[UK-CONTEST] What is the best VHF Radio

Mon Sep 8 12:57:06 EDT 2008

Interesting reading, speaking as a HF/VHF contester and keen VHF op.

Whilst I am a fan of the IC7400, having owned one and used it in HF and VHF 
contests for a couple of years, I only consider it 'adequate' on 2m (and 
HF).

On 2m, I have been fortunate to run it alongside an old Icom IC 251E with 
Mutek front end in several 'lifts' - it doesn't have all the bells and 
whistles, but is significantly more sensitive than the 7400.

A few people I've spoken to think highly of the 847 as a V/UHF radio.

It'd be great if one of the big manufacturers produced a high-performance 
V/UHF radio, but like Joh says I think those days are gone due to lack of 
demand - you only had to listen to 2m yesterday during the biggest contest 
of the year. I've got a reasonable station and struggled to make more than 
40 QSOs in 6 hours.

I think next time I'll got for a higher-performance HF/6m radio and get a 
decent transverter for 2m.

73
Darrell G0HVQ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John F Wilson" <UK-Contest at grebe.plus.com>
To: "UK-Contest" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] What is the best VHF Radio

> Neil,
>
> I reckon the IC7400 despite one or two issues, is hard to beat, on all
> round performance, strong signal handling and trasmit noise close to
> carrier.  The problem is that it only covers HF, 50 MHz and 144 MHz.
> Its high time ICOM produced a DSP VHF/UHF rig as a successor to the
> IC910 but I suspect they won't due to the smaller market than for HF rigs.
>
> On your original point, my feeling is that with the attenuator in and
> the preamp off, it was the transmitted signal that was at fault unless
> you just turned your preamp off by removing the supply to it without
> switching it out of circuit in which case it might be that if the signal
> was strong enough it could still be driving the off amplifier device
> into non-linearity.
>
> 73 John G3UUT
>
> Ian Burns wrote:
>> Neil,
>>
>> The Javornik II can be found here
>>
>> http://lea.hamradio.si/~s53ww/xvrt/xvrt.htm
>>
>> The page also shows some screen shots of the transverter o/p indicating
>> why you don't want to use it. With the PA turned off, depending on the
>> drive control setting (anything over about 1/4 is bad) the o/p has
>> spurii about 45dB down from the main carrier. These spurs move in and
>> out with respect to the main carrier as the rig is tuned across the band
>> and are offset anywhere from zero to several hundred KHz from the
>> carrier. Filtering is not an option.
>>
>> When you have seen how bad the TVTR o/p from the FT1000MP is you won't
>> want to use it to transvert to any band...
>>
>> As Jiri says a pad on the main o/p works well and is clean.
>>
>> 73
>> Ian
>>
>>
>> G3RIR wrote:
>>
>>> Ian,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the response. I have never heard of Javornik perhaps you can 
>>> let
>>> me have a link.
>>>
>>> I have an FT1000mp as well as my FT847 and have a DEM transverter for 
>>> 432
>>> which was used with the FT1000mp. I moved to the FT847 for contesting on 
>>> 432
>>> as there are not too many very strong signals on 432 from our NFD 
>>> location
>>> (G3SDC/P on the Norfolk coast (JO02st)) and it is much more convenient 
>>> and
>>> smaller that the FT1000mp etc!!
>>>
>>> I have recently been active on 144 and that is where the FT847 might not
>>> have a robust enough receiver. However I found only one signal 
>>> splattering
>>> during the weekend from my home qth in IO92 so I am not blaming the rx 
>>> just
>>> yet.
>>>
>>> What did you find wrong with the FT1000mp transverter output? Could it 
>>> be
>>> cleaned up with filtering? When using the FT1000mp for a transverter I
>>> switch off the pa completely from inside the little top lid as this is 
>>> safer
>>> than someone accidentally running too much power from the pa into an
>>> attenuator.
>>>
>>> Neil, G3RIR
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
>>> [mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ian Burns
>>> Sent: 08 September 2008 09:13
>>> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
>>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] What is the best VHF Radio
>>>
>>> I can thoroughly recommend the FT100MP and Javornik II transverter
>>> combination. The receiver is not totally bomb proof but is noticeably
>>> better than my FT847. We used the setup at G0FBB in the 2m trophy this
>>> weekend and had no real problems despite some very loud signals on the 
>>> band.
>>>
>>> The only drawback of this combination is that the transverter output of
>>> the FT1000 can be too dirty to use on a crowded band. It's a fair way
>>> off the VHFCC recommendations of -100dBc... The main o/p is clean enough
>>> to use via a suitable attenuator though.
>>>
>>> 73
>>> Ian.
>>>
>>> Dave wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> At 20:21 07/09/2008 +0100, G3RIR wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There is a useful comparison of HF Tcvrs here
>>>> http://www.df9ic.de/tech/trxtest/trxtest.html
>>>>
>>>> 73 Dave G4RGK
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Earlier today I reported to a station on 144MHz that his signal was 
>>>>> very
>>>>> wide. I could hear splatter about 12kHz either side of his signal.
>>>>>
>>>>> I turned off my mast-head pre-amp, switched in an attenuator and 
>>>>> turned
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> my
>>>
>>>
>>>>> beam side on so that I only had s7 registered on my s-meter. The 
>>>>> splatter
>>>>> was still noticeable.
>>>>>
>>>>> The station concerned said he was definitely not over-driving 
>>>>> anything.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> He
>>>
>>>
>>>>> asked what receiver I was using and on being told it was an FT847 he
>>>>> suggested that it was my receiver at fault. This may of course be the
>>>>> problem but he wasn't the only loud signal on the band but was by far 
>>>>> the
>>>>> widest.
>>>>>
>>>>> What are the group members' views on the FT847 in handling such
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> situations
>>>
>>>
>>>>> and indeed what is the best receiver around for 144 and 432?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am also interested to know what is the specified noise figure for 
>>>>> the
>>>>> FT847; of course the manual only refers to sensitivity!
>>>>>
>>>>> Neil, G3RIR
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>>> Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.17/1655 - Release Date: 
>>> 07/09/2008
>>> 15:30
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.18/1658 - Release Date: 
> 07/09/2008 15:30
>
> 