[ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro

[n4lq]

Well if you are waiting for a blip on the screen on 80 meters at 9 PM in 
the summertime then you can expect a lot of green paint due to QRN. The 
scope works best on quiet bands. One thing I like to do is open it up to 
200hz and see who has the strongest signal. Then I tune him in and find 
out where he is, his power and antenna type. Just another little fun 
pastime. Of course this works best on cw since ssb signals are rather 
broad for this game.
Steve N4LQ

-----Original Message-----
From: "Jeff Frank" <jafrank at nyc.rr.com>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 11:51:39 -0400
Subject: Re: [ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro

> 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/ 
> 
> ----
> 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/
>