[ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro

Wed Oct 6 17:28:22 EDT 2004

Steve - well ... when you put it that way.
Jeff - KX2P
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "n4lq" <n4lq at iglou.com>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: [ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro


> Justify the expense of the scope the same way you justify the expense of 
> the radio. Just consider the scope as part of the radio. The speaker 
> provides the aural link and the scope the visual link to the spectrum. 
> Without the scope, you are driving blind, thrashing about the bands, 
> helplessly grouping for signals while aimlessly cranking the tuning knob 
> back and forth from one end of the band to another hoping to luck upon a 
> carrier that happens to be transmitting at precisely the same instant 
> you swish across his frequency while with the scope you can visualize 
> the entire band segment, spot the signal and lock in on him like an 
> English Pointer dog. Push the freeze button and lock the screen like 
> stopping a DVD then slither over to his frequency like a cobra and 
> pounce on him like a Grizzly Bear. Now open that wallet and let the 
> moths go free!
> 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 14:09:22 -0400
> Subject: Re: [ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro
> 
>> John - That's the problem ... how do I justify spending almost a
>> thousand 
>> dollars more for a scope that I think is window dressing for my
>> purposes?
>> Jeff -KX2P
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "John Geiger" <johngeig at yahoo.com>
>> To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 12:47 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro
>> 
>> 
>> >I don't have a 756 but I have never seen the true use
>> > of the band scope either.  Maybe I am way off base
>> > here, but it seems that a little knowledge of
>> > propagation, plus using a DX internet cluster, will
>> > fulfill its purpose.  For example, if it is daylight,
>> > then 20 and 17 are probably going to be open.  I can
>> > tune the band and actually listen for signals, without
>> > having to see them.  If I am looking for rare DX, then
>> > I can turn on the cluster and look for the spots, or I
>> > can tune the band and actually listen.
>> >
>> > 73s John NE0P
>> >
>> > --- Jeff Frank <jafrank at nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> 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/
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________
>> > Do you Yahoo!?
>> > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
>> > http://vote.yahoo.com
>> > ----
>> > 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/