[NevadaARES] Observed differences Realistic/Rat Shack

[KD7JYK]

Only by the name of the distributor, then the similarities end.  When it was
labeled Realistic, Icom manufactured the radios, several that I have opened
have Icom IC-02at boards inside.  The "Realistic" HTX-202s are as
bulletproof as the Icom IC series 2m, 220 and 440 MHz transceivers.  There
was supply delay for a few months in mid-late1994 and when they reappeared
the name of Radio Shack on the front it was manufactured by the cheapest
sub-contractor in asia and the quality reflected this with erractic TX and
RX problems, poor deviation, low quality controls, volume, power switch and
keypad malfunctions along with the keyboard circuitry creating birdies in
the band, batteries that die years before their specification, self
destructing audio ICs if the squelch is left open, randomly failing CTCSS
encoders and poorly designed audio filtering circuits that make many of the
newer radio shack labeled raios useless for packet or other data modes. So
far I have experienced all but the backup battery failing.  All the newer
radios meet the minumum requirements of the FCC and most of these problems
can be resolved, but who want's to reverse engineer a new radio right out of
the box?

You my not run into all these problems in a relatively low density HAM
population such as Nevada, but in 1994 when the new versions were coming out
and a club of 300 HAMs may have 50 rat shack radios in it, it was quite
clear the new ones were junk.

Kurt

----- Original Message -----
From: bill Croghan <billcroghan@earthlink.net>

> : [NevadaARES] Wanting to buy 2m HT.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>snip<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> > Realistic prefered  over Radio Shack,
>
> Realistic IS Radio Shack.  Years ago Radio Shack started using the name
Realist,
> but Eastman Kodak sued over the name so RS changed it to Realistic.  That
was
> over 30 years ago.
>
> Bill
> WB0KSW
>
>
>
>
>