[CW] What about a FT-450 for CW? A second look.

Sat Nov 15 23:10:16 EST 2008

I hate it when I do this (I say with egg on my face) - must've been pooped myself.  I was referencing my FT840 - not the 450  YKIES!!!  I've really been working too many hours.  My apologies to all (I just turned 55 on Friday - can I use that as an excuse???)

I can't believe I couldn't even remember the model of my on rig.

Man, oh man, oh man (I'm kicking the ground as I type this)....

ALL my comments apply to my 840.

Sheeeeessss.....

Back in my hole!

Mark

(From the description, I'd say my 840 is the toy, not the 450, but I still dream about the K3 - that I got right!)

________________________________

From: cw-bounces at mailman.qth.net on behalf of Danny Douglas
Sent: Fri 11/14/2008 7:26 PM
To: CW Reflector
Subject: Re: [CW] What about a FT-450 for CW? A second look.

With that explanation, I dont think of it so much a a toy, at all.  Its
pretty much what most of us have in one way or the other.  Yeah, I got a few
bells and whistles I didnt have on the old rig, but its also minus a couple
that one had.  I used to own a separate pair of Yaesu FL/FR DX400 which did
a very good job, but they were tubed, and were a real pain to keep going,
when used several hours a day.  The main reason for replacing them ws just
that --- re tube twice a year, play with coils to repeak the receiver,
almost every month. etc. etc.  Up grading to a transistor/only rig was a
great move.  Ive even gone to a transistor-only amp.  No more tubes!!!  I,
for one, dont need a "professional" rig, which I consider a 6,000 rig to be.
It becomes something more than just a hobby, when you pour that sort of
money into it.

Yeah, with all the split operations today, it would be nice to have a second
receiver built in, and maybe a receive only port for 160, etc.  but every
item you add makes the costs go way higher than the value of what you are
getting.  You get an inexpensive tranceiver, add a second receive chain,
extra power output, blah blah blah blah, and what do you have?  A rig that
cost a heck of a lot more than if you went out and purchased a rig with all
that built in, so you havent saved a penny, but have actually spent more.
In the financial world that is called the "law of diminishing returns".  Add
a pool, three bathrooms, a three car garage and you dont get the value of
the costs, when you sell the house.  So be it with radios said Cesar.

Danny Douglas
N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB
All 2 years or more (except Novice)
Pls QSL direct, buro, or LOTW preferred,
I Do not use, but as a courtesy do upload to eQSL for
those who do.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Baker" <k7ddmjb at qwest.net>
To: "'CW Reflector'" <cw at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 10:01 PM
Subject: RE: [CW] What about a FT-450 for CW? A second look.

I guess stating ones opinion when you are tired doesn't always come out as
planned so let me make another stab at it when I am not as pooped.  :>)

My comment about it being a toy was intended to stir the pot just a touch so
that those who actually owned one would make their comments and address why
they liked it. Many who read the lists are "lurkers" and don't post unless
prodded to do so. No foul or slam intended.

The rig has its high and low points and I'll attempt to explain them.

Pluses.

Full DSP IF system so NO extra crystal filters to purchase.
YES, it does have VOX, (the button is right on the panel in plane sight.)

It will run QSK or semi-break in with adjustable time delay.

It even has a "Morse trainer" mode for those who need the practice and don't
want to break out the computer to generate it.

It runs the full amateur bands 160M to 6M and has a built in antenna
matcher. (Limited range but useful.) and full wide band receive coverage.

IF notch, peaking, DSP noise reduction, and microphone audio equalization
are there as well.

Minuses.

The DSP is somewhat limited it setting and adjustment as far as I can tell.

Like many rigs, QSK was more of an after thought rather than a specific goal
and is a bit noisy and clunky but it does work.  Much easier to just run
semi break in and not abuse the ears as much.

The keyer is built in but I find the menu system to access it and many of
the functions in the rig to be non intuitive.  Maybe its just me but I like
some of my adjustment up front where I can get to them without trying to
remember the menu system to get there.

The tuning knob is really tiny for my liking. It should have been more the
size and shape of say the IC-706 or at least that diameter.

Facts.

The rig with matcher/tuner is $739 at HRO.
To make a significant improvement in performance will cost about double the
price.
There is no rig I am aware of that offers the same or equal features in an
HF to 6M rig near that price.
Any rig that keeps you on the air is better than being QRT.
The best radio you own is the one you can afford to purchase.

Epilog.

Don't let my opinion sway your decision one way or the other.
The best way to evaluate a rig is to use one for a day or two and have the
manual with you so you can understand all the features it has to offer and
then weigh it all against what you can afford. One mans diamond is another
mans chunk of coal. Ultimately, you are the one who will use it and decide
if you made a wise decision.

Other choices and why.

IF, you are looking for the best in rigs primarily for CW, then I would say
you have two major choices. Elecraft K3 or TenTec Orion.
Hands down, they are the two that have the smoothest QSK, outstanding
receivers, widest choice of options and are the most reasonably affordable.
OK, so they aren't cheep but they don't cost $10K plus either.

