[TenTec] re QST ad

[John Nason / NA9U]

I am having the feet on my O2 shaved 1/32" of an inch.

73,
John NA9U

--- Merle Bone <merlebone at charter.net> wrote:

> Rob - K5UJ said:
> "Some hams obsess about BDR etc. beyond what 95% of
> hams give a flip about.  For those 95%, whether a
> rig is 
> "good" or "bad" boils down to what I call the
> pleasure rating:  on a scale from 1 to 10, how much
> fun is it to operate; how much pleasure do you
> derive from the experience?  Factors affecting this
> can range from audio quality, to heft (does it move
> on the table when i plug in cans?) and build
> quality, as well as drift, f.p. layout, PA power,
> blah blah with the rx down there 
> somewhere in the priority list.  Oh, it has to be
> able to hear--don't get me wrong, but if the AGC
> pumps at times, it's not the end of the world. " 
>  
> I don't think any one technical specification "makes
> a really good receiver." However, it clearly
> appears, to me, that the HF radio manufacturers are
> putting more time and effort into building much
> better receivers that take advantage of new
> technologies. TenTec's use of roofing filters, as an
> example, has clearly spilled forward and backward -
> although not quite as effective in earlier model
> transceivers. My FT1000MP is a much better receiver
> with the INRAD roofing filter then it was without it
> - more FUN! But it is not nearly as good as my
> Orion. Nothing is "the end of the world." However,
> it seems - based on what manufacturers are building
> and people buying - that many amateurs, in the new
> HF radio market,  are paying attention to "real
> receiver performance." I think that is good for
> TenTec because of their historically  strong
> commitment to excellent radio performance.
> ......................Just another assertion - like
> yours. 
> Merle - W0EWM 
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>