Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+KENWOOD\s+TS\-2000\s*$/: 18 ]

Total 18 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: "AD5VJ Bob" <rtnmi@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 23:20:56 -0500
Does anyone here know if a KENWOOD TS-2000 can be used as an effective contest rig? Opinions please. 73 fer nw, Bob AD5VJ(AAR6VM) Visit My Ham Blog http://www.ad5vj.com/ 10X# 37210, FP#-1141, SMIRK#-
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-04/msg00266.html (6,784 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 08:43:26 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: ** REPLY SEPARATOR ** When the TS-2000 first came out it got several very bad reviews for poor receiver performance. You might want to check the QST review. Bill, W6WRT ____________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-04/msg00272.html (7,145 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:57:37 -0500
Bob, What kind of contesting are you talking about? The TS-2000 isn't most people's first choice in a contest rig, although it's not nearly as poor a performer as most people claim. Especially those
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-04/msg00273.html (8,292 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: Andrei Nevis <v49a@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 10:44:41 -0700 (PDT)
Bob, I like this Radio, never had TS-2000 but somehow I like it. I was going to buy one a year ago, but was not recommended by several contestmen and bought PRO-3. I have a another Kenwood as a backu
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-04/msg00274.html (8,475 bytes)

5. [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: "Jamie Dupree NS3T" <ns3t@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 09:54:27 -0400
First, I have to say I am always amazed at the negative reviews the TS-2000 gets from people who have never touched it. I'm not sure what spurs this - but seemingly whenever someone asks about it, th
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00005.html (8,356 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>
Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 08:57:07 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: ** REPLY SEPARATOR ** The negative reviews came from people who have operated one and have not been impressed. Nobody can "review" a radio they have never operated, but they can quo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00010.html (7,445 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: Zack Widup <w9sz@prairienet.org>
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 11:14:59 -0500 (CDT)
I used one on Field Day a couple years ago. I wanted to make some CW QSO's and the OWNER couldn't even figure out how to turn on the sidetone for CW. (Admittedly, he must not work much CW). I am not
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00011.html (8,190 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: "John Geiger" <ne0p@lcisp.com>
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 16:39:14 -0000
There were some negative reviews on eham.net based solely on the appearance of the radio. Personally, I like the appearance of the TS2000. 73s John NE0P ______________________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00013.html (7,950 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 14:31:15 -0500
The TS-2000 is a complex rig that takes a little while to figure out. Sitting down at AES or a buddies house probably doesn't do the rig justice. Most people don't like the TS-2000 because they "hear
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00015.html (9,451 bytes)

10. [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: "S56A" <s56a@bit.si>
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 23:03:13 +0200
I asume this is a tech question but didn't notice any tech answer yet. ARRL test shows respectable IP3>20 dBm and that was soundly verified at 3V8BB on 40 m SSB with BCI. DSP CW filter was also fun t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00016.html (7,170 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: "Hsu, Aaron (NBC Universal)" <aaron.hsu@nbcuni.com>
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 17:44:23 -0700
The ARRL test numbers, while helpful for general use, don't say much for <5KHz spacing which is what CONTESTERS need. In a contest, you're often <2KHz away from your nearest neighboor (on phone) and
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00020.html (9,403 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: Jan Erik Holm <sm2ekm@telia.com>
Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 06:47:44 +0200
This is from www.w8ji.com http://www.w8ji.com/transmitter_splatter.htm Radios Some modern radios are especially poor, even when operated at rated power levels. For example, the TS-2000 and IC-756 ser
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00025.html (9,051 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: "S56A" <s56a@bit.si>
Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 10:17:11 +0200
<5KHz spacing which is what CONTESTERS need. In a contest, you're often <2KHz away from your nearest neighboor (on phone) and less than 500Hz away on CW. I experienced that radio congestion in Silic
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00026.html (7,290 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: "LA5HE Ragnar Otterstad" <la5he@otterstad.dk>
Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 10:35:14 +0200
See if you can get your hands ( or eyes) on a presentation G3SJX did at the RSGB HF Convention last year, where he did a rewiev summary of all transceivers he had testet for RADCOM the past 25 odd y
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00027.html (8,192 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>
Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 09:25:46 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: ** REPLY SEPARATOR ** Beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder. That "melted plastic" look of the TS-2000 was an instant turn-off for me. I'm an old time Kenwood fan, having owned
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00034.html (8,405 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: "N2TK, Tony" <tony.kaz@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 12:50:17 -0400
Is that report available anywhere or do you have to be a RSGB member? N2TK, Tony --Original Message-- From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of LA
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00035.html (8,933 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: "W4ZW" <w4zw@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 16:33:00 -0400
I haven't spent enough time with one to venture an opinion, but the short time I did operate one it seemed quite capable. It's no FT-1000, but for a rig that operates from 160 thru 440, it's quite a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00037.html (9,027 bytes)

18. [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
Author: caffe <caffe@milnet.co.yu>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 17:58:54 +0100
SM2EKM wrote: At least I wouldn&acute;t buy a radio that gets words like this. W8ji should know better what might be expected from 100 W TX with bipolar transistors at +14V PSU. Buy MOSFET TX on +28V
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00056.html (8,027 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu