MW, Mark |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [TenTec] RX366, Cecil |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [TenTec] RX366, Richards |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |