This is my last post on the topic of MFJ quality ... I promise. ;)
The point that I and a handful of other hams here with manufacturing
experience have tried to make is that you shouldn't have to accept the
likelihood of defects in order to get low cost. Cost should be a
function of design, not being inept on the manufacturing floor. You
should reasonably expect lower operating performance if you go low cost,
and various MFJ products are good examples of that. You won't get the
same port-to-port isolation from an MFJ feedline switch but that's fine
in most cases. You won't get the same power handling capability from an
MFJ antenna tuner, and you won't get the same accuracy from some of
their analyzers. That is all the way it should be ... they target a
lower price point and if you don't need the higher performance of other
brands there is no reason to pay for it.
But there is no excuse for those lower priced items to have shoddy
workmanship, and that's the gripe many of us have with MFJ. They simply
don't care enough about the quality of their products to learn the same
principles of good manufacturing that most other American companies
needed to learn to survive over the last thirty years. It wouldn't cost
them a dime extra. The only reason that MFJ survives is because most
hams don't know enough to expect better.
OK ... I'm done now.
73,
Dave AB7E
On 4/3/2018 1:10 PM, Timothy Coker via TowerTalk wrote:
I’m in the middle here and while I’d hold my tongue about a broken Array Solutions or DXE
product (as my personal experience is that wouldn’t be the norm), I’ve also personally been
on the losing average of product defects.
My point is that it’s not surprising as sometimes I choose to gamble and be
cheap.
Tim / N6WIN.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|