[Yaesu] Re: [Kenwood] Why are we so SWR-phobic

[Mike Brown]

Reminds me of a test I did with my 940 and Icom 746. At 3:1, the 746 was 
around 25 watts. The 940 must have been built a little stouter, because 
at:3:1 it was still putting out 90 watts.

73, Mike K9MI

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Geiger" <w5td at lcisp.com>
To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>; <kenwood at mailman.qth.net>; 
<yaesu at mailman.qth.net>; <dx-list at yahoogroups.com>; 
<cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 17 16
Subject: [Kenwood] Why are we so SWR-phobic


Am I the only one who things that the SWR protection circuits in currents 
are ridiculous?  I mean, most of them start cutting power back with a 1.5:1 
SWR?  Are today's rigs so poorly designed that you could damage the finals 
with a 2:1 SWR?  Older solid state rigs used to handle that just fine.  The 
ad for the Yaesu FT107M advertised that it would put out 75% power into a 
3:1 SWR!!  Most Ten Tecs will put out almost full power into a 3:1 SWR.  But 
most other moderns rigs are putting out 50% power or so into a 2:1 SWR.

The worst is the Yaesu FT857/897 series which cuts up the audio if the SWR 
gets above 1.5:1 or so, and people think that this is a good thing?

So what is going on with the rig designers?  Do people really want this 
aggressive of an SWR circuit?  I find it kind of annoying to have to return 
the tuner every 25 kcs or so on some radios.  Are the finals today really 
that fragile?

Or is it just me?  Anyone else with ideas?

73s John W5TD
______________________________________________________________
Kenwood mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/kenwood
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
Post: mailto:Kenwood at mailman.qth.net