[ICOM] Sherwood Engineering test numbers

Mon Oct 16 23:56:47 EDT 2006

> John,
> 
> Before I buy a new radio I talk to lots of guys who are 
> already using them.
> I am never the first guy on the block to buy a new radio.
> 

I agree with this and know that John does too. 

Rob Sherwood as I have come to find out is respected by many as an independent source who uses sound engineering practices in his
work.

After a couple of years at this (getting back into Ham Radio) things I noticed had changed as far as integrity in the hobby was
concerned and I needed a procedure to follow that would prove itself for weeding out the scams and "piggies" (non "Hams")

It once was that a Ham would have been ashamed to make a deal that was not good for both sides and with equipment worthy of the deal
(working) or if not working at least *exactly* what he had described it to be.

So it became my experience (proven procedure)
that after thinking I might want a radio model:

I first went to Rob Sherwood's site and compare data

Then started signing up for the yahoo reflector(s)
  (listening and searching the reflector for key words)
  then asking the operators on the reflector(s) questions

Then looked at the reviews on e-ham

Then (because I am an electronics technician) 
   I tried to call the manufacturer and
    get a tech on the phone (NOT SALES)

Then if still interested:
I normally do a Google 
  and find as much on posts from users as possible

Then I try to find all of the mods 
   that are going to be **needed**
     to make it a *real* radio

Then I weigh the *ASKING* price against
  what I find at known fair used dealers sites
  http://swap.qth.com/index.php
  http://www.qth.com/wq5j/
  http://www.qth.com/k5mdm/
  http://hamtrader.k1dwu.net/
  http://www.burghardt-amateur.com/Burghardt/HTML/main_menu_frames/used_prod_frame.html

Then I ask around about the "Ham" (could be a "piggy") who is selling the equipment and do a search on Google to see if there are
any comments about him that would tell me I don't want to do any deals with him.

Then I go here:
http://chat.qth.com/viewforum.php?f=2&sid=426dadfd2c441176beb82735e317eedb
And see if there is any feedback on him.

Then I make an offer based on the data I have collected.

This has proven effective for me.

I am sorry but except for a run down of features I don't put much focus on ARRL reviews or the manufacturers reviews (which I am not
sure are different) except in rare cases.

  73 fer nw es gud DX,
Bob AD5VJ(AAR6VM)
http://www.ad5vj.com/

Member: CTDXCC, NTCC, STXDXCC
FISTS: # 12637
10X# 37210, FP#-1141
SMIRK#-5177, RARS #-149

> -----Original Message-----
> From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
> [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Tim Duffy K3LR
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 9:27 PM
> To: ICOM Reflector
> Subject: Re: [ICOM] Sherwood Engineering test numbers
> 
> John,
> 
> Before I buy a new radio I talk to lots of guys who are 
> already using them.
> I am never the first guy on the block to buy a new radio.
> 
> I struggled when I left my old Kenwood TS-930S radios behind 
> in 1990 and went to the Icom IC-765.
> I have been 100% Icom ever since. I asked lots of 765 owners 
> how they liked the radio before I made the change.
> 
> Rob Sherwood's measurements are important, but you must talk 
> to users of the radio you might be interested in. They need 
> to be using the radio like you will (similar antennas, etc.) 
> to get a good feel. Then take a test drive before you buy!
> 
> By the way, I agree with Jan, the IC-7800 is the BEST radio I 
> have ever used!
> I still love the IC-781 too! I'll never sell my IC765s!
> 
> 73!
> Tim K3LR
> 
> 100% Icom Multi Multi contest station
> http://www.k3lr.com
> 
> John Geiger wrote:
> 
> > Hi Tim,
> >
> > Given that this is true, how can one tell whether something 
> has a good 
> > receiver or not, other than by using it?  It seems that the numbers 
> > are very limited, then.  And many of us can't afford to be 
> the guinea 
> > pig for new radios that come out.
> >
> > 73s John W5TD
> >
> > --- Tim Duffy K3LR <k3lr at k3lr.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi John:
> > >
> > > That is why I said "lots of strong signals on the band".
> > >
> > > I have worked with Rob Sherwood for over 30 years.
> > > His tests are the best.
> > >
> > > The way all of the receiver tests are performed, does not 
> give you a 
> > > look into "real world" situations. Using two tones gives you a 
> > > standard and some guidance on which to compare, but you 
> have to look 
> > > further in to see the real world story.
> > >
> > > On the air means LOTS of strong signals. That is MUCH 
> different than 
> > > the lab.
> > >
> > > 73!
> > > Tim K3LR
> > >
> > > John Geiger wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Tim,
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I have heard others say that also.  But that still doesn't 
> > > > get down to my original question-how
> > > did
> > > > it score so well on the IMD DR Sherwood test??
> > > Better
> > > > than many radios considered contest radios.
> > > >
> > > > 73s John W5TD
> > > >
> > > > --- Tim Duffy K3LR <k3lr at k3lr.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > 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/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > 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/
> > >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > 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/
> 