[ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro

[Jeff Frank]

Thanks Dave - What you say makes sense. Just not sure about the scope. I've 
seen it and have a hard time accepting it's going to be useful to me for hf 
work. One guy told me it's good if you're doing something else and are 
waiting for a signal to appear on a closed band (like 15 at night). I guess 
it would help in a frantic contest situation to know where the activity is 
if you're hunting for a better band at the time. Otherwise it looked to me 
like somebody took a can a green paint and threw it against a wall.
Jeff - KX2P

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Edwards" <kd2e at comcast.net>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: [ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro


> Jeff... I have a 756Pro. I don't have the 746, but I think the answer is a
> no brainer.
> The Pro2 is a better radio.
> Even if the performance were the same....Once you start using the
> 'fish-finder', you will not want to be without it!
> I passed on the ProII....not much differance. But, I may be tempted by the
> ProIII.
> Sad thing though...for essentially the same rig..the price will be near
> double what I paid for my Pro a few years ago!
> ...Dave
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jeff Frank" <jafrank at nyc.rr.com>
> To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 10:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro
>
>
>>
>> Gus - Thanks for the lead to the Sherwood web-site. Haven't seen that one
>> yet. But from what I've read, performance isn't always exactly correlated
>> with "numbers" and some argue that tests for esesentially analogue radios
>> don't always apply well for more dsp designs. I'm looking more for actual
> on
>> the air experiences with the Pro2 vs. 746Pro. But thanks.
>> Jeff - KX2P
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Augie Hansen" <augie.hansen at comcast.net>
>> To: "Icom Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 10:08 AM
>> Subject: Re: [ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro
>>
>>
>> > On 10/6/04 7:31 AM, "Jeff Frank" <jafrank at nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I'm trying to decide between buying the Pro 2 or the 746 Pro. Read 
>> >> just
>> >> about
>> >> everything I could find on the internet about it. Besides the
> difference
>> >> in
>> >> extra features and price, some technical types have been saying the 
>> >> Pro
> 2
>> >> has
>> >> a more "bullet-proof" front end against very strong signals than does
> the
>> >> 746
>> >> Pro. I like working 40 meters (ssb and cw) at night, as well as and
> some
>> >> contest activity, so that could be an important factor for me. Does
>> >> anyone
>> >> have any experience with both those radios under very strong signal
>> >> conditions?
>> >
>> > Hi Jeff,
>> >
>> > Given your intended use you want a radio that has good dynamic range
>> > characteristics. Check out Rob Sherwood's comparison chart on his web
>> > page:
>> >
>> > http://www.sherweng.com/presentation.html
>> >
>> > The close-in (2KHz) is particularly critical to CW contest operators. I
>> > have
>> > an Elecraft K2 and an old, but still very capable Drake R4C with the
>> > Sherwood mods. Both have exceptional dynamic range characteristics.
>> >
>> > The two Icom radios you are looking at have virtually the same DR
>> > numbers --
>> > good, but not great. A 2KHz number of 80 or higher is preferred. So 
>> > your
>> > choice will probably be based more on cost vs. features (dual watch,
>> > etc.).
>> >
>> > 73, Gus Hansen
>> > KB0YH at arrl.net
>> >
>> >
>> > ----
>> > 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/
>>
>> ----
>> 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/
>
> ----
> 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/