I've been in ham radio, off and on,/mostly on, since the late 1950s.
Having been on air via, 1year, non renewable novice tickets, kn4boa, and wn4uuu;
5-year, renewable Technician tickets, w4ukt, and wb4idu;/
the latter having been upgraded to general in 1996:
Over the years In terms of VHF and or UHF HTS,
I've owned and used units by Drake, Kenwood, Icom, Yaesu, Wilson,
Radio Shack, Tempo, Alinco, and Baofeng.
Each has had its' strong points, each has had its' weak points!
Each has had its' accessability plusses and its' accessability minuses!
Each has had its' price points!
Each has been type accepted by our FCC.
Each has served its' amateur radio service purposes!
There's No doubt that the high dollar, tough as nails units made
for military and or commercial applications will last longer and do
better than units made to a lesser standard, and therefore are much to
be desired and appreciated!
But most of us miss many opportunities to experience them.
And when we have them, replacing a battery pack normally costs more
than one of the current run of complete VHF-UHF radios!
What a ham operator buys, comes down to a matter of expectations,
operating preferences, and yes, budgetary concerns!
*All Of Which Are Both Valid And Legitimate Considerations!
The bottom line is that each of us, blind or not, is quite privillaged
to be where we are in terms of ham radio equipment availability, and
in terms of what we're able to do at this point in blind accessable
ham radio history!!!
One final thought, In the late 1950s, I'd never have dreamed of
purchasing _Any kind of even partially accessable, new, working,
VHF-UHF radio for a hundred, let alone twenty-five dollars!
**Just a thought about over all perspective!
Thanks To All Of You For All You Are And All You Contribute To This Great List!!
and as one contributor on one of the qrp lists I frequent always says,
"Ham radio is a contact sport!
So, Get on the air and make contacts!
Sincerely, Danny Dyer, Wb4idu.
On 10/18/14, Steve Dresser <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> One problem with the less expensive radios (and Baofeng is one of the =
> worst offenders) is that they tend to have dirty transmit output. =
> Hopefully, that has improved in the newest model, but I don't know that =
> it has.
>
> Steve
>
> ----- Original Message -----=20
> From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 20:13
> Subject: Re: Baofeng radios
>
>
>> You are right, just cheap and actually on test equipment, a few of my=20
>> friends say they are within spec but nowhere near as good as the more=20
>> expensive radios. Personally I rather used commercial radios, I'm just =
> more=20
>> comfortable with them especially with all the public service I do I =
> don't=20
>> feel right trusting those radios. In fact for events we do simplex on, =
> where=20
>> PL tone isn't needed, I've even been known to bring out an old Icom =
> IC2AT=20
>> which I only paid $10 for and it out performs them transmit and =
> receive=20
>> hands down.
>> ----- Original Message -----=20
>> From: "Alan R. Downing" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 7:35 PM
>> Subject: Baofeng radios
>>=20
>>=20
>>>I know zero about Baofeng radios. If I were to ask the question, why =
> does
>>> one buy a Baofeng radio instead of a Kenwood, Icom, or Yaesu, what =
> would=20
>>> the
>>> answer be? When I have read posts about Baofengs, it seems to me =
> that no
>>> one claims that Baofengs are superior to the major three in some way,
>>> perform better than the big three, or have better quality than the =
> top=20
>>> three
>>> brands. I am left with the impression that Baofengs are nothing more =
> than
>>> cheap. Is my perception correct? Or am I missing something here?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Alan R. Downing
>>>
>>> Phoenix, AZ
>>>
>>>=20
>>
>
|
