[ICOM] Most rugged HF transceivers

[Jim Vohland]

I don't think the 7200 is a ruggedized 7000. 7000 and 7200 don't have much in common. Now if you said 718, maybe.....
 

> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 16:29:55 -0400
> From: k8ri at rogerhalstead.com
> To: icom at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [ICOM] Most rugged HF transceivers
> 
> On 6/14/2012 2:40 PM, John wrote:
> 
> I have to agree with Jv, but
> 
> Rugged is a relative term and Ham rigs in general are quite fragile. 
> Which is the most rugged Icom rig? I'd have to lean toward the 7200 
> which I believe is the
> ruggidized version of the 7000.
> 
> 73
> 
> Roger (K8RI)
> 
> 
> > I am interested in what people would consider the most rugged Icom HF or
> > HF/VHF transceivers (new or used). By rugged I mean able to withstand the
> > most abuse (environmental, not operator induced). This would include being
> > slapped at times, hit with thrown object, and everything else that might
> > occur in a chaotic enviroment. So, which rigs would withstand this
> > environment with the least chance of being damaged? A low price point
> > would also be good in case it was damaged, one would not be out a lot of
> > money.
> >
> > John AF5CC
> > ----
> > 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/
> > To support QSL/QTH.net: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> 
> 
> 
> ----
> 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/
> To support QSL/QTH.net: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html