[ICOM] ICOM PRO III
Roland Guidry
na5q at w5ddl.org
Fri Dec 24 13:55:30 EST 2004
Every Icom rig I have owned has operated without flaw. The Yaesu I had had
problems and service was terrible ant the time. Just bought upgraded from a
Pro II to a Pro III, first station worked after just turning it on was
VU4RBI at 7:02 CST. What an experience! Did the new rig cause that to happen
when I could not hear them before, I doubt it, but it sure felt good. Hi!
And confirmed the upgrade to my XYL, sure???
I experience with the Pro III tells me that it receives as close to the Pro
II, I do like the new features a lot! They make using the radio more of a
pleasure. I do plenty of RTTY contesting and having the Xmt/Rvc decode to
backup the PC is nice for me.
The new Yaesu's interest me, but I have to start saving my dollars for that
one!
Merry Christmas to all and Happy New Years!
Thanks Dick for the relector and appreciate it!
73 de, Roland, NA5Q
-----Original Message-----
From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of icom-request at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 12:50 PM
To: icom at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Icom Digest, Vol 1, Issue 433
Send Icom mailing list submissions to
icom at mailman.qth.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/icom
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
icom-request at mailman.qth.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of Icom digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: 7800 vs. PROIII vs? (Malcolm Ringel)
2. Re: 7800 vs. PROIII vs? (Dick Flanagan)
3. Merry Cristmas (Cyrus Turner)
4. Re: 7800 vs. PROIII vs? (Edward L. Dowdy)
5. Re: 7800 vs. PROIII vs? (Jan C. Robbins)
6. Re: 7800 vs. PROIII vs? (Crocdonz at aol.com)
7. Thanks to all (William Diamond)
8. Remote station (Jan C. Robbins)
9. apologies for that last! (Jan C. Robbins)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:33:22 -0500
From: "Malcolm Ringel" <mringel at bluecrab.org>
Subject: Re: [ICOM] 7800 vs. PROIII vs?
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <00b901c4e9d6$49a99460$cd2f4845 at DGG4W921>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Jan: Thanks for the info ...that's why I posed the question. My clearly
unscientific surmise was based not on "data", but on my personal observation
that I almost never hear anyone discussing their Ten-Tec products, whereas
Icom is often a hot topic.
It may well be that I am listening to different people/in different areas or
simply a matter of timing.
Frankly, I wish there were a dozen top-end rigs, all from different healthy
manufacturers, with the resulting competitive improvements which would
surely result.
Geeez...why can't I just shut up.
Best wishes from the Maryland Eastern Shore
Malcolm, K3KZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan C. Robbins" <swanman at cfu.net>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: [ICOM] 7800 vs. PROIII vs?
> I'd be curious to know why one might think the Orion "doesn't sell
> nearly as well" as, say, the 7800. The data I've seen suggest the Orion
> is selling better than any other top-of-the-line transceiver has in the
> last decade, given its limited supply schedule. It would be doing a
> great deal better if supply could begin to keep up with worldwide
> demand, which so far it can't.
>
> As to the comparisons, at least half a dozen independent testing
> operations rate the Orion higher than the 7800, not one the other way
> round. The margins vary, of course.
>
> 73 Jan
>
> Malcolm Ringel wrote:
>
> > Why, then, do you suppose they (Ten-Tec Orions) do not sell nearly as
well
> > as the Icom products ? This is not offered as a "smart remark" , just
> > genuine curiosity.
> > As always, 73 to most.
> > Malcolm Ringel, K3KZ
> > St. Michaels, MD
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <N8GMB at aol.com>
> > To: <icom at mailman.qth.net>
> > Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 10:30 AM
> > Subject: Re: [ICOM] 7800 vs. PROIII vs?
> >
> >
> >
> >>The Ten-Tec Orion according to the tests and reviews I have read out
> >
> > performs
> >
> >>easily the 7800 under difficult conditions, for a fraction of the price
of
> >>the Icom...
