Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+OMNI\s+6\+\s+or\s+FT1000MP\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+OMNI\s+6\+\s+or\s+FT1000MP\s*$/: 17 ]

Total 17 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: jdvoracek@vvm.com (John Dvoracek); Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 22:48:18 -0500; A question for those of you who have personally operated BOTH an OMNI VI+ and an FT1000MP: If you could own ONLY ONE of these rigs and wanted to work BOTH cw and ssb contests, which do you buy? (I kn; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00175.html (8,177 bytes)
2. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: n4lq@iglou.com (Steve Ellington N4LQ); Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 23:59:32 -0400; The only way you're ever going judge this is for you to try each rig yourself. I've had 2 Omni 6's and one MP. Since I'm not a contester and mostly a rag-chewer, I sold them and now enjoy the pure cw; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00176.html (10,639 bytes)
3. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: jloase@ozline.net (Jim); Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 11:35:38 -0400; John, I have used both and each has some advantages. If you like bells and whistles and extremely accurate frequency stability the FT 1000MP is probably your rig. The Dsp in the OMNI is superior as f; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00182.html (9,698 bytes)
4. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: crobson@erie.net (Chris Robson); Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 14:12:33 -0400; Hi John & the Rest of the Gang, I have had the pleasure of running at Contest station K3TUP and that setup uses 4 contesting seats with all matching equipment and the rigs are FT-1000MPs. I found the; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00187.html (9,602 bytes)
5. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: paulc@mediaone.net (Paul Christensen); Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 14:47:22 -0400; I own both transceivers and you can see them side-by-side at: http://www.qsl.net/w9ac/ I'm not going to get into another comparison. However, note that of the two radios, it's the Omni Six Plus that; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00188.html (11,114 bytes)
6. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: n4lq@iglou.com (Steve Ellington N4LQ); Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 16:29:12 -0400; I think the SX-99 is the best looking think on the bench Paul. Steve N4LQ --Original Message-- From: Paul Christensen <paulc@mediaone.net> To: tentec@contesting.com <tentec@contesting.com>; yaesu@con; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00190.html (8,678 bytes)
7. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: jdvoracek@vvm.com (John Dvoracek); Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 17:46:06 -0500; I hope I have everyone on the list who has replied so far, and a few other interested parties. Based on 11 replies from operators of both rigs, and considering operating characteristics only (not ser; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00197.html (9,149 bytes)
8. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: jdvoracek@vvm.com (John Dvoracek); Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 10:34:27 -0500; A question for those of you who have personally operated BOTH an OMNI VI+ and an FT1000MP: If you could own ONLY ONE of these rigs and wanted to work BOTH cw and ssb contests, which do you buy? (I kn; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00203.html (9,527 bytes)
9. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: k4wj@att.net (John/K4WJ); Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 21:13:15 -0400; I don't thing so Steve. Me things the Omni VI is better looking and me also things that is a SX-100 es not a 99, or maybe even a SX-101. (I couldn't resist it Steve..the Thing thing that is, after yo; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00208.html (9,212 bytes)
10. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: ai2q@ispchannel.com (Alex Mendelsohn); Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 22:14:25 -0400; Where are you folks looking at Halliscratchers receivers? I have an SX-99 sitting here. Vy 73, AI2Q, Alex in Kennebunk, Maine .-.-. -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm Submissions:; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00209.html (10,751 bytes)
11. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: k4wj@att.net (John/K4WJ); Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 22:38:31 -0400; Alex, Paul, W9AC, provided a URL to his WEB site and there was a picture of his station. On top of the all the equipment sat a Hallicrafters receiver which one of my buddies suggested may be a SX-96.; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00210.html (11,698 bytes)
12. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: wb4huc@texas.net (Michael A. Newell); Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 22:50:38 -0500; Paul also graciously provided the photo for posting on The Unofficial OMNI VI Web Site. Point your browsers to http://wb4huc.home.texas.net/omni-vi and click the station owner photos link. 73, -- --; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00211.html (9,376 bytes)
13. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: geraldj@ames.net (Dr. Gerald N. Johnson, P.E.); Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 22:12:06 -0500; It has too many knobs for an SX-99 and the antenna trimmer on the left side was not a part of the SX-96 and the SX-101 was not a two dial receiver so that leaves SX-100. 73, Jerry, K0CQ -- FAQ on WWW; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00212.html (8,736 bytes)
14. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: k4ldr@hitter.net (Peter J. F. Shaw); Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 08:59:38 -0400; Greetings Ttalkers: I believe that the bright Hallicrafters receiver displayed at W9AC's ops position is the SX-110. The 110 was a shined-up version, with little electronic advancement, of the SX-96.; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00213.html (9,748 bytes)
15. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: k4ldr@hitter.net (Peter J. F. Shaw); Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 09:02:06 -0400; Correct typo in my previous email. change SX-110 to 100. 73 K4LDR -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm Submissions: tentec@contesting.com Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@con; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00214.html (8,110 bytes)
16. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: kg5u@hal-pc.org (Dale L. Martin); Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 19:02:09 -0500; and me also It's definitely not an SX-101....and where's the Triton IV? Now, there's a good looking radio!...after the Omni VI/VI+. And I thing we should take a closer look at W9AC and find out what; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00221.html (8,623 bytes)
17. [TenTec] OMNI 6+ or FT1000MP (score: 1): Author: paulc@mediaone.net (Paul Christensen); Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 20:49:41 -0400; I'll put an end to the suspense at: http://www.qsl.net/w9ac/ The gorgeous Hallicrafters receiver that first caught the attention of Steve, N4LQ, is in fact a ca. 1955 model SX-100 MKII to be exact. A; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-05/msg00222.html (11,538 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 17
Page: [1]