Date: Tue, 22 Mar 94 04:30:25 PST
From: Ham-Equip Mailing List and Newsgroup <ham-equip@ucsd.edu>
Errors-To: Ham-Equip-Errors@UCSD.Edu
Reply-To: Ham-Equip@UCSD.Edu
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Ham-Equip Digest V94 #74
To: Ham-Equip
Ham-Equip Digest Tue, 22 Mar 94 Volume 94 : Issue 74
Today's Topics:
2m HT recomendations ?
HTX-202
Kenwood AT-250 and TS-440S - Question
looking for a suggestion: ICOM 765 or ?
Strange Amplifier Interaction
Yaesu FT840
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <Ham-Equip@UCSD.Edu>
Send subscription requests to: <Ham-Equip-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the Ham-Equip Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-equip".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Mar 94 05:22:17 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!csn!joelf@hplabs.hp.com
Subject: 2m HT recomendations ?
To: ham-equip@ucsd.edu
Harland MacKenzie (harland@sabre.mech.ubc.ca) wrote:
(Stuff deleted)
: I am looking at models from Kenwood, Yeasu, and I-COM. I am
: leaning toward the Kenwood TH-28A. I am also looking at the
: Yeasu F-11R and 411 as well as a few models from I-COM.
(More stuff deleted)
I have a Kenwood TH-27A and a friend with the TH-28A. I am very happy
with the "features" on either radio. On the other hand, the biggest
problem I find in our area (Denver, CO) is that the TH-28A seems to have
way too wide a front end in the high intermod areas. When I get downtown
with my TH-27A, I fight intermod, the TH-28A and my wifes TH-78A (dual
band) get almost intolerable. This will be a problem with almost any hand
held. The new Kenwood models are supposed to be better on power than the
TH-28A but I have not had to chance to try one.
73 -- Joel
KG0IL
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 94 20:19:17 PST
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!pacbell.com!sgiblab!swrinde!emory!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!news.mic.ucla.edu!unixg.ubc.ca!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!mala.bc.ca!oneb!ham!emd@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: HTX-202
To: ham-equip@ucsd.edu
I'm considering the purchase of the Radio Shack handheld as a spare
handheld, especially since they're on sale 'til the end of the month for
$259 Can.
Can anyone tell me if other, larger batteries will also fit on the RS
radio? It doesn't look like much capacity to me...
Thanks, Bob.
Robert Smits There is *no* idiotproof filter.
VE7EMD Idiots are proof against anything!
Ladysmith B.C. - Richard Chycoski, VE7CVS
e-mail: emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 1994 08:23:15 MST
From: agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!eff!news.kei.com!news.byu.edu!cwis.isu.edu!mica.inel.gov!pc-ojg.inel.gov!ojg@ames.arpa
Subject: Kenwood AT-250 and TS-440S - Question
To: ham-equip@ucsd.edu
I have recently aquired a Kenwood AT-250 and I already had a TS-440S. In the
manual for the 440S, it lists the AT-250 as optional equipment. I got the
manual for the AT-250, but it does not address how to interface it to the
440S. Anyone know how???
Please help! the AT-250 works (tried it out on a 430.)
Thanks!
Jay - WA4VRV
For all email, write to:
ojg@tis.inel.gov or GREENBJC@inel.gov
73's
------------------------------
Date: 21 Mar 1994 17:03:40 -0600
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!cs.utexas.edu!geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!doc.cc.utexas.edu!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: looking for a suggestion: ICOM 765 or ?
To: ham-equip@ucsd.edu
In article <Cn0u39.LCD@hpqmoea.sqf.hp.com>,
David Stockton <dstock@hpqmoca.sqf.hp.com> wrote:
>Rob Lingelbach (rob@xyzoom.info.com) wrote:
>: I have a Kenwood TS440SAT, and I haven't been that happy with the
>: receiver performance. I am doing a lot more listening these days than
>: talking, so would like something with good filter options and bandpass
>: tuning, and just a better receiver in general. I was told by someone
>: that the IC 765 transceiver is outstanding in receiver performance; I
>: am not familiar with it, except that the local hamradio store doesn't
>: sell them any more. I was also told that the IC728 has a good
>: receiver but not as good as the 765.
>.
>
>: Can anyone suggest a transceiver under 1500$ that would fill the bill?
>
>: Thanks
Rob..I am going to have to suggest the TS-850..without antenna tuner.
That should be about 1500.00
There is just no radio that stacks up to it at that exact price range.
And has anyone but me had problems with those noisy-high distortion
Audio output amps in the ICOM xcvrs? My hearing is real good in the
upper freqs..(ie 16K) and the odd harmonic distortion in that range gives
me real bad listiner fatigue in short order. The IC-751a series is
real bad about it..
73 Bob AA5PB
------------------------------
Date: 21 Mar 1994 22:02:02 -0500
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news.ans.net!hp81.prod.aol.net!search01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Strange Amplifier Interaction
To: ham-equip@ucsd.edu
I wonder how well the vertical is grounded. Even better yet, is it roof
mounted?
Since the TL922 uses a standard PI output network (the tune and load caps are
in shunt), it could be that the grounding path is --> along outside of coax, to
amp, thru tune/load cap, then to chassis ground and finally earth.
The frequency selective effect would kinda hint that the transmission line is a
part of the return circuit.
If the vertical is BONDED to earth....then ignore me completely, I don't know
what I'm talking about ;-)
scott nx7u@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 1994 02:02:22 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!col.hp.com!srgenprp!news.dtc.hp.com!hplextra!rigel!pooley@network.ucsd.edu
Subject: Yaesu FT840
To: ham-equip@ucsd.edu
Does anyone have any opinions/experience with this radio? I would
very much appreciate any info. It sounds too good to be true to
me...
thanks,
Chuck
------------------------------
Date: 21 Mar 1994 23:15:13 GMT
From: news.cerf.net!pravda.sdsc.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!charnel.net.csuchico.edu!charnel!yeshua.marcam.com!news.kei.com!eff!news.umbc.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.@@ihnp4.ucsd.edu
To: ham-equip@ucsd.edu
References <2m58sq$12hg@watnews1.watson.ibm.com>, <2mfkd6$8p4@apple.com>, <19MAR94.18754189.0121@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA>on.a
Subject : Re: FT-990 vs TS-850
NADO000 (NADO@UNB.CA) wrote:
Referring to the choice between a Yaesu FT990 and a Kenwood TS850:
: A friend has both the Yeasu 757 and a Kenwood 440AT and he confirms
: the same findings. The Yeasu is more pleasant to listen to and most
: of us do a lot more listening than talking. My next rig is likely to
: be a Yeasu.
This seems to be a popular pair of radios. There've been several
postings over the last months asking for comparisons between these rigs.
I've also narrowed my choices down to these two if (when?) I ever
replace my Drake rigs. One thing that almost never seems to get
mentioned however...
How do these rigs sound on the air! At the risk of starting a flame
war, I'll venture the opinion that, in general, I find Kenwoods putting
out among the best sounding signals on the air. I've got to admit that
I enjoy hearing the reports of superior audio quality that my Drakes
seem to get on sideband, and I'd hate to give that up. I like putting
out a good pleasing signal! If it weren't for that factor, I'd probably
lean towards the Yaesu. As it is, I'm not sure.
Any thoughts or comments on the transmitting audio qualities of the
major brands on sideband, particularly these two radios?
Scott Turner N0VRF scott@hpisla.LVLD.HP.COM
------------------------------
End of Ham-Equip Digest V94 #74
******************************
******************************