> >>
> >>Chuck
> >>n8gmb
> >>----
> >>Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
> >>Win a new Icom IC-756 PRO III and help QSL/QTH.net
> >>Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ----
> > Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
> > Win a new Icom IC-756 PRO III and help QSL/QTH.net
> > Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/
> >
> >
>
> --
> "There is no end to what you can accomplish
> if you don't care who gets the credit." Anon.
>
> ----
> Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
> Win a new Icom IC-756 PRO III and help QSL/QTH.net
> Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 08:40:41 -0800
From: Dick Flanagan <dick at twohams.com>
Subject: Re: [ICOM] 7800 vs. PROIII vs?
To: ICOM Reflector <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20041224083904.00c35a38 at mail.greatbasin.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 08:33 AM 12/24/2004, Malcolm Ringel wrote:
>Best wishes from the Maryland Eastern Shore
Best wishes to all from the High Desert of Western Nevada.
Thank you all for making this the very best ICOM reflector.
73, Dick
--
Dick Flanagan K7VC NV SM
E-mail: k7vc at arrl.org
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 10:44:20 -0600
From: "Cyrus Turner" <w5dxe at hotmail.com>
Subject: [ICOM] Merry Cristmas
To: forsale-swap at mailman.qth.net, icom at mailman.qth.net,
kenwood at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <BAY10-F592B210696A86D77A906F1F4A60 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
To all I wish a very Merry Christmas
and A very safe and Happy New Year
May Gods Blessings continue to be bestowed upon everyone
Cy/W5DXE
Failure isn't falling down. It's failing to get back up.
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:01:07 -0600
From: "Edward L. Dowdy" <ka9ees at insightbb.com>
Subject: Re: [ICOM] 7800 vs. PROIII vs?
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <005c01c4e9da$2c7a9570$6501a8c0 at Edward>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=response
Thank YOU Dick. Merry Christmas.
Ed KA9EES
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Flanagan" <dick at twohams.com>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: [ICOM] 7800 vs. PROIII vs?
> At 08:33 AM 12/24/2004, Malcolm Ringel wrote:
> >Best wishes from the Maryland Eastern Shore
>
> Best wishes to all from the High Desert of Western Nevada.
>
> Thank you all for making this the very best ICOM reflector.
>
> 73, Dick
> --
> Dick Flanagan K7VC NV SM
> E-mail: k7vc at arrl.org
>
>
> ----
> Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
> Win a new Icom IC-756 PRO III and help QSL/QTH.net
> Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:02:52 -0600
From: "Jan C. Robbins" <swanman at cfu.net>
Subject: Re: [ICOM] 7800 vs. PROIII vs?
To: ICOM Reflector <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <41CC4BBC.4050309 at cfu.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Hi Malcolm,
Please don't "shut up" when you're making such good sense! Hope I didn't
lead you to think i thought otherwise.
Like you, I hear more about Icoms than any other rigs, but that's
because I've owned them for years and been around a lot of other Icom
owners(why we're on this reflector, nicht wahr?). But I talk to a lot
of (a) contesters and (b) European DXers, and in those groups the only
Icom taken seriously (for good reason in my opinion) is the 775. The
Orion gets top billing. And as to the "urban myth" that Orions are
unreliable, try telling that to the top-score multi-multi contesters who
traded in their Omnis (perhaps the most reliable contest rigs ever
built), not to mention their MK V's, for Orions. ON4UN would have a good
laugh about the "unreliability" claim.
More generally, there are no doubt LOTS of different reasons for valuing
particular radios. My own tests are: (1) which will let me dig deepest
into the noise and (2) which deepest into the pileups (the guy on the
other end doesn't know or care what I'm transmitting on). I own 775s
and see no evidence the 7800 could do any better on those scores, but
the Orion might, though probably not enough to make me spend $4K. On
the other hand, a 756PROII lasted one week here; the 775s ran rings
around it. Ditto a K2, though that is a VERY nice toy.
Once again. Vy Happy Holidays to All! You keep the hobby alive and fun
for an old geezer, even after 46 years as a ham.
vy 73, jan
Malcolm Ringel wrote:
> Jan: Thanks for the info ...that's why I posed the question. My clearly
> unscientific surmise was based not on "data", but on my personal
observation
> that I almost never hear anyone discussing their Ten-Tec products, whereas
> Icom is often a hot topic.
