[ICOM] TS-2000 vs. IC-910

[Dave Edwards]

Mike...Either the 910 or the 2000 take a bit of getting used to...but then, 
the controls are pretty intuitive.
I purchased a 910 to replace my X75 line up. As mono-banders, they took up a 
lot of room.  I used a TS2000 during field day, and liked some of the 
features. I purchased one for HF use, but in playing around...I side-by 
sided it with the 910 using a coax switch on 2 meter SSB.
I tuned in a cw beacon, and they both sounded about the same. So, I swung 
the beam until the signal was weak. Finally, when the signal was weak enough 
to be about 40% copy on the TS2000, I switched back to the 910 and the 
signal was gone...not there. To confirm, I went back and forth a few times 
and the 2000 clearly had better ears. This was with headphones, as I had the 
signals as weak as they get.
So, I sold the 910.
Oh...and bought a 970H....but have not put that to the test yet...
ymmv, but it was clear in my shack!
....Dave
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Raskin" <rask1553 at bellsouth.net>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: [ICOM] TS-2000 vs. IC-910


> Joe, Dave, Bill, and Tony - Thanks for your responses.  I received a total 
> of five, only one of which was favorable for the TS-2000, which I have 
> copied below.
>
> 73,
> Mike, W4UM (ex-K4KUZ)
> South Florida DX Association - www.qsl.net/k4fk
> Mid Florida DX Association - www.w4fdx.com
> Florida Contest Group - www.floridacontestgroup.org
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++
> Mike,
> I've owned both and they were each good rigs. The 2000 has IF DSP as
> opposed to "optional" AF DSP in the 910. I like the fact that the DSP is
> standard and more sophisticated on the 2000. Really about the only thing
> that the 910 has over the 2000 is more power on 440mhz. 75 wattts vs 50
> on the 2000. But that may not be much of an advantage because the SWR
> protect circuitry in the 910 keeps it pulled back to the 35 to 40 watt
> level if the SWR is the least bit higher than perfect. In fact I have
> never seen my 910 do close to 75 watts on 440 except into a dummy load.
> Now if you have limited space for that satellite rig then the 910 is for
> you as it has a smaller footprint. At first glance the 910 appears to be
> $300 cheaper than a 2000 but by the time you add a TCXO, a single DSP
> module and a CW filter to get it as close to the 2000s capabilities as
> you can then it costs $190 MORE than a 2000 and you don't have all the
> HF capabilities that the 2000 throws in for free. I don't see how Icom
> sells any 910s. Wanna buy my 910? I think I just talked myself into
> another 2000! 73
> Paul, N5PS
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Joe Kononchik" <kononchik at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 4:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [ICOM] TS-2000 vs. IC-910
>
>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>>  I have an Icom IC-910H and have not regretted it once.  But before 
>> purchasing the Icom, I was seriously looking at the Kenwood TS-2000. 
>> Here are a few things that influenced me to buy the Icom over the 
>> Kenwood.
>>
>>  (1) I was not interested in HF since I was seriously thinking about 
>> getting into satellite communications.  The IC-910H is UHF and VHF only. 
>> The TS-2000 has HF, UHF and VHF.
>>
>>  (2) Eventually I would like to try 23 cm, but wanted the ability to 
>> install it myself without any appreciable downtime or the additional cost 
>> of someone else installing a module for me.  The IC-910H 1.2 GHz module 
>> is user installable; the TS-2000 is not.
>>
>>  (3) The display looks cleaner and less cluttered on the IC-910H, the 
>> TS-2000 does not.
>>
>>  Hopes this helps.
>>
>>  73
>>  Joe, KS1I
>>
>>  > -----Original Message-----
>>> From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] 
>>> On
>>> Behalf Of Michael Raskin
>>> Sent: 26 August 2006 21:08
>>> To: kenwood at mailman.qth.net; Icom Reflector
>>> Subject: [ICOM] TS-2000 vs. IC-910
>>>
>>> I already have a good HF rig with 6M (IC-7800). I'm looking for a VHF 
>>> rig
>>> for 2M CW (maybe 440, too) and, eventually, SAT. Both have been around 
>>> for
>>> several years and I don't know if Icom or Kenwood plan to introduce new
>>> models in the near future. Any pros or cons? Has anyone tried both?
>>>
>>> Mike, W4UM (ex-K4KUZ)
>>> South Florida DX Association - www.qsl.net/k4fk
>>> Mid Florida DX Association - www.w4fdx.com
>>> Florida Contest Group - www.floridacontestgroup.org
>>>
>> ----
>> 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/