IF, you had to pick a direction and start building a station that will grow
and expand in capability with future funding as it becomes available and
wanted a great radio that you can really "Know and Understand" how it works
and what is going on inside, I would say start with a K3, even a 10 watt
version for $1399 as a mechanical kit (the boards are assembled and tested
you just have to do the assembly of the rig) and when you get the $499 for
the 100 watt internal amp, add it on.  Want the second antenna jack, add it
on, or the second full DSP receiver, add it on for $599.  Want the ultimate
in rock crusher front end filtering?  Add the 300Hz roofing filter made by
INRAD and sold under the Elecraft name.
I AM going to have one down the road myself.  I am attempting to thin the
herd here at my QTH and intend to bank the $$ until I can do just what I
described.

What indicators make for a good rig choice?
Ask yourself, "What are the big boys buying and why?"
Yeah, I know, they aren't you but, they must have their reasons because some
of them seldom change rigs unless there is a significant improvement to be
had.
Lots of the heavies are trading off their old FT-1000D rigs for TenTec Orion
II's or K3's because they see and recognize the improvements. Excellent bang
for the buck as well.
For some that move isn't cheep either as they might be buying two or more
rigs. Enter the SO2R contest crowd.

So I hope this small novel hasn't bored you asleep, but I thought I should
take the time to better express my reasoning for my comments and give you
some useful food for thought.

Good luck and let us all know what you end up with and why.

Best 72, 73

Michael Baker  K7DD
k7ddmjb at qwest.net

-----Original Message-----
From: cw-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:cw-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of Mark Danner
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:09 AM
To: CW Reflector
Subject: RE: [CW] What about a FT-450 for CW?

Michael J.,

I have an FT450.  Toy?  Yeah....maybe!  (When it's all you got, it's
hard to say some things!)
Just a couple of notes on the 450 - you will have to add a narrow CW
filter - it's not included.

Also, (this is picky!) if you like to zero-beat by turning the VOX off
and keying against the other signal, it won't work with the 450.
There's no VOX button to push!

If you enjoy SWL activities, you'll probably want to add a wide AM
filter.  The included AM filter is too narrow.

If you want to work 10M FM - you'll need to add that module also.

Also, if you really like QSK, the 450 will be very disappointing.  I can
get closer to QSK with my Tuna-Tin and it's toggle switch (slight
overstatment for effect!)

But, I've been using the "toy" since my last rig died and this was the
only one I could afford at the time.  Yes, I'd love to replace it, but
that will have to wait.  Do I enjoy using it?  Sure!  The alternative is
no operation at all (I use it as the receiver with the Tuna-Tin.)

If you can spring for more, it'd be a really good idea.  If it's all you
can afford, just remember it's an entry level rig and the whistles and
bells will add to the cost.

A toy?  Well, you're talking about Christmas, so toys aren't that bad!

73,

Mark  AB7MP

-----Original Message-----
From: cw-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:cw-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of Michael Baker
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 11:55 PM
To: 'CW Reflector'
Subject: RE: [CW] What about a FT-450 for CW?

Save your money and buy a TS-2000 Kenwood and forget the FT450. It's a
toy radio designed as a newbie first HF rig. Not too bad on SSB but it
is NOT a serious CW rig at all.
I have played with every rig on the market in the last 40 years and as a
CW DXer and contester on a budget I have NOT regretted my purchase of
the TS2000 almost 5 years ago now.
Most 930's I have used and owned had a good receiver in them. Yes they
have some phase noise but the QSK is sweet.
The TS2000 has a bit of a noisy receiver as well but the selectivity
features of the adjustable DSP filtering are wonderful. You can split
hairs with is!  :>) I am planning on adding the INRAD 2.1 roofing filter
to mine as soon as I have some spare $$$ and I am told it makes the
front end almost bullet proof.
Just one mans opinion but I do think you would just be wasting your
money.
This weekend is Sweepstakes so if you have access to a TS2000 to listen
too this would give you a good test of its capabilities and the
shortcomings of the FT450.
Good luck. Best 72, 73

Michael Baker  K7DD
k7ddmjb at qwest.net

-----Original Message-----
From: cw-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:cw-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of Michael Josefsson
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 11:57 PM
To: CW Reflector
Subject: [CW] What about a FT-450 for CW?

Well XMAS is approaching. Will a FT-450 make me happier than I am now
using a 1984 vintage TS-930S? I find the 930 somewhat noisy but love the
QSK. And when operating field-day then I seem to be the only one not
being QRM:ed by the others - they QRM each other and I QRM them in some
extent, but I come out on top usually:)

So is a FT-450 an improvement? At least *something* must have happend
the last decades, or...  :)

Ideas welcome!
/Micke
_______________________________________________
CW mailing list
CW at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw

_______________________________________________
CW mailing list
CW at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw

_______________________________________________
CW mailing list
CW at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw

_______________________________________________
CW mailing list
CW at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> 
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.3/1788 - Release Date: 11/14/2008
1:36 PM

_______________________________________________
CW mailing list
CW at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 13380 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/attachments/20081115/75e06a41/attachment-0001.bin