[ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro

Wed Oct 6 17:48:48 EDT 2004

John - Just the right thing to say to an obsessive who's trying to come to 
some kind of peace with this issue. Now you open a new can of worms.  But 
you're right about 2 meters ... it's something I never explored. Never been 
off hf in over 44 years of haming. I expect the Pro3 to have it's share of 
problems since just about all the new rigs do when they first come out. Icom 
might have stumbled across something real good (maybe even a classic) when 
they made the Pro2. I've never heard anyone say anything bad about it.
Jeff - KX2P

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Geiger" <johngeig at yahoo.com>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: [ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro

> Hi Jeff,
>
> 2 other things to consider:
>
> 1. With the PROIII out soon the prices on PRO IIs will
> drop, as will the resale value, so the PROII might not
> end up costing much more than the 746PRO, but it also
> might not be worth much more on the used market
> either.
>
> 2. The 746PRO does have 2 meters on it, which can be
> alot of fun.  Assuming that you live in 2 land, you
> should have plenty of activity on 2 meter SSB, and
> there is always WSJT meteor scatter and EME, etc.
> Gives you some new areas to work on and chase awards
> on.
>
> 73s John NE0P
>
> --- Jeff Frank <jafrank at nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm starting to think if the scope makes operating
>> more fun, then it's worth
>> it (providing you can afford it). I could always use
>> more fun. Am I really
>> going to feel the extra money I paid a number of
>> years down the road? (God I
>> hope not!) Plus, it will have better resale value
>> since alot of new radios
>> are beginning to come with scopes now. You guys have
>> been very helpful.
>> Thanks much.
>> Jeff -KX2P
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "David J. Ring, Jr." <n1ea at arrl.net>
>> To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 2:06 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ICOM] Pro 2 vs. 746 Pro
>>
>>
>> >I am amazed at how many signals I miss even when
>> tuning in "WIDE"
>> > selectivity on a unoccupied band - more often than
>> not, the station pauses
>> > when I tune by, and I miss it.  But with the
>> 756PRO/2 bandscope, I see the
>> > blip and can "find" the signal.  Also I am able to
>> find the DX station
>> > when
>> > I see the pileup by looking for the "little blip"
>> on the scope...
>> >
>> > It is the one feature that I really love in this
>> radio, I think it isn't
>> > worth the money difference between the 746PRO and
>> the 756PRO/2 but having
>> > paid the money, I won't trade for the 746PRO even
>> if offered generous
>> > money.
>> >
>> > It is one of those features that costs more than I
>> want to pay, but once I
>> > have it, I won't trade it.
>> >
>> > 73
>> >
>> > DR
>> > ----- 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
>>
> === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> ----
> 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/ 