[Kenwood] 480, or 2000

[Eric Lowell]

QST lists the BDR for the 480 as 3 dBc better than the 2000 (-58 dBc for the 480 vs -55 for the 2000)
It's almost an apple/orange comparison, feature-wise.

Best Regards, Eric (W1EL)

Eric Lowell
Eastern Maine Electronics Inc.
48 Loon Road
Wesley ME 04686
eme.inc at starband.net
www.satnetmaine.com

--- On Thu, 9/3/09, J. Moen <jmm at jwmoen.com> wrote:

> From: J. Moen <jmm at jwmoen.com>
> Subject: Re: [Kenwood] 480, or 2000
> To: kenwood at mailman.qth.net
> Date: Thursday, September 3, 2009, 3:47 PM
> I like the sound of the 480's
> received audio, but for weak signals, or for 
> selectivity, the TS-2000 appears to be somewhat better.
> 
> The TS-2000 has so many additional features, including band
> coverage to 440 
> mhz (or 1.2 ghz for the X version), cross-band repeat, DX
> Cluster, Satellite 
> mode, a second receiver for VHF/UHF, remote control over RF
> (Sky Command), 
> internal TNC -- that is why many of us like the
> TS-2000.  But if all you 
> want is a very good HF transceiver, and one with a very
> small footprint to 
> boot, the 480 is ideal for you.  Plus, the 480 has
> some interesting features 
> of its own, in particular remote control over a network or
> the internet. 
> The 480 is also really easy and comfortable to operate.
> 
> Both are good radios, and it depends on what you plan to
> do.
> 
>   Jim - K6JM
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Joe" <n3ain at hotmail.com>
> To: <kenwood at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 12:23 PM
> Subject: [Kenwood] 480, or 2000
> 
> 
> > Hi. Any of you out there have both rigs to compare
> them? I heard the 
> > receive on the 480 is hands down better than the more
> expensive 2000 with 
> > better dynamic range. If that's the case, why spend
> the extra money for 
> > the 2000. Of course, I'm just asking about HF.
> performance since I know 
> > the 480 doesn't have VHF. In my research, it seems
> like having VHF in the 
> > rig is the only plus for buying the 2000 if in fact
> you want everything in 
> > one rig. If any of you have ever compared these two
> back to back, please 
> > let me know. I want more than just opinions. Thanks
> and 73. Joe.
> > 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Kenwood mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/kenwood
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Kenwood at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>