[ICOM] IC-375

Fri Nov 14 01:46:32 EST 2008

thats what the 970 does best, a satellite radio
and weak signal on VHF/UHF equal to the
275 and 475. Same quadruple conversion
receiver.  I own one and would never
part with it, untill I cant get parts. he he
As for 2/440 and 1.2,  you are
actually in agreement with me. These are probably
here to stay. Have enjoyed this feedback, though.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Geiger" <aa5jg at yahoo.com>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 1:22 AM
Subject: Re: [ICOM] IC-375

> Yes, but it is the "wrong" part of the 13cm band.  It is the satellite 
> part, not the weak signal part (around 2304mhz).  I dont' think 2m, 70cm, 
> and 1.2g are going anywhere anytime soon.
>
> 73s John AA5JG
>
>
> --- On Fri, 11/14/08, mecker at peoplepc.com <mecker at peoplepc.com> wrote:
>
>> From: mecker at peoplepc.com <mecker at peoplepc.com>
>> Subject: Re: [ICOM] IC-375
>> To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>> Date: Friday, November 14, 2008, 12:20 AM
>> forgot, the 970 offers 2.4ghz
>> if you got it with that. Nobody
>> has that band.
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Geiger"
>> <aa5jg at yahoo.com>
>> To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 1:01 AM
>> Subject: RE: [ICOM] IC-375
>>
>>
>> > One thing to also consider is that you can buy quite a
>> few new radios that will cover the bands that the Icom 970
>> did, at least a stock 970.  You can get a TS2000, FT897,
>> FT857, FT817, Icom 7000, Icom 910H, Icom 706MKIIG. The
>> TS2000 and the 910H can also be fitted for 1.2ghz.  With the
>> exception of the 910H, all of these radios give you many
>> more bands than the 970 did, so to many people, there
>> isn't a reason to buy a 970, I can do better on the
>> current market for less.
>> >
>> > There isn't a new radio that covers the
>> frequencies that the Icom 375 did.
>> >
>> > 73s John AA5JG
>> >
>> >
>> > --- On Thu, 11/13/08, Mike Olbrisch
>> <mike-2007 at elp.rr.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: Mike Olbrisch <mike-2007 at elp.rr.com>
>> >> Subject: RE: [ICOM] IC-375
>> >> To: "'ICOM Reflector'"
>> <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>> >> Date: Thursday, November 13, 2008, 9:45 PM
>> >> Well - there it is....  No matter what the cause -
>> the price
>> >> is the price.  The
>> >> value to you is the value to you.  You pay it or
>> you
>> >> don't.
>> >>
>> >> That's why I drive a 15 y/o Toyota and a 32
>> y/o jeep.
>> >>
>> >> Good luck - whatever you decide.
>> >>
>> >> Mike - KD9KC.
>> >> El Paso, Tx.
>> >> DM61rt
>> >>
>> >> Molon labe. [mo-lone lah-veh] Google it...
>> >>
>> >> =============================================
>> >> The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All
>> Rights
>> >> reserved.
>> >> =============================================
>> >>
>> >> > -----Original Message-----
>> >> > From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net
>> >> > [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
>> Behalf Of
>> >> mecker at peoplepc.com
>> >> > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:59 PM
>> >> > To: ICOM Reflector
>> >> > Subject: Re: [ICOM] IC-375
>> >> >
>> >> > like I said, availablity or scarcity is not
>> the only
>> >> thing
>> >> > that determines price.
>> >> > Market demand (or more recently)
>> >> > consumer spending, is a better indicator.
>> >> > A lot of folks list an item, and have
>> >> > their friends bid it up.
>> >> > Still, I would understand if it was a Collins
>> with a
>> >> > legendary legacy of Apollo missions and such.
>> My icom
>> >> 970 , a
>> >> > radio with more widely used frequencies (at
>> least some
>> >> of
>> >> > maybe we'll keep) in the future, only
>> gets like
>> >> 1700.00 at
>> >> > hamfests with my original purchase of 3200!
>> Seems that
>> >> when I
>> >> > sell, I cant buy the same..
>> >> >
>> >> > ----- Original Message -----
>> >> > From: "STeve Andre'"
>> >> <andres at msu.edu>
>> >> > To: <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>> >> > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 4:42 PM
>> >> > Subject: Re: [ICOM] IC-375
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > > $1250 is not an unrealistic price for an
>> >> excellent condition
>> >> > > 375.  Few 375's and 1275's made;
>> the 375
>> >> had only two
>> >> > > actual markets--the US and Canada so
>> they really
>> >> are rare.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I don't think the US allocation of
>> 220 is
>> >> uncertain.  After
>> >> > > the FCC got singed then they took the
>> bottom 2MHz
>> >> away
>> >> > > from us, we got he upper 3MHz on a more
>> secure
>> >> footing.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --STeve Andre'
>> >> > > wb8wsf  en82
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Thursday 13 November 2008 16:35:11
>> >> mecker at peoplepc.com wrote:
>> >> > >> thank you for this info. This means
>> that
>> >> > >> highly inflated prices, 1250.00 may
>> be
>> >> > >> a farce, a few isolated cases,
>> possibly
>> >> > >> even a scam, to sell this rig for
>> that much.
>> >> > >> I think it was initially because
>> there werent
>> >> > >> many ic-375s available, but after
>> what you
>> >> > >> just said, Im not sure I even want
>> to buy
>> >> > >> one let alone pay 1400.00 for an 15
>> percent
>> >> > >> or more listing fee ebay sale.
>> >> > >> I guess a 220FM mobile, like several
>> >> currently
>> >> > >> being made by other manufactuers eg:
>> ALinco
>> >> > >> , is well under 300.00 and very
>> affordable,
>> >> > >> not so bad to loose. -Marc KE2BP
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> > >> From: "Adam Farson"
>> >> <farson at shaw.ca>
>> >> > >> To: "'ICOM
>> Reflector'"
>> >> <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>> >> > >> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008
>> 3:39 PM
>> >> > >> Subject: RE: [ICOM] IC-375
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> > Hi Mike,
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Hanging over all this is the
>> uncertain
>> >> allocation status
>> >> > of the 220 MHz
>> >> > >> > band. This band does not enjoy
>> the
>> >> protection of an international
>> >> > >> > allocation; it is footnoted in
>> for ITU
>> >> Region 2 only.
>> >> > The 220-222 MHz
>> >> > >> > segment has already been
>> reallocated;
>> >> the rest of the
>> >> > band is probably
>> >> > >> > no
>> >> > >> > less vulnerable. This is
>> probably the
>> >> reason why the
>> >> > amateur-equipment
>> >> > >> > manufacturers are no longer
>> supporting
>> >> 220 MHz.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Cheers for now, 73,
>> >> > >> > Adam VA7OJ/AB4OJ
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > ----
>> >> > > 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/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----
>> > 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/ 