[ICOM] PRO2 vs. PRO3

[John Geiger (NE0P)]

My rig wasn't enclosed either.  I can't remember exactly where I touched on the radio to see that it was hot, but it did seem fairly hot to the touch.  It worked fine though, other than the SSB power on the meter showing only 70 watts or so on voice peaks.  My 756 always showed 100 watts on voice peaks.  I do not have a PEP reading wattmeter, so couldn't comment on using an outside meter.  It is interesting, though, to notice how the meter readings differed from the PRO2 to the 756 original.  I have had 2 756 originals and they both always read 100 watts on voice peaks.

73s JOhn NE0P


---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Adam Farson <farson at shaw.ca>
Reply-To: ICOM Reflector <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Date:  Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:39:24 -0800

>Hi John,
>
>My 756Pro2 (now sold) did not run particularly hot; neither does my 756Pro3.
>The temperature at the vent slots above the display, and on the rear panel
>behind the PA, rises to about 32C (90F) in an 18C (65F) ambient after 2 to 3
>hours' operating. All my radio gear is free-standing, not enclosed.
>
>http://www.qsl.net/icom/ic756pro2/hot.html
>
>Both radios deliver 100W PEP into a 50-ohm load as measured on an
>oscilloscope calibrated against a Bird 43. I do not pay much attention to
>the analogue meter on SSB. The digital bar-graph Po scale is somewhat closer
>to peak-reading, but the oscilloscope is the most accurate.
>
>http://www.qsl.net/ab4oj/peptest.html 
>
>Cheers for now, 73,
>Adam VA7OJ/AB4OJ
>
>
>
>
>Scanned for viruses by Blue Coat
>http://www.WinProxy.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/
>
 

________________________________________________________________