[Icom] IC-746PRO vs IC-756PRO

Wed, 26 Feb 2003 20:00:00 -0500

I'm not sure they were shortcomings. I wish I still had my original 756,
not to mention my 756pro. As I remember, the original (analog) 756
worked and sounded about the same as my ic-746. And though it had the
burden of the mechanical filters, and a boring display, it was a darn
nice rig. 
Wish I'd kept it. But then again, they'd have to take my 756proII out of
my cold dead hands...
73, Warren W1GUD

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Siu Johnny
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 6:39 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Icom] IC-746PRO vs IC-756PRO

Hi Wayne,

I would be grateful if you could elaborate further about the short
comings
of IC756 original.  I shall be pleased to learn about it.

73

Johnny VR2XMC
----- Original Message -----
From: "A N Other" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 7:05 AM
Subject: Re: [Icom] IC-746PRO vs IC-756PRO

> At 01:22 PM 2/26/03 -0600, you wrote:
> >Thinking about selling my original 756 and buying a new 746PRO. The
price
is
> >very low now and they are throwing in the power supply. Curious as to
how
> >much difference there is between the 746PRO and 756PRO performance
wise.
> >I could pick up a used 756PRO for about the same money. Anybody
compared
> >these two rigs side by side? Also does anyone know if the band scope
on
the
> >746PRO is a continuous display or does it work like my 706 and make
one
scan
> >of the band with the audio muted? Thanks.
> >Paul, N5PS
>
> The band scope works like the 706 band scope. The 746PRO will make a
crude
> SWR plot for you on the screen tho.
>
> I owned an original 756 and I was shocked that Icom could produce such
a
> thing. It never made the grade in my eyes. I had a late model TS850 at
the
> time also. I kept the 850 and sold off the 756. My only regret was not
> unloading the thing faster. There were a number of issues that, to be
kind,
> suggested to me that the original 756 was pushed out too soon and in
an
> unrefined state.
>
> Today, I still have the 850 and there is a 746PRO sitting beside it. I
> passed on the original 756PRO simply because Icom lost my trust
through
the
> experience with the original 756. I bought the 746PRO because I wanted
to
> play 2M weak signal, and I wanted to have real IF DSP and 100 watts to
do
> it with.  It does that very well, BTW. I don't miss the bandscope
(much),
> but I sure do miss the S Meter. The little stalk controls along the
bottom
> feel just as cheap as they did on the 756. The 746PRO is very SWR
> sensitive. You'll be using the coupler a lot.
>
> I'm quite satisfied with my 746PRO. The MONITOR is anemic and the S
Meter
> doesn't seem "quite right", but everything other than that *works* and
> works well. The noise blanker is OK - better than the 756 and 706
blanker,
> but still inferior by far from the 740 or 751A blanker. For those that
> believe its normal for an effective blanker to trash a receiver, I
invite
> you to try a Drake R4C.
>
> I have no owner knowledge about the 756PRO. An opinion? You trade off
> 746PRO 2M (and VHF monitoring) for a more feature rich and expensive
HF
> radio. For many, the bandscope is a big attraction. The 756PRO seems
to be
> held in high regard by most.
>
> I chose the 746PRO over the 756PRO at the time because it had PRO II
level
> DSP, a better working noise blanker (well, at least they rediscovered
how
> to make it adjustable, at least) and I wanted a 2M IF DSP weak signal
> radio. Some folks have slammed the 746PRO for 2M sensitivity, but for
weak
> signal, that isn't much of an issue. The sensitivity is set by the
mast
> head amp.
>
> What I do not understand tho is the 746PRO has a BDR of around 123 dB
and
> the 756PRO II is almost 10 dB inferior. Actually, this specification
on
the
> 756PRO II is approaching the level of an FT817 or about matches the
IC740,
> yet no one has complained. For sure, 115 dB of BDR is out of keeping
of a
> radio in the 756PRO II price class.
>
> In raw receiver specs, the 746PRO betters or equals the 756PROany
> everywhere except for 3rd order intercept. Generally you run out of
BDR
> before you start to get to 3rd order intercept, assuming the 3rd order
is
> above 0. Point? The 746PRO is not inferior in any way to the 756PRO
II, at
> least in rough profile. You'll have to start digging to find a major
> difference in capability. I'm sure there is. Yes, the 756PRO (and II)
is
> more feature rich, but the 746PRO has the essentials well covered.
>
> The 746PRO is no slouch and will serve you well. It doesn't have the
draw
> and appeal of the 756PROany. The 756PROany (obviously) offers much
more in
> creature comforts, and it has a real S Meter - an increasingly hard to
find
> item these days. The PRO II has refined the 756PRO in a number of
subtle
ways.
>
> 746PRO or used 756PRO? If you are at that level, I'd suggest you wait
for
> Dayton and see what deals can be had on a 746PRO or a 756PRO II. If
the
> rumored IC785 ever appears at Dayton guys will be unloading their PRO
IIs.
> Dayton is not quite 80 days from now. If you've had your 756 since
> original, another 80 days is no time at all. Even if you don't go to
> Dayton, many dealers have Dayton-like prices that week. You can pick
up a
> plain 756PRO anytime. Come Dayton, circumstances could put you in
756PRO
II
> territory for hardly much more money.
>
> Maybe.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Wayne
> VE3CE
>
> ----
> Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan W6OLD, [email protected]
> Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.315 MHz
> Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/
>
----
Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan W6OLD, [email protected]
Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.315 MHz
Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/