CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] FT-920 - IC-718

To: "Bill Coleman" <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] FT-920 - IC-718
From: "KE5CTY Bob" <rtnmi@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:14:40 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I would love to be wrong. I am *very* open to being able to make adjustments
to what it appears I have found out. It is disqueting to me it just seems to
be the way it is based on the feedback and the ages of the rigs themselves.

Remember am just basing my conclusions on what seems to be the most sought
after (preferred) radios for what is considered the most grueling test
(CONTESTING) and those who are at the top of the list don't consider the
rigs you mentioned as preferred, but the older ones.

They may have some interesting and new bells and whistles, but do they
*really* add to better operation or are they just "neat" stuff (that is what
I meant by smoke and mirrors)? In other words they are in fact inovative in
there own right (I agree), but do they *really* add to better communication
or are they just new *stuff* more buttons so to speak.

It would seem the later is true or they would be preferred wouldn't they?

I mean preferred by those who look at the bottom line (the top guys) - will
the rig help *the most* while in the "heat of battle".

TNX,
Bob
KE5CTY (old calls WB5ZQU - WY5L)
http://www.qsl.net/ke5cty/
Code may be dying but the pioneering spirit that put the code there in
the first place is still going strong.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Coleman" <aa4lr@arrl.net>
To: "KE5CTY Bob" <rtnmi@sbcglobal.net>
Cc: "'David Thompson'" <thompson@mindspring.com>; "'CQ Contest'"
<cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 9:37 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] FT-920 - IC-718


>
> On Jul 21, 2005, at 7:17 PM, KE5CTY Bob wrote:
>
> > According to the manufacture dates and the demand (preferred radios) -
> > there has been no *practical* noticeable change in equipment (change
> > worth having from a practical - operational standpoint) for almost 9
> > YEARS only smoke and mirrors (cosmetics) with the *most* preferred rig
> > being almost 10 years old in technology according to manufacture
> > output:
> >
> > Kenwood; TS-830S HF Transceiver;Manfact'd approx May 1981
> > Kenwood; TS-850S 160-10 Meter Transceiver;Manfact'd approx Jul 1991
> > ICOM; IC-728 MF/HF Transceiver;Manfact'd approx Feb 1993
> > Yaesu; FT-1000MP MF/HF Transceiver;Manfact'd approx Apr 1996
> > Yaesu; FT-920 MF/HF/6 Meter Transceiver;Manfact'd approx Oct 1997
> >
> > (((The Dead Years)))
> >
> > ???? 2005 ????
>
> I think this depiction is inaccurate. The so-called "dead years" have
> a number of innovative rigs introduced:
>
> Elecraft K2 and K2/100
> TenTec Orion
> IC-7800
> FT-7900DX
>
> And even that misses the FT-1000 variants that have been introduced,
> with substantial upgrades to the basic rig:
> FT-1000MP Mk V
> FT-1000MP Mk V Field
>
>
>
> Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL        Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net
> Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
>              -- Wilbur Wright, 1901
>
>


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>