Hi all -
After literally going through a spasm of entire shack equipment/rig
turnover in the last few months I heartily agree with John's comments. For
the record, after my "shack pverhall spasm" the shack now consists of an
Omni VI+, Corsair II (back after a temporary trade to Ten Tec on the Argo),
K2/100, OHR500 and Palstar R30. In and out of the shack was an Argo V and I
let go a very fine Icom 756 ProII.
One thing that surprised me is that, real or imagined, my Omni VI+ seems
much better than I remember my Omni V. On the other hand, one of the list
members went from an Omni VI+ to an Omni V in the last two months and likes
the V more. We speculated that perhaps even identical rigs may have their
own characteristics - just like a two identical keys will feel different.
Another thing that surprised me was to see myself let the ProII go. I was
totally enamored with the ProII and very justifiably so. It is an amazing
rig. However, when I fired up that Omni VI+ - well it just fit me like a
glove and the Pro had to go to help pay for the VI and the Corsair. On paper
the Pro is better than the VI+. In my shack the VI+ is (for me that is) is
20 times more fun - even without an Icom style bandscope!
My rig shuffling spasm is over, but it certainly proved to me that nothing
replaces that on the air test that allows us to each subjectively decide
what out favorite "operating feel" is.
73/Tim NZ7C
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Rippey" <w3uls@3n.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 6:06 AM
Subject: [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff
> Given the variables involved in lab data results and their interpretation,
> as discussed in this thread, there seems to be no substitute for in-home
> evaluations of transceiver performance by each ham as the final arbiter.
>
> This is no panacea, though, because it's an expensive, time-consuming
> process to obtain, evaluate, compare, resell and then ship out individual
rigs.
>
> As an additional complication, most of today's transceivers are designed
to
> be pretty much all things to all people--to provide all kinds of modes,
> options, etc., at a certain price point. Each transceiver therefore
> consists of many complex compromises--determined by a host of
> design/production decisions, with an end result that can be a
> mish-mash--perhaps very appealing to some while leaving others
unimpressed.
> (As one example, the IC-756 PROII's "dual watch" feature is not the same
as
> Yaesu's separate receivers in the 1000 series because, as I understand it,
> in producing the 756 PRO is basically a military transceiver converted to
> amateur use and the original military specs did not call for dual
receivers.)
>
> Furthermore, as perhaps in the case of an FT-920 I owned, the rig obtained
> may not meet factory specs, unbeknownst to the purchaser. In other words,
> the ham could be attributing certain faults to a model generically when in
> fact the specific rig under evaluation is defective. This means, ideally,
> that two or three samples of each model (ugh!) should be evaluated before
> reaching a conclusion.
>
> In spite of the valiant ongoing efforts of the ARRL, and to a lesser
extent
> CQ Magazine, the reports they provide can only be a first cut in the
> evaluation process. (If you don't have a good curve ball, you won't be
> invited to spring training.) Ultimately, each ham's selection of his/her
> "ideal" transceiver has to be up to him/her, acting alone. And it's a
> complicated, lengthy process. No wonder so many hams either hang on to
> their tried-and-true transceivers from the 80's or, if buying a new rig,
> fall back on brand loyalty as their selection criterion. Being loyal to a
> brand does greatly simplify life. And the good news is that most (all?) of
> the rigs today are pretty good all-round performers so it's not as if you
> end up with a poor performer no matter what rig is chosen and by what
> selection process.
>
> The foregoing makes me wonder how many hams who are not now Ten-Tec owners
> will be motivated to explore on their own the Orion when it becomes
> available--meaning not just reading up on it but actually buying one?
>
> 73,
> John, W3ULS
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|