[ICOM] Pro 3 and 7000 Tests by Sherwood

[Jan Robbins]

Since Rob Sherwood uses the BEST testing methods known in the industry, 
and since his results are widely recognized as the MOST RELIABLE among 
third-party testers (and offer by far the most extensive and precise 
comparisons), I'd sure want to know who ELSE thought he had anything 
better to say and why, before I wondered a minute what "someone else" 
thought.  Who is qualified to judge the "standard," pray? Rob's been 
doing this for 20+ years, and everybody in the industry knows his 
results are more accurate than others and stand up over time, not to 
mention that he has no "vested interest" in the various brands, and that 
he, almost single-handedly, finally got ARRL labs to use HIS methods.  
As someone said a long time ago, "When you hire Michelangelo to paint 
the Sistine Chapel ceiling," don't ask a schoolboy to judge and correct 
it."   Jan N0JR

John Geiger (NE0P) wrote:

>It is interesting that the 756PRO3 has slightly worse performance (probably within margin of error) as compared to the 756PRO.  Can anyone else confirm that they are so close in receiver performance?  Most evidence seems to say otherwise.
>
>73s John NE0P
>
>
>---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
>From: Bill Tippett <btippett at alum.mit.edu>
>Reply-To: ICOM Reflector <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>Date:  Tue, 28 Mar 2006 10:36:56 -0500
>
>  
>
>>        FYI Sherwood recently added
>>data for the IC-756 Pro III and IC-7000 to
>>his receiver performance test data table:
>>
>>http://www.sherweng.com/table.html
>>
>>                        73,  Bill  W4ZV
>>
>>----
>>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/
>
>
>  
>