TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] Corsair III?

To: "NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Corsair III?
From: "GARY HUBER" <glhuber@msn.com>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:10:57 -0500
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Rick,

I certainly understand the advantages of new technology radios in contesting. 
But for those who are just looking for a radio to work DX, a Corsair II with 
filters and the matching VFO to provide dual receive, provides a lot of bang 
for the buck. I believe I spent well over $2000 to put a completely loaded (250 
Hz, 500 Hz, and 1.8 KHz optional filters) Corsair II, VFO, power supply, and 
microphone on my desk during the last production run of the Corsair II. I'd 
sold my Omni D to buy a Paragon for MARS work, and as I'd been told by several 
members of the Ten-Tec staff, the Paragon just wasn't a DXer's radio. I still 
have the Corsair II station (and the Omni VI+ / Titan 425 / 253 Coupler) which 
is still my radio of choice for the DX weak ones and pile-ups where dual 
receive and QSK are an advantage.

I'm sure a lot of the new digital technology versus PTO, LC circuits is very 
subjective. I believe the old analog radios do a better job of handling very 
large A+B-C signal mixes in the passband and I know I can work on Corsair II / 
Omni D series or technology radios with simple equipment. While I can hold my 
own operating a Microsoft or Linux/Unix O/S computer, I'd just rather have a 
simple radio for DXing rather than a CPU controlled collection of digital 
circuitry that rebuilds an analog audio signal for my ears and brain to decode. 
That's the reason I occasionally suggest Ten-Tec offer a simple 100 watt, QSK, 
dual receive transceiver.

I doubt that I'm the only one who feels this way, but it's a niche market to be 
sure and most likely not a profitable one at that.

VY 73 & DX,

Gary - AB9M - www.csm-gh.com
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: NJ0IP<mailto:Rick@DJ0IP.de> 
  To: 'GARY HUBER'<mailto:glhuber@msn.com> 
  Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 12:21 AM
  Subject: RE: [TenTec] Corsair III?


  Gary, you need to try an Orion in a big contest to appreciate the
  advancements.  The selectivity of the filters in its own is reason enough to
  switch.

  I miss the ease of use of my Omni VI (and V and Corsair II), but I would
  certainly not want to trade down.  The Orion is better when the going gets
  rough.

  73
  Rick

  -----Original Message-----
  From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com<mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com> 
[mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]
  On Behalf Of GARY HUBER
  Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 9:35 PM
  To: TenTec Reflector
  Subject: [TenTec] Corsair III?

  How about a new $2000 - $3000 box built around upgraded Corsair II
  technology? 100 W, full QSK, Dual PTO, Dual Receive, IF shift, Narrow
  Filters, etc. Keep the digital circuits to minimum except for a Digital
  Frequency readout and possibly a DSP filter option. 

  As far as the receive function of new Ten-Tec transceivers go, I still
  believe the new boxes have a hard time competing with the Corsairs and Omnis
  when the DX is S-1 and the pile is up 1 to 5 KHz with many KW's calling. I
  know Omni VI + and the Orion's have low noise floors and great specs, but I
  also know what my ears tell me.

  Maybe it makes more sense to keep refurbishing and rebuilding the old PTO
  radios, they provide a lot of satisfaction per dollar. At any rate I doubt
  that I'll buy an Orion, Orion II, or any rig with a CPU.

  Best regards,
  Gary - AB9M - 
www.csm-gh.com<http://www.csm-gh.com/<http://www.csm-gh.com<http://www.csm-gh.com/>>
 
  _______________________________________________
  TenTec mailing list
  TenTec@contesting.com<mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
  
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec>


_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

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