While I appreciate the ARRL Lab doing evaluation on various pieces of
equipment, I've noticed that they evaluate only ONE piece. From my design
and manufacturing experience, ONE is not a very reputable sample.
I recall and have copies of the Paragon evaluation done by the ARRL, the
Omni VI+ evaluation, the original Delta 580 evaluation and none read totally
favorable. However, my experience in actually owning at least 1 or more of
each of these radios, (still do) I conclude that the ARRL Lab report may be
accurate for the sample tested, at the same time, it does not correctly
represent a production lot which typically has smoothing effects related to
production output.
To that end, I do like the ARRL Lab reports in making comparisons to other
"like" products.
Me, I'm just waiting for my ORION to arrive,............ pre-ARRL Lab
reports. And yes, I do expect to find a software bug or two. No big deal,
software can be fixed. Hardware problems, well that's another tale. I
don't expect to find any hardware problems.
73
Bob, K4TAX
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Rippey" <w3uls@3n.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:15 PM
Subject: [TenTec] I get nervous when . . .
> It looks like the first Orions are just around the corner, and I get
> nervous when I think that the rig's reputation will to a considerable
> extent stand or fall on what the ARRL's lab reports. Since the report will
> be based on lab tests of a single early production unit, it is a dicey
> (i.e., Las Vegas crapshoot) business for Ten-Tec. Recall that the QST
> review of the OMNI VI Plus some years back had several nits to pick that
> detracted substantially from the overall report on the rig. Those nits
> clearly were the result of minor production glitches, not fundamental to
> the design of the radio at all. Also, a lot will ride on who does the QST
> review. Will he be a top CW op, a digital mode enthusiast, or perhaps
worst
> of all a casual SSB rag chewer? Dave Newkirk and Rus Healy (a CW maven),
to
> name two eminently qualified folks, are no longer available. That's why I
> get nervous when . . .
>
> 73,
> John, W3ULS
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
|