Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+ARRL\s+Reviews\s+746PRO\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+ARRL\s+Reviews\s+746PRO\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] ARRL Reviews 746PRO (score: 1): Author: n4lq@iglou.com (n4lq@iglou.com); Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:07:01 -0400; I just read the review of the IC-746 Pro in the new QST. I thought they covered things pretty well. It does seem like they try to avoid subjective comments which might be a good thing. Has anyone tak; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-04/msg00382.html (7,206 bytes)
2. [TenTec] ARRL Reviews 746PRO (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 21:28:29 -0400; Most important, keep in mind that is the ARRL's dB below PEP measurement that makes everything look 6dB better than the standard method. On the negative side, Texas Star CB amplifiers (with class C; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-04/msg00396.html (8,267 bytes)
3. [TenTec] ARRL Reviews 746PRO (score: 1): Author: geraldj@isunet.net (Dr. Gerald N. Johnson, electrical engineer); Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 22:28:10 -0500; The WWII Command Set VFO was and still IS as good as a Collins PTO, far better than any other receivers contemporary to the 10B. It couldn't be made today, though with good temperature control and so; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-04/msg00398.html (8,068 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]