[ICOM] Sherwood Engineering test numbers

[David J. Ring, Jr.]

K3LR de N1EA

Hello Tim,

I wonder if anyone could compare the receivers in the IC-7000 and the 
IC-706GMK2?

Has there been an improvement?

For what it is worth - packing all that radio in such a small box is 
fabulous (706).

73
David N1EA

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tim Duffy K3LR" <k3lr at k3lr.com>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 12:19 AM
Subject: Re: [ICOM] Sherwood Engineering test numbers


John:

My 706 is a much better radio when using antennas that are somewhat 
inefficient
such as mobile and portable antennas.
If I hook my 706 up to a beam or a full-size dipole, the attenuators do a
wonderful job of protecting the front end and making the radio usable.

Remember that the IC706 series receiver was never intended to compete along 
side
radios that cost far more and perform much better with lots of strong 
signals on
the band.

73!
Tim K3LR

John Luthy wrote:

> John,
>
> First I am NOT any kind of expert,
>
> But I have noticed that my 706MkIIg is almost hard to listen to,
> mostly because it hears everything, so I wonder if it is fed a small
> signal in a lab it might look like a very good reciver,
> So I wonder if I would be happier with my 706  if I had a differnt
> filters in it.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Geiger" <johngeig at yahoo.com>
> To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>; <yaesu at mailman.qth.net>;
> <icom at mailman.qth.net>; <yaesu at contesting.com>;
> <dx-list at yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 1:58 PM
> Subject: [ICOM] Sherwood Engineering test numbers
>
> > How much stock does everyone place in the Sherwood
> > Engineering receiver test numbers (www.sherweng.com)?
> > While I admit that the 2khz spacing is a much more
> > useful measurement than the 20khz the ARRL has used
> > for a long time, and I believe that Rob Sherwood knows
> > what he is talking about when he tests receivers, I
> > have a hard time believing some of his numbers.
> >
> > For example, he measures the 2khz IMD DR for the Icom
> > 706MKIIG at 74db. This places it right in line with
> > the PROII and PROIII at 75db, and better than the
> > 756PRO (71db), FT1000D (69db), FT1000mp MK V (69db),
> > and the Icom 746 (70db).  Now I have owned many of
> > these radios, and I did not find the 706MKIIG to have
> > that good of a receiver, definitely not better than
> > the 756PRO or the Yaesu FT1000 series.  It overloaded
> > pretty bad under contest conditions.  What am I
> > missing in his measurements, that makes the 706MKIIG
> > look so much better than these other radios?
> >
> > 73s John W5TD
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.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/
>
> ----
> 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/


-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.0.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/476 - Release Date: 10/14/2006