Hi Fred,

Having used both, I think the 480 is quite a bit superior to the 2000.

Very 73 to all.
--------------------
Kevin :)
Amateur Radio:  K7RX

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fred Olver" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 15:29
Subject: Re: thinking of changing rigs


> Like most of you, I believe the Icom radios far out-perform the kenwood
> ts-2000, and like most of you, I would rather have the accessibility of 
> the
> Kenwood, however since we're comparing rx sensitivity, how do those of you
> feel the ts480 stacks up against the ts2000?
>
> Fred Olver  [log in to unmask]
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Steve Dresser" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 9:29 AM
> Subject: Re: thinking of changing rigs
>
>
>> Lou,
>>
>> I've always thought Icoms were way ahead of Kenwoods in the
>> sensitivity and noise department, but their lack of speech feedback
>> makes them difficult for us to use.  That was less of an issue when
>> there were more controls on the front panel, but today everything is
>> buried in menus and it makes operation tough for us.  It's just so
>> nice to be able to access everything, and that's why I bought my 480.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On Monday 3/6/06 22:37 Louis Kim Kline wrote:
>>>Hi.
>>>
>>>I bought the TS2000S mostly because of accessibility.  There are things I
>>>don't like about the radio.  It isn't as sensitive as some of my older
>>>equipment, and I don't like the AGC on the TS2000S.  Actually the 
>>>receiver
>>>on my Kenwood TS690S will outperform the TS2000S.
>>>
>>>Anyway, I think my favorite transceiver from a receiver performance
>>>standpoint was the Icom IC735--zI always had all the sensitivity that I
>>>wanted, and it was somehow more intelligible in noisy band conditions 
>>>than
>>>any of my Kenwood radios.  Regarding the IC746, I would have gone with
>>>that
>>>radio if I could have solved the accessibility problem, and there are
>>>somethings that I don't even care that much about.  I find for example in
>>>the TS2000S that the menus are pretty much set and forget.  I presume 
>>>that
>>>the Icom is like that also.  PL tones are a much bigger deal, as is
>>>repeater offsets.
>>>
>>>
>>>If Icom would even let you program it from a computer like the TS2000S,
>>>that would be a manageable arrangement.  If they did that the way that
>>>Kenwood did with the '2000, maybe I would still be running an Icom IC706
>>>MkIIG
>>>
>>>73, de Lou K2LKK
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>At 09:07 AM 3/6/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>>> >     Gary:
>>> >
>>> >Although I don't use the IC746 pro, I do have the Icom 746 basic rig,
>>> >and
>>> >love it.  I have heard others say that they feel the sensitivity and
>>> >selectivity of the 746 line is better than that for the TS2000.  I
>>> >haven't
>>> >had a TS2000, though, to do a direct comparison myself.
>>> >
>>> >The only down side to the 746 is that you probably will need some
>>> >sighted
>>> >assistance to get certain things set up, since the menus and some other
>>> >functions (like repeater off-sets and PL tone selection) are not "user
>>> >friendly".  Once you get repeaters programmed into memories, though,
>>> >those
>>> >problems are solved.
>>> >
>>> >I don't know how helpful this will be to you, and I'm sure others on 
>>> >the
>>> >list will have their own thoughts and opinions.
>>> >
>>> >If you have any more questions regarding my experience with the 746,
>>> >feel
>>> >free to ask.
>>> >
>>> >73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>>> >
>>> >----- Original Message -----
>>> >From: "Gary Lee" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> >To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> >Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 10:42 PM
>>> >Subject: thinking of changing rigs
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > > I am thinking of changing rigs from my ts2000.
>>> > >
>>> > > Candidates are
>>> > > icom 746 pro
>>> > > icom 756 pro
>>> > > kenwood ts480
>>> > >
>>> > > I would like to hear from anyone who has actually operated these 
>>> > > rigs
>>> > > to
>>> > > get a feel for their performance and useability.
>>> > >
>>> > > I don't need anything over 100 wattts, in fact, any other rig
>>> > > suggestions
>>> > > are welcome.
>>> > > I'm mostly looking for better selectivity and sensitivity than I 
>>> > > seem
>>> > > to
>>> > > get with the 2000.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks for any light you can shed on this.
>>> > > 73
>>> > >
>>>
>>>Louis Kim Kline
>>>A.R.S. K2LKK
>>>Home e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
>>>Work e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
>>>Work Telephone:  (585) 697-5753
>>