> It may well be that I am listening to different people/in different areas
or
> simply a matter of timing.
> Frankly, I wish there were a dozen top-end rigs, all from different
healthy
> manufacturers, with the resulting competitive improvements which would
> surely result.
> Geeez...why can't I just shut up.
> Best wishes from the Maryland Eastern Shore
>
> Malcolm, K3KZ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jan C. Robbins" <swanman at cfu.net>
> To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 10:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [ICOM] 7800 vs. PROIII vs?
>
>
>
>>I'd be curious to know why one might think the Orion "doesn't sell
>>nearly as well" as, say, the 7800. The data I've seen suggest the Orion
>>is selling better than any other top-of-the-line transceiver has in the
>>last decade, given its limited supply schedule. It would be doing a
>>great deal better if supply could begin to keep up with worldwide
>>demand, which so far it can't.
>>
>>As to the comparisons, at least half a dozen independent testing
>>operations rate the Orion higher than the 7800, not one the other way
>>round. The margins vary, of course.
>>
>>73 Jan
>>
>>Malcolm Ringel wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Why, then, do you suppose they (Ten-Tec Orions) do not sell nearly as
>
> well
>
>>>as the Icom products ? This is not offered as a "smart remark" , just
>>>genuine curiosity.
>>>As always, 73 to most.
>>>Malcolm Ringel, K3KZ
>>>St. Michaels, MD
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: <N8GMB at aol.com>
>>>To: <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>>>Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 10:30 AM
>>>Subject: Re: [ICOM] 7800 vs. PROIII vs?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The Ten-Tec Orion according to the tests and reviews I have read out
>>>
>>>performs
>>>
>>>
>>>>easily the 7800 under difficult conditions, for a fraction of the price
>
> of
>
>>>>the Icom...
>>>>
>>>>Chuck
>>>>n8gmb
>>>>----
>>>>Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
>>>>Win a new Icom IC-756 PRO III and help QSL/QTH.net
>>>>Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>----
>>>Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
>>>Win a new Icom IC-756 PRO III and help QSL/QTH.net
>>>Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/
>>>
>>>
>>
>>--
>>"There is no end to what you can accomplish
>>if you don't care who gets the credit." Anon.
>>
>>----
>>Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
>>Win a new Icom IC-756 PRO III and help QSL/QTH.net
>>Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ----
> Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
> Win a new Icom IC-756 PRO III and help QSL/QTH.net
> Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/
>
>
--
"There is no end to what you can accomplish
if you don't care who gets the credit." Anon.
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:09:35 EST
From: Crocdonz at aol.com
Subject: Re: [ICOM] 7800 vs. PROIII vs?
To: icom at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <157.46bc6fed.2efda74f at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
hi
well, it would seem to me that the reason the icom and others outsell the
ten
tec's are that there are so many more outlets for buying them. you cant go
to
a radio store and play with one and take it home. it has to be ordered from
the factory. why they did this is a mystery to me. i have my pro 2's, grat
rigs
and an omni 6 plus. for the life of me, i cant tell the difference in the
rigs rx, as i can hear the same thing with all of them. even the 1000d, if i
can
hear it on the tt, i can hear it on them.....and vice versa. btw, i'm not a
cw
person.
anyway, merry christmas to all.
don-kd9mf
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:08:36 -0800
From: "William Diamond" <wjdiamond at cox.net>
Subject: [ICOM] Thanks to all
To: "Icom at Mailman. Qth. Net" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <000001c4e9f4$5a37e0c0$6601a8c0 at for99t6w8ttfev>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi Folks,
It's been a while since I have been on the reflector but I was still looking
once in a while when I could.
For those that had not heard, I had a pretty close call, health wise and
numerous hospital stays with more procedures than I want to remember.
I am now getting along quite well after firing all of my doctors and
starting over from scratch which turned out to be the best decision that I
have made in a long time.
I just wish that I had spent as much time in picking out a doctor as I have
on picking out rigs.
It was an event filled year with the lightning strike ect., but all has
turned out OK.
