[CQ-Contest] RE: [UK-CONTEST] FT1000 or FT1000MP? (LONG)

"Andy Cook" at contesting.com "Andy Cook" at contesting.com
Tue Dec 30 16:33:01 EST 2003

I've used both the 1000 and the 1000MP (original version). I find the close-in strong signal performance of the MP better and this has been borne out for mein the lower number of burbles in contests like AFS. The auto notch on the MP is great on SSB but I don't use any of the rest of the DSP in anger. The ATU is better on the original radio and the extra power can be convenient. I prefer the INRAD 1.8k filters on SSBto the Yaesu 2k ones in the D (but not so keen onthe INRAD 2.1k ones)  I'd probably keep the MP on balance but wouldn't worry too much if I just had the 1000.

Andy, G4PIQ
ginal Message-----
    From: "Steve Jones"<steve at rjtraining.fsnet.co.uk>
    Sent: 30/12/03 11:59:37
    To: "CQ-Contest at contesting.com"<CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
    Cc: "uk-contest at contesting.com"<uk-contest at contesting.com>
    Subject: [UK-CONTEST] FT1000 or FT1000MP? (LONG)
      Seasons greetings to all.
    I would appreciate people's view as to whether I should keep my 2 year
    old FT1000 (non D) radio, or the mint condition FT1000MP which I bought
    in December. I bought the latter in order to carry out some a/b tests
    over Christmas holiday, and to also compare with the rx of my ic7400
    (mainly used on 6 and 2m) and a friend's ic756proII.  
    To put the dilemma into context my current and future interests are as
    1.	To continue HF contesting (hence the need to keep one twin rx
    2.	To become more active on the lower bands as we go down the cycle
    (40m four square construction started, and plans for bigger 80m and 160m
    antennas), hence the need for a decent rx on low bands, and also option
    of diversity reception (plan to put a big loop across one of my fields)
    3.	I'd like to have the option of transverting onto 70mhz again
    from 10m (so rx performance on 10m and ease of transverting is
    4.	I continue to have an interest in 10m, so a decent rx on 10m is
    also important
    I would welcome people's views on which of the 1000's I should keep. My
    Christmas tests are not yet complete, but so far the ic7400 has been
    impressive on LF and 10m on RX (but not as good as the two 1000's in
    handling qrm (without using the dsp- all radios compared using the stock
    2.4 bandwidth. to be fair), so I am comfortable keeping the ic7400 as my
    second HF/6/2m radio. The difference between the two 1000s (so far) has
    been marginal on  160m, 80m and 10m, and when I have tried the MP's dsp
    I cannot say that it has made a noticeable difference on ssb. The MP has
    had the Inrad 70mhz mod carried out, so there is no hiss problem on rx
    that I can detect.
    I am particularly interested in hearing from contesters who switched
    from the 1000 to the original MP - what were the perceived advantages of
    switching, and did your view change with the benefit of hindsight?  Do
    you find the dsp useful with ssb contesting?  I am equally interested in
    honest opinions from people who have switched from the MP to a MK5 or
    MK5Field recently - ie perceived advantages and the actual experience
    after switching. I have considered the option of selling both the 1000
    and the MP and going for the 200w mk5 plus the 6m transverter (6m has
    been main band here for 15 years), but have been told of birdie problems
    on the transverter plus some failure problems with the mk5 itself. The
    MK5 Field is an option I would consider seriously if someone who has
    used one in anger can convince me its better than either the ft1000 or
    the original MP. 
    My gut feeling at present is to stick with my original decision 2 years
    ago (when I could have bought either the ft1000 (USA import) or the
    outgoing original MP) and continue to keep the ft1000 (stock cw 500hz
    and 250hz filters, plus an Inrad 1.8 ssb filter I added to the 455 if),
    as I don't think any manufacturer will ever build such a quality radio
    as the original FT1000 again.  However I like the MP too (for its easy
    configuration, transverting, and auto notch).  If I am persuaded to keep
    the MP then I would probably buy the Inrad 8.2mhz if 1.8 ssb filter to
    give me cascaded 1.8s on ssb, and add at least another cw filter and the
    second rx 400hz Inrad cw filter. If I keep the FT1000 I will add the BPF
    to give true diversity rx , as well as the Inrad 400hz second rx cw
    filter .
    I am sure some will suggest keeping both the 1000s for SO2R, but I don't
    intend trying SO2R for quite a while yet, and I would rather use the
    ic7400 with its 100w on 6m and 2m for PAs than go down the transverter
    route on all the vhf bands (been there with my ft920 and its too messy).
    So there you have it - which 1000 would you keep and why please. In
    order to keep the use of bandwidth down it might be better to mail me
    direct, and I will sumarise to the reflector if there is enough demand,
    or will email direct those that want to know the outcome.
    Final final question - I remember there used to be a website with equip
    details of active contest stations but could not find it on the web
    yesterday - is it still available? I am interested to see what all the
    big guns are currently using (without having to go to each of their
    individual web sites).
    Thanks for the bandwidth and HNY for 2004
    Steve GW0GEI      
    UK-Contest mailing list
    UK-Contest at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list