Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+The\s+Next\s+Flagship\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+The\s+Next\s+Flagship\s*$/: 52 ]

Total 52 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: TTMaven <jrichards@k8jhr.com>; Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 22:15:02 -0400; Are we a dis-proportionate group? yes, I think so. Following the bankruptcy trends, and the larger economy, I doubt a lot of family age hams will be buying the expensive stuff. We are living in the; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00577.html (10,905 bytes)
22. Re: [TenTec] The next flagship (score: 1): Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 05:21:37 +0200; Let's see Wayne, 1400 radios purchased out of 750,000 hams in the US... plus about 400,000 in Western Europe... Then how many hams in the rest of the world... Penetration rate is... 0.01% maybe. And; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00578.html (10,523 bytes)
23. [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: John Rippey <w3uls73@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 09:26:47 -0400; My problem with no "Flagship" rig offering by Ten-Tec revolves around the fact that it must be very hard (perhaps impossible) to produce in the U.S. a transceiver selling for under $2K and still make; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00587.html (9,202 bytes)
24. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 08:56:30 -0700; The price of a minimally configured K3 is currently $2200 if bought as a kit. and its quality and performance are in a league with the $10K "flagship" products. It is designed and manufactured in the; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00590.html (9,401 bytes)
25. Re: [TenTec] The next flagship (score: 1): Author: Jim Lowman <jmlowman@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 09:48:00 -0700; I don't know how many of you subscribe to Facebook or Google+ but if you look at the shack photos on the QRZ page, you won't see much American-made equipment other than the occasional Elecraft K3. Yo; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00591.html (10,224 bytes)
26. Re: [TenTec] The next flagship (score: 1): Author: GARY HUBER <glhuber@msn.com>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 11:53:28 -0500; Check AB9M at QRZ.com Made in USA.... 73 & DX, Gary - AB9M --Original Message-- From: Jim Lowman Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 11:48 AM To: tentec@contesting.com Subject: Re: [TenTec] The next flagshi; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00593.html (10,492 bytes)
27. Re: [TenTec] The next flagship (score: 1): Author: Barry N1EU <barry.n1eu@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 16:59:37 +0000; Yup, and 3 out of 3 on my shack photo: http://files.qrz.com/u/n1eu/rigs.jpg 73, Barry N1EU _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.conte; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00594.html (11,922 bytes)
28. [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: Spencer <k5gak@powerc.net>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 11:12:53 -0600; I like radios with knobs and as few push buttons as possible. I don't like radios with endless menu options that require an aftermarket brain book to make them work. I like CW, keeps my brain active.; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00597.html (8,593 bytes)
29. Re: [TenTec] The next flagship (score: 1): Author: Jim Allen <jim.allen@longhornband.net>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 13:56:42 -0500; That's not too surprising. When a new ham gets his ticket, and heads off to the LRS to get gear, probably at an HRO, or AES and similar, what does he see? All the JA gear. There is nothing else, and; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00600.html (11,756 bytes)
30. Re: [TenTec] The next flagship (score: 1): Author: Jim Lowman <jmlowman@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 12:02:00 -0700; Very nice, Gary! 73 de Jim - AD6CW Check AB9M at QRZ.com Made in USA.... 73 & DX, Gary - AB9M _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.co; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00602.html (9,157 bytes)
31. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 22:39:45 +0200; Agree Spencer, but let's carry this thought a little farther. External manual tuners work MUCH better than remote auto-tuners. 73 - Rick, DJ0IP (Nr. Frankfurt am Main) Built in ATUs are OK but remote; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00606.html (8,860 bytes)
32. Re: [TenTec] The next flagship (score: 1): Author: GARY HUBER <glhuber@msn.com>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 17:02:08 -0500; Thanks Jim... I started with a Hallicrafters HT-40 and Hammarlund HQ-180 back in 1973. I bought my first Ten-Tec transciever, a 546C with ext VFO and PS in 1980-81. Then Corsair-II and VFO & PS, Para; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00610.html (10,657 bytes)
33. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 15:51:00 -0700; Built in ATUs are OK but remote auto-tuners work better. I question this statement, because it seems to be built on the assumption that excess loss in the mis-matched transmission line matters a lot; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00613.html (10,035 bytes)
34. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: Duane Calvin <ac5aa1@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 17:56:17 -0500; The LDG tuner in the Orion does a fine job, I've found. _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00614.html (10,087 bytes)
35. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>; Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 12:06:30 +0200; Jim, I agree with all of that, but you leave one point out. "Openwire." As you well know, the impedance of an openwire dipole varies from band to band and can be all over the map, up to a couple thou; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00625.html (11,034 bytes)
36. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: Barry N1EU <barry.n1eu@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 06:35:23 -0400; Here's a crazy idea that's never going to happen. I'm continually amazed at the ergonomics, coolness, and good looks of the Omni VI+ front panel. I just don't think it's ever going to get better than; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00627.html (8,728 bytes)
37. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 09:45:01 -0700; Rick, I didn't leave it out at all -- it's one of the non-resonant antennas I talked about. This is a lousy antenna, a bad idea. Yes, the Handbook says it "works" on all bands. So does a light bulb.; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00631.html (10,134 bytes)
38. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>; Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 22:57:50 +0200; Jim, I can't agree. Sorry. You are not on the same page as I am. You push a resonant antenna, but that's a monoband antenna. You sell the "all band dipole" much too short. YES you are correct about i; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00637.html (12,010 bytes)
39. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: Carl Moreschi <n4py3@earthlink.net>; Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 17:06:04 -0400; I also agree if I could only have one antenna it would be a 130 foot dipole set up as an inverted V and fed with open wire line to an in shack tuner. And my second choice is an end fed 130 wire in an; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00638.html (12,951 bytes)
40. Re: [TenTec] The Next Flagship (score: 1): Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>; Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 23:15:50 +0200; My favorites are similar to Carl's: 1: 130 to 136 foot wire, fed in the middle with openwire 2: Off-Center-Fed Dipole such as the one I currently use (see: http://www.dj0ip.de/off-center-fed-dipole/8; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00639.html (14,204 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3]