Contrary to what some have said, I did not turn away from Icom to Yaesu,
Kenwood etc., it is just the fact that it really was silly to have so many
of my damaged rigs replaced with 746 Pro's and 756 PRO It's and multiple
speakers, mikes etc.
I did chose as replacements for some, the "top end" rigs from brand Y & K as
well as some "mint" brand "C" stuff.
As to which I like the best, it is a toss up and depends entirely on
personal preferences in as much as most of you know, the spec's means
nothing to me at all, it is the way it sounds and performs in my world that
matters to me.
If I were to design a rig from the ground up, it would have Collins audio,
Yaesu knob feel, Icom display, Yaesu size, Kenwood xmit smoothness, Kenwood
DSP ect.
Of all the Icoms that I have owned, I like my IC 781 the best of all, of all
the Yaesu's that I have or have owned in the past, I prefer the FT1000D.
On the Kenwood's I prefer the TS 870 DSP the best. Of the Collins, the orig.
S 1 line is my favorite.
So anyway, thanks to all for the support thru the medical problems and the
damage to the collection, it may have not always been answered in a timely
manner buy it sure was appreciated.
Every morning there were several that emailed me to see if I was ok as well
as lots of phone calls as well.
Also as usual, Adam Farson was a true friend that I have never met in
person. Once again Adam helped me get the new web site properly "calibrated"
It is a true inspiration for everyone and I can truly understand his
appreciation of the Quadra amplifier as it is an outstanding performer for
most any modern rig.
So, from LA (lower Arkansas}, thanks and happy holidays to ya all.
73
William J. Diamond
Rogers, Arkansas USA
Ham Radio Operator WRXT
Please visit my all
new web site at
www.wjdiamond.com
All Incoming & Outgoing Mail Scanned by Mail Washer and Mcafee For
Everyone's Protection.
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:35:19 -0600
From: "Jan C. Robbins" <swanman at cfu.net>
Subject: [ICOM] Remote station
To: ICOM Reflector <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <41CC6167.3030709 at cfu.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Hi Rich,
And very Happy Holidays! Hope all is well with you folks.
It's high time I reported back re progress here on the remote. Thanks
to you, it's going just fine!
Have an IC-746 (extended rig control is marvelous) with Rigblaster Pro,
and will eventually add an 87A with Alpha Remote and Alpha Max. Using
Remote Desktop; remote computer runing XP Pro, local computer running 98
(that's fastest combination I've found; better than two XP-Pro
machines). Rig control and CW are via TRX-Manager, audio via Skype, as
you recommended. RTTY and other data modes through MixW, which accesses
sound card directly so don't need TRX or Skype for that ("silent" RTTY
is a blast).
Right now the "remote" is located on a card table in a corner of my
shack, with the "remote" computer connected to one of my internet ports.
The "local" control setup is about 10' away and connected to another
internet port. Needless to say, I can't judge internet slowdown this
way (sigs go down the road about two miles to CFU.NET and come back!),
but it is the most convenient remote testing setup I've ever had. Can
operate the remote "blind," or watch exactly what happens and make
changes in an instant. Have only just begun taking "pre-flight check"
notes, but will have a book of 'em by the time the rig goes REAL remote.
That won't be till next May, the first time we'll get back to the summer
place (Upper Michigan), where the remote is going to live--and replace
the Kachina--but by then I ought to have most of the bugs worked out and
have a pretty good sense of how to operate successfully. haven't
decided on antenna(s) yet. Have four wire loops up there now, and a GAP
vertical, but also have four 70' military masts, so might go with
something like a log-periodic. I'd be interested in any thoughts.
in fact, ANY advice from an experienced hand like you would be very much
appreciated.
Vy 73.
Jan
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:36:09 -0600
From: "Jan C. Robbins" <swanman at cfu.net>
Subject: [ICOM] apologies for that last!
To: icom at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <41CC6199.6060702 at cfu.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
That last was intended just for Rich, not the reflector! Fumble fingers
is att it again.
--
"There is no end to what you can accomplish
if you don't care who gets the credit." Anon.
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Icom mailing list
Icom at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/icom
End of Icom Digest, Vol 1, Issue 433
************************************
More information about the Icom
mailing list