[ICOM] IC-7800

[awallacejr at sbcglobal.net]

Another possible conclusion--Sherwood is in the business of selling home
built "cures" for the "problems" he finds in various radios so he may not be
entirely objective ?

Andy K5VM


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Tippett" <btippett at alum.mit.edu>
To: <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 11:33 AM
Subject: [ICOM] IC-7800


> K4SX wrote:
>  >Does anyone know the latest information regarding the IC-7800 and
> problems and/or suspected problems?
>
>          Ron, looking at slides 19 & 20 of Sherwood Engineering's
> presentation during the Contest Forum at Dayton here,
>
> http://www.sherweng.com/Dayton_2004/Dayton_2004-Sherwood_files/frame.htm
>
> there is an apparent inconsistency between Icom's advertising claims of
> "+40 dBm IP3 and 110 dB dynamic range" with preliminary measurements
> by ARRL.  ARRL's actual measurements were as follows:
>
> Dynamic Range at 20 kHz: 98 dB
> Dynamic Range at 5 kHz: 87 dB
> Dynamic Range at 1 or 2 kHz: 78 dB
>
> Sherwood's summary comment:  "One would expect a dynamic
> range closer to 110 dB with an IP3 greater than +40 dBm."
>
> Possible conclusions:
>
> 1.  Icom's claims may be more hype than substance, and there
> could be some specsmanship games being played.
> 2.  ARRL's measurements were bad.
> 3.  The unit under test was bad.
>
>          Take your pick but you might want to wait for ARRL's full
> report which should be out by late summer.  I suspect ARRL will
> be in contact with Icom to resolve which of the above conclusions
> is true.  Also RSGB's RadCom should be testing the IC-7800 soon
> which will give us another excellent data point.
>
>                                  73,  Bill  W4ZV
>
>
> ----
> Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
> Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.316 MHz
> Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/
>