BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
John Miller <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 8 Mar 2006 10:51:25 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
he thought CW was better on the 2000 as well as the unfiltered receive, with 
no filtering in at all he said the 2000 is better, maybe not by a lot but 
just a very slight bit. we both can't believe a company as good as Kenwood 
put the antenna connectors on pig tails on the 480 too. If the price was 
right I'd probably try one with speech but doubt I'd keep it very long.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Dresser" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: thinking of changing rigs


John,

What things did your friend think were better on the 2000?

Steve

On Tuesday 3/7/06 20:38 John Miller wrote:
>I asked some one who has both and put them side by site and he says it's 
>not
>very much better and at some things not as good as the 2000.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2