Bottom line is they're both great rigs and they aren't THAT different. The
differences I see are:
1. O2 uses 4-pole narrow cw filters with no extra preamp to degrade IMD.
The O1 work-around is to put 600hz 4-pole filter in 1Khz filter slot. There
is absolutely no reason to use the 500/250 filter slots in the O1. I've
actually thought of putting a 300hz 4-pole filter in my O1 1Khz filter slot,
since I don't need to go wider than that.
2. O2 control cpu is a bit faster; maybe the sweep is also better (???) but
I N-E-V-E-R use the sweep (or NR); if you want sweep, go with LP-PAN via
VE7TK's if output mod
3. O2 can't run v1 firmware, which many prefer (and also has less touchy
rx/tx gain setting).
Personally, I wouldn't upgrade unless I got an O2 for a bargain price but it
would be worth hearing from folks who own both O1 and O2.
73, Barry N1EU
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 12:45 AM, Eric Rosenberg <email@example.com
> There's a possibility that I may be able to upgrade from an (original)
> Orion (with all the INRAD filters) to an Orion II.
> Is there really that much of a difference between the two that would
> make it worthwhile? It's my understanding the sub-RX is the same (i.e.,
> no individual filters, no good for diversity reception), that the
> display is in color (no big deal) and the scan function is better, all
> as a result of a more powerful processor.
> Is there something I've missed?
> Eric W3DQ
> Washington, DC
> TenTec mailing list
TenTec mailing list