Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+I\s+get\s+nervous\s+when\s+\.\s+\.\s+\.\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+I\s+get\s+nervous\s+when\s+\.\s+\.\s+\.\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: w3uls@3n.net (John Rippey); Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 15:15:49 -0500; It looks like the first Orions are just around the corner, and I get nervous when I think that the rig's reputation will to a considerable extent stand or fall on what the ARRL's lab reports. Since t; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00220.html (8,292 bytes)
2. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: jimr.reid@verizon.net (Jim Reid); Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:22:55 -1000; Well, if they have not already put in an order, which I really doubt, they will have to stand in line for at least the third production run as I understand where things stand now on deliveries. It i; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00224.html (8,224 bytes)
3. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: RMcGraw@Blomand.Net (Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX); Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 20:10:08 -0600; While I appreciate the ARRL Lab doing evaluation on various pieces of equipment, I've noticed that they evaluate only ONE piece. From my design and manufacturing experience, ONE is not a very reputab; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00226.html (10,415 bytes)
4. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: Wa9mxq@cs.com (Wa9mxq@cs.com); Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 21:31:12 EST; I don't think the "only ONE piece" rule always applies. Seems like I recall that they did like three different radios some years back when they did the Icom IC-751 as an example. Actually, I should c; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00229.html (8,558 bytes)
5. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: RMcGraw@Blomand.Net (Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX); Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 20:55:02 -0600; Yes, I'd agree and have seen and read those multiple radio reviews. These are evident when a radio fails any of the spec test values. In follow up, the ARRL Lab consults with the supplier. Typically; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00230.html (9,915 bytes)
6. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: K3YD@aol.com (K3YD@aol.com); Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:39:28 EST; << It looks like the first Orions are just around the corner, and I get nervous when I think that the rig's reputation will to a considerable extent stand or fall on what the ARRL's lab reports. >> D; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00232.html (8,043 bytes)
7. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: calderman@cox.net (Chester); Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 00:26:01 -0500; John, I am a Life Member of the ARRL. Being such I can tell you that after I read their review on the original Omni 6 where the complained about the birdies present when they removed the antenna from; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00233.html (10,237 bytes)
8. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: kw0d@netexpress.net (Dave Kamp, KW0D); Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 23:30:57 -0600; Even if I was able to afford plunk-down for a new Orion, I'd not inclined to be concerned about ANY lab-reports or reviews. I've got an Omni VI here that's been around a while, and judging by the sim; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00234.html (9,121 bytes)
9. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: ny9h@arrl.net (Bill Steffey); Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 04:38:34 -0600; IF TenTec actually gets the opportunity to select the evaluation set ( they do sell direct, not thru dealers, where ARRL usually purchases a set to review) TT has an inherent advantage in the process; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00235.html (8,901 bytes)
10. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: n1eu@yahoo.com (Barry N1EU); Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:48:42 -0800 (PST); Tom WB4BQF said "after I read their review on the original Omni 6 where the complained about the birdies present when they removed the antenna from the receiver input, I put very little faith in thei; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00236.html (8,195 bytes)
11. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: w5yr@att.net (George, W5YR); Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 12:05:11 -0600; I agree with Barry, as usual. All manner of internal problems can be masked by the introduction of sufficient external noise . . . A receiver with antenna disconnected or terminated in the specified; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00256.html (9,972 bytes)
12. [TenTec] I get nervous when . . . (score: 1): Author: w5yr@att.net (George, W5YR); Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 12:31:23 -0600; So, how meaningful are the ARRL test results if they come from a cherry-picked, specially prepared, non-production unit? I agree that it is in TT's interest to have ARRL test the best performing "sam; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-01/msg00257.html (10,898 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]