[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] receiver specifications ---Eagle

To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] receiver specifications ---Eagle
From: shristov <shristov@ptt.rs>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 21:24:15 +0100
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
mike bryce <prosolar@sssnet.com> wrote:

> So, is the Eagle that much better than the ICOM pro series?
> (The Atlas 210 has a better receiver than the Icom 756 Pro III?
> The Heathkit SB104 better than the unmodified Drake R4C?)

Receiver quality is a much more complex thing than, say, IM dynamic range.

IM dynamic range is a kind of limit. 
Under specific circumstances, if the limit is not exceeded,
the IM specification is irrelevant and other things
become responsible for the "receiver quality".


Sinisa  YT1NT, VE3EA

TenTec mailing list
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>