[Kenwood] rig rumors?

[peter A Markavage]

I like 599D twins too and they sound great on AM.
Pete, wa2cwa

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:25:45 -0500 "mark kenward" <k8vf at diamondcs.net>
writes:
> "It's nice to get nostalgic but that rig and its design technology 
> has run
> its course. Like so many other rigs, it just lives on in the used 
> market
> kingdom.
> 
> Pete, wa2cwa"
> 
> 
> Perhaps, Pete, but our (MY)point is not nostalgia at all.
> 
> I liked my HQ180AC also, but it cannot compare as a receiver. I love 
> my 599
> twins(why no 160meters, guys?) and have since 1976, but other than
> sensitivity-it cannot compare.
> 
> I continue to use the rig(850), and SOLD my 870 (which I traded the 
> 850 for)
> BECAUSE IT IS BETTER!
> 
> In fact, better than anything else KW has made since(barring 
> possibly some
> permutation of the 950, which was similar).
> 
> What works, works. I would buy the 850sat DeluxeMK because it 
> works!
> 
> I believe that is why the 850 continues to be so popular.
> 
> Anyone listening at Kenwood???????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "peter A Markavage" <manualman at juno.com>
> To: <kenwood at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 3:14 AM
> Subject: Re: [Kenwood] rig rumors?
> 
> 
> > Quote from k4pdm - "Their advertising could stress how "real" 
> hams
> > looking for top performance go for hardware filtering and real 
> knobs, not
> > menus."
> > So, if you consider rigs with state-of-the-art DSP circuitry, 
> menus or
> > computer driven. etc. as the going forward look  in amateur radio
> > equipment verses hardware filtering/real knobs(?), Kenwood 
> advertising
> > should single you out as an "unreal" ham, "not" real ham, ham 
> "lite",
> > etc. I'm sure Kenwood's advertising would win awards for that ad
> > campaign.
> >
> > It's nice to get nostalgic but that rig and its design technology 
> has run
> > its course. Like so many other rigs, it just lives on in the used 
> market
> > kingdom.
> >
> > Pete, wa2cwa
> >
> > On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:25:42 -0800 (PST) Paul Manuel 
> <k4pdm at yahoo.com>
> > writes:
> >>
> >> --- peter A Markavage <manualman at juno.com> wrote:
> >>  I guess if you two guys could find several thousand more 
> buyers,
> >> with
> >> > money up front, you could petition Kenwood to build you one. 
> But,
> >> to
> >> > retool back up for a model intro'd in 1986 would be economic 
> folly
> >> and
> >> > embarrassing to them.
> >>
> >> Well, they wouldn't CALL it an 850, of course, and wouldn't be
> >> EXACTLY the
> >> same. Their advertising could stress how "real" hams looking for
> >> top
> >> performance go for hardware filtering and real knobs, not menus.
> >> Maybe it
> >> could be a TS-970SAT? Of course, it would probably have to sell 
> for
> >> $5000
> >> or so since it is hardware-intensive...which makes the used 850s
> >> look that
> >> much better (hi hi!)
> >> 73,
> >> Paul K4PDM