[Top] [All Lists]


To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: SCOUT RX
From: zettel@homer.libby.org (Steve Zettel)
Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 23:02:37 -0600
>The Scout receiver of the 555 and 556 run rings around a Kenwood TS 50.  I
>used both last Field Day, and the TS-50 has really bad intermod performance,
>and is bad with strong signals around it, and is B-R-O-A-D!
>The Jones filter of the TT is a dream, and even goes more tight than I like to
>I have done sensitivity comparison between the Scout and my Kenwood 450, and
>the Scout is as sensitive or more so than the 450.  If you believe that the
>Kenwoods basic sensitivity should be about the same, then the difference is in
>how the Scout handles strong signals better than the TS 50.
>I have read the TS 50 has only a "stock" relatively wide filter, and you do
>not have the option of other selectivity choices.  If so, the choice is Ten
>Tec far and away.

Just as a counter-point: I have a TS-50 that I bought about two years ago,
just after getting licensed. At that time the rig was somewhat less
expensive than it is now. IRCI offered a 2.1khz replacement for the stock
SSB filter, that tightened the passband up and featured steeper and deeper
skirts. I installed that filter, their 500hz filter, and the RF speech
processor they offered, too. A good manual tuner used in line will also
help somewhat, and the AT-50 matching autotuner is left in the circuit
during receive if one elects to use it. Some of the bigger Kenwoods with
built-in tuners only used them for transmit. In a really strong IM signal
environment, a la Field Day, a bandpass filter is almost a necessity (but
is just as much a necessity for many other radios). These mods turned the
TS-50 into a respectable performer. However, this also increased my net
investment to an amount significantly above what the Scout sells for even
today with a full complement of modules. Would I do it again? I don't know,
but for two years the TS-50 was doing double duty as my only rig, mobile or
in the shack, so the additional bells and whistles were nice. As modified,
there wasn't much difference in performance with a Yaesu FT-890 that I
later picked up (another radio featuring filtering at only one IF stage).

Since this is the Ten Tec reflector and not the Kenwood reflector, let me
hasten to add that an Omni VI and other Ten Tec equipment now grace my
shack. I used every comparable (and not so comparable) radio I could try
before coming to the decision that I had to have an Omni; nothing so far
has made me second guess that decision.


Steve Zettel  KJ7CH                      kj7ch@libby.org
Libby, MT  USA                  steve.m.zettel@usace.army.mil
Take a tour of NW Montana at:         http://www.libby.org

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>