[ICOM] Overload, 756 PRO III (Was Comments on 746pro)

[W7RY]

I too noticed images on my NEW pro III on 160 meters during the CQWW CW
contest. Needless to say, I was very disappointed to here them on a rig
I just paid $3000.00 for. 

According to Adams web site, the 756 pro III is better than anything
else!

Hmmmmm....


73
Jim W7RY




-----Original Message-----
From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of Bob Garrett
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 8:06 PM
To: ICOM Reflector
Subject: Re: [ICOM] Comments on 746pro

Gary et al,

I purchased the 746PRO in November of 2004, my first Icom rig.  I then 
purchased the 756PROIII in March of 2005.  I really liked the 746PRO and

thought hmmm, if the 746PRO is good, the PROIII has to be significantly 
better.  Yes, the RX is quieter but, for the investment, the 746PRO is a

better value.  I find both suffer from phantom signals.

Let me quickly add that about 95% of my operating is on 160 meters
chasing 
DX where you have 20 over S9 signals and you are trying to dig out a S4 
signal close by.  The only rig I have found to date that is pretty much 
bullet proof under those conditions is my FT-1000MP Field with the Inrad

roofing filter.   I do switch between all three rigs frequently and each
has 
its strong and weak points.

Just one mans opinion.

73, Bob K3UL 

----
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/