Hi Russ;
The SR@ does have the wideband filter.
73 De Anthony W2AJV
[log in to unmask]
ECHOLINK NODE NUMBER: 74389
----- Original Message -----
From: "Russ Kiehne" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: question
> The SR II, which many people, still own, had a different cabinet and AM
> coverage only to 1600 KHz; the
> SR III accommodates the expanded AM band. The II does not have a AM
> wide/narrow filter
> switch.
> There are some technical changes as well; the III uses varactor tuning
> compared to
> the II, which uses a conventional variable capacitor.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Kenyon" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 7:23 AM
> Subject: Re: question
>
>
>> What is the differents between the super II & III?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Russ Kiehne wrote:
>>
>> > The superradio II is better than the III from all of the reports I've
> read.
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Tom Behler" <[log in to unmask]>
>> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 5:58 PM
>> > Subject: question
>> >
>> >
>> > > In my oppinion, the Super III. radio is not quite as selective or
> as
>> > >
>> > > sensitive as the older Super II on AM. In addition, I don't think
>> > > the
> FM
>> > on
>> > >
>> > > the super III. is as good as the FM was on the older Super II. My
>> > > old
>> > Super
>> > >
>> > > II. was so good that I wore the darn thing out over the last 16 years
> or
>> > so.
>> > >
>> > > HI! HI!
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > But, to get back to Bob's question, I'd still say the Super III. is
> better
>> > >
>> > > than any similarly-priced run-of-the mill AM/FM radio you could get.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On another note, I don't think the speaker and sound quality of the
> Super
>> > >
>> > > III. is as good as my older Super II.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Best 73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > >
>> > > From: "Bob Humbert" <
>> > >
>> > > [log in to unmask]>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > To: <
>> > >
>> > > [log in to unmask]>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 3:21 PM
>> > >
>> > > Subject: Re: question
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > What do you think of it? Is the sensitivity and selectivity any
> better
>> > >
>> > > than
>> > >
>> > > > the run of the mill portable radios?
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
|
