[TenTec] Re: Post Sweepstakes: FWIW

[jerome schatten]

John... what mods did you do to the FT-920?  CW --I found that the sidetone 
on the 920, which has little to do with what is actually being transmitted 
drove me nuts. I ended up using another rx to monitor what I was sending 
(cumbersome).  I found the 920's qsk unusable (clipped very badly), and it's 
keying too soft. I wonder if you dealt with any of these problems in your 
modded version?

I still have the 920; it holds up the Jupe -- now if I could put the Jupe's 
qsk in that 920 box...

Best,
Jerome - VA7VV


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Rippey" <w3uls at 3n.net>
To: <tentec at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 7:20 AM
Subject: [TenTec] Re: Post Sweepstakes: FWIW


> FWIW, my experience in the CQ SSB and the ARRL SS was as follows. A 
> barefoot OMNI VI gave me everything I needed and more in the CQ SSB. 
> Amazing performance on both receive and transmit. A modified FT-920 and 
> the OMNI VI tied in the SS for CW receiver performance. On CW, I find the 
> FT-920 generally easier to use--more amenities--but the OMNI VI is always 
> there to step in if/when needed.
>
> How strange that after four years of diddling with a bunch of transceivers 
> (not including the PRO II or the Orion) I end up with the Omni VI and the 
> (modified) FT-920 sitting side by side and the others either sold or up 
> for sale.
>
> I use two Carolina Windoms up about 45 feet from a QTH 150 feet over the 
> Potomac River, about half a mile inshore on the Virginia side across from 
> St. Clement's Island. Based on my experience, I think there is something 
> to the notion of location, location, . . .
>
> 73,
> John, W3ULS
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>