[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] 6N2 observations

To: on of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] 6N2 observations
From: "Scott Harwood" <scotth@hsc.edu>
Reply-to: scotth@hsc.edu,Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 08:19:38 -0400
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Agreed, but I live in a fringe area (50-60 mi. from repeaters), so rather than 
invest in beam/rotator, I opted for the preamp/amp solution.  Of course one 
could use one's ricebox, but I prefer the Ten-Tec.
Scott K4\vwk
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@storm.weather.net>
Reply-To: geraldj@storm.weather.net,Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment 
Date:  Fri, 07 Jul 2006 10:59:15 -0500

>On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 07:46 -0400, Scott Harwood wrote:
>> I recently acquired a 6N2 and agree with your observations, but I also noted 
>> that the receiver sensitivity on two meters was  low compared to my other 
>> ricebox receivers.  I sent it back to Ten-Tec for alignment.  They returned 
>> the rig saying the rx sensitivity was within specs.  I now use it with a 
>> Mirage preamp/amplifier and am very happy with the little rig.
>> Scott K4VWK
>The 6N2 should have a quiet receiver. Its MDS specification is 10 dB
>poorer than a rice box on 2m and 2m rice boxes are at least 10 dB poorer
>than 2m atmospheric noise in mid USA and more than 10 dB poorer than the
>2m receiver state of the art for sensitivity. Of course that makes it
>easier to stand strong signals, and adding external broadly tuned
>preamps makes it a whole lot more susceptible to out of band strong
>signals like pagers and repeaters.
>73, Jerry, K0CQ,
>All content copyright Dr. Gerald N. Johnson, electrical engineer
>TenTec mailing list

TenTec mailing list

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