[VHFcontesting] Transverters

Mon Dec 17 14:43:16 EST 2018

I certainly wouldn't consider the older Yaesus or the HTX100 that we were
running to be good IF radios, but they were certainly functional and
inexpensive enough that we got on the bands.

Another advantage of the 28MHz IF radios is that you can tower mount the
transverters and dramatically reduce the cable loss.

With 2-3 operators in the car, we don't necessarily want everything in one
radio. Having the ability to divide work and leave one person calling CQ on
6 or 2 while the other op spends as much time as required pulling in the
mults is helpful.

Sean WA1TE

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 2:04 PM Bill Olson <callbill at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all, Here's my take on all this. The nice thing about transverters,
> especially ones with high dynamic range mixers, is that they preserve the
> good features of the IF rig. If the IF rig is an HF transceiver which
> (because it's meant to be used on the crowded HF bands) has great
> selectivity, low phase noise, and other state of the art features like
> modern noise blankers, well you know, all the bells and whistles, etc, then
> you have a VHF/UHF rig that will really perform for weak signals on a
> crowded band on VHF. The down side is extra complexity, more cables, more
> boxes, more stuff to go wrong etc. Many of the new HF/VHF/UHF rigs are
> pretty good on selectivity and dynamic range, maybe not that great on
> sensitivity. But for roving on 6,2,432, even 1296, these rigs are probably
> the way to go. Add PA's and preamps if needed. Using the same rig as an IF
> for a 222 transverter makes sense (certainly better than an HTX100!). On
> the higher "microwave" bands a separate IF rig might make sens
>  e as long as it's stable and low in self-generated noise. being able to
> run "liaison" on a lower band while working the microwave bands is a plus.
> I think FT290's are probably less than ideal these days. But if that's all
> you have, it's more important to be "out there" than to worry about the
> ultimate in performance.
>
> my $.02  - bill K1DY (in snowy Maine)
> ________________________________
> From: VHFcontesting <vhfcontesting-bounces at contesting.com> on behalf of
> Sean Waite <waisean at gmail.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2018 6:09 PM
> To: aduhawk at comcast.net
> Cc: VHF Contesting; Patrick Thomas
> Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Transverters (was: Icom IC-9700 Release Date)
>
> The K1SIG rover uses transverters on everything but 6,2 and 70. Depending
> on the configuration for the particular contest, we have an IC-746, IC-910,
> IC-7000 and a TS-590 pulling duty on the native bands. One of those cheapo
> Ukrainian transverters on 222, previously with an HTX100 as IF but next
> time will be an FT-818. We've got SG Labs transverters on 33,23 and 13cm,
> and if I actually get the rest of the pieces I need I have a homebrew (not
> my homebrew, purchased homebrew) transverter on 5 gig and a DEMI 10 gig
> module. We had been using a FT290rII and an FT790rII as IFs on the
> microwaves, but will be moving to an FT817.
>
> I've debated getting the 1.2 module for the 910. For the price I'll
> probably end up with the SG Labs amp, 25W vs 10W and half the price. I see
> one on ebay at the moment for $750, which is 3/4 what I paid for the radio
> itself. The IC-9100 and IC-9700 are both out of my price range for now.
>
> 73, Sean WA1TE
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 9:05 AM <aduhawk at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > We started roving seriously 20+ years ago using Xvrtrs for 222, 900, 1.2
> > and 2304. We used 706MKii and an IC820 which doubled as an IF for 1.2 and
> > the primary for 432. We have TE Systems higher power amps for the bottom
> > four.  There are beams for all bands.  There are two of us in the vehicle
> > (K9ILT shotgun) and our weekend gear.
> >
> > The release of the TS2000X simplified life dramatically.  It became the
> > primary rig for 6, 2, 432 and 1.2.  The 706 became the IF for 900 and
> 2304
> > (with an attenuator).  The second SO239 for HF became the IF port for
> 222.
> > The remote head meant that we had control of everything right in front of
> > us.
> >
> > When the Limited Rover Class was introduced we simplified further, giving
> > up 2304, where we had little success.  We now run the bottom four bands
> > using the TS2K and our amps for VHF contests and for the UHF Contest we
> use
> > the 2 meter output as the IF for 900.  We may go to a higher power xvrtr
> > from DEMI for 900.
> >
> > I understand the the 9100 is large and heavy, so while we were initially
> > interested, the lack of a remote head kept us away.  We do have a 7300,
> > which is nice for home use and are planning to pick up a 9700 for home
> use
> > as well.  With the TS2K being discontinued we may pick up a spare if the
> > close out price is attractive enough.
> >
> > The Kenwood resides in the Rovermobile where we use it one in a while for
> > portable ops on HF.  I prefer the performance of transverters but
> > sometimes, the complexity of cables and power connections increases the
> > ceiling of complexity to the point where the fun gets diminished.
> >
> > 73, Tim K0PG and Pat, K9ILT
> > The Rovairs Extraordinaires
> > > On December 16, 2018 at 6:48 PM Patrick Thomas <
> p-thomas at mindspring.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > To be fair, the stock 9100 covers 12 bands over two decades of RF.  I
> > have to admit I share some disappointment that 222 (and 33cm while we're
> > dreaming) can't be included in a $1500-$2000 dedicated V/U radio.  I
> guess
> > Big Radio is in league with the transverter industry!
> > >
> > > Speaking of which... let me fork this thread off on a related topic...
> > how many people here use a rig with native VHF/UHF coverage of
> 144/432/1296
> > for weak signal work, as opposed to off-board transverters?  I'm not
> > holding my breath on direct conversion UHF radios, so frequency
> conversion
> > has to happen somewhere, right?  But I can see either philosophy: 1) the
> > radio manufacturer gets the best prices, an army of engineers, and knows
> > their system the best... or 2) the transverter people aren't constrained
> by
> > cost vs. mass market appeal, physical space, etc.
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > > KB8DGC
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > >Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 11:32:10 -0600
> > > >From: Peter Laws <plaws0 at gmail.com>
> > > >To: VHF Contesting <vhfcontesting at contesting.com>
> > > >Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Icom IC-9700 Release Date
> > > >
> > > >On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 9:47 PM N6Ze via VHFcontesting
> > > ><vhfcontesting at contesting.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> And 135 cm (222-225mhz )?? Hahaha
> > > >
> > > >Icom finally decides to put L-band in as the default (meaning no need
> > > >to leave room for and then design a removable module as on previous
> > > >radios) and ... people complain because there is no 222 MHz band.
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > VHFcontesting mailing list
> > > VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.contesting.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fvhfcontesting&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc0756a161f3043f2432a08d6644ad5fc%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636806669904873311&sdata=0PZVVmOr2s8Jezp4A9P%2BdknKRKDA4UBlo26x3ZGU8s4%3D&reserved=0
> > _______________________________________________
> > VHFcontesting mailing list
> > VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.contesting.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fvhfcontesting&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc0756a161f3043f2432a08d6644ad5fc%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636806669904873311&sdata=0PZVVmOr2s8Jezp4A9P%2BdknKRKDA4UBlo26x3ZGU8s4%3D&reserved=0
> >
> --
>
> Sent from my Motorola DynaTAC 8000X
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting at contesting.com
>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.contesting.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fvhfcontesting&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc0756a161f3043f2432a08d6644ad5fc%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636806669904873311&sdata=0PZVVmOr2s8Jezp4A9P%2BdknKRKDA4UBlo26x3ZGU8s4%3D&reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
-- 

Sent from my Motorola DynaTAC 8000X