[ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro

[Jeff Frank]

John - Is the scope really that detailed? What I saw of it looked like a 
green smudge on a screen. Maybe the guy had his scope set for viewing a very 
large portion of the band?
Jeff - KX2P
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JohnD" <wm7a at cox.net>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 1:26 PM
Subject: RE: [ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro


>I find the band scope pretty useful even with the less sensitive version in
> my IC-756.
> Some of the reason's are:
>
> Finding a quiet spot in a pileup or during a contest.
> Finding the responding station quickly when a DX station is working split.
> Quickly seeing if a band is open
> Finding signals quickly on band where there are only a few signals
>
> John DeRuiter, WM7A
> http://members.cox.net/wm7a/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of Jeff Frank
> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 8:52 AM
> To: ICOM Reflector
> 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/
>
> ----
> 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/