Charles,
I was wondering too why no mention of the 940.
I still have my TS-940S (bought in 1984) as a backup and SO2R radio. I ran many
A/B tests when I first got the FT1000MP and found the 940 very close to the MP
in pulling out weak signals on 160.
In terms of ergonomics I actually prefer the 940 (no menus -- no need to change
preamp when switching from 160 to 10 meters, etc.) It is computer controlled
(unlike the 930). Of course it doesn't have the second RX of the MP, DSP, etc.
For about half the price of a used MP, the 940 is a bargain.
Of course many had serious phase noise problems on TX that were far more
serious than the click problems with unmodified MPs.
73/Jon AA1K
Felton, Delaware
www.aa1k.us
At 10:15 AM 11/13/04, you wrote:
>OK, all this discussion about receivers for 160M has me wondering something
>(and this may be a big joke I'm just not aware of)...
>I've seen no mention of the Kenwood TS-940S, either good or bad, or in any of
>the rankings. I know it's an old rig now, but how does it stack up in the
>line-up?
>
>Charles
>K5ZK
>
>_______________________________________________
>Topband mailing list
>Topband@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
|