I'm not surprised about Wouxon; it's substantially cheaper than any of the
big three, and it's still a good radio.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 17:48
Subject: Re: HT suggestions please
> your right I think.
> at the same time, by making the SMA's opposite of the typical commercial
> HT,
> they have insured that the amateur accessory market for antennas thrives.
> Not all commercial HT's are opposite of the ham gear though...a local ham
> who also operates his own small business UHF repeater, has several Icom
> commercial HT's that have the same configuration as the icom ham HT's and
> so
> on.
> these are older, or at least, a few years older, HT's though and most are
> the same model, which I can't remember off the top of my head.
> Great little HT's though...small, great audio and excellent user
> configurations for things like TOT, tones, squelch, display, alert tones
> and
> so on.
>
> anyway, with companies like Wouxun and others designing their HT's more
> towards the commercial side, I think the big three and their supporting
> accessory manufacturers will begin to see some proffit losses in the next
> few years.
> unless they start making accessories for the chinese radios as well, which
> I
> suspect they will before long...since wouxun at least seems to be taking
> off
> in north america right now.
> I know of at least 10 local hams who have the dual band udp2? radio.
> once you bore a hole in front of the microphone element, and remove the
> rubber membrane, the tx audio is extremely good...if you leave it stock,
> the
> tx audio is very low and sometimes difficult to hear.
>
> 73
> Colin, V A6BKX
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Dresser" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 10:59 AM
> Subject: Re: HT suggestions please
>
>
>> Colin,
>>
>> While I'm not a big fan of SMA connectors, I think we're stuck with them
>> because there isn't room in the modern HT for anything else. All that
>> said,
>> I don't understand why the "big three" ham manufacturers took the reverse
>> approach of the commercial handhelds. Seems as if they shot themselves
>> in
>> the foot by doing what they did.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 00:54
>> Subject: Re: HT suggestions please
>>
>>
>>>I tend to agree with Danny on this one.
>>> I haven't broken an SMA connecter yet, but I've known of many instances
>>> where this has happened. Far fewer instances of BNC connecters breaking
>>> off
>>> the radio or snapping.
>>> Also, BNC connecters are far more ruggedly constructed and due to their
>>> larger size, are far easier for blind ops to repare than an SMA.
>>> Also, a female BNC, IE the connecter on the radio itself, has far less
>>> friction on it when taking antennas on or off...an SMA style set up
>>> requires
>>> you to screw the antenna on or off the radio, and the center pin of the
>>> antenna, or at any rate, the male part of the SMA connecter drills into
>>> the
>>> female part of the plug until the connection is tight. This causes
>>> metal
>>> fatigue. With a BNC connecter, you just press the two halves together,
>>> and
>>> give a quarter turn and it's done.
>>> far far less stress on the electrical connection point.
>>> Perhaps the BNC might endure more strain or stress because it sticks out
>>> further from the chassis of the radio, but this is compensated for by
>>> the
>>> fact that the mounting is far more rugged compared to a female SMA
>>> connecter.
>>> commercial radios, and some of the newer commercial/ham radios from
>>> china
>>> use a male SMA on the radio, and this reduces allot of the above
>>> mentioned
>>> problems inherent with an SMA connecter.
>>> If the antenna snaps off, you can easily replace the antenna instead of
>>> having to send the radioin for repares.
>>> Whereas the tradditional radio female connecter will snap off with the
>>> antenna in most cases and requires costly repares.
>>>
>>> All that said, personal experience is what you have and if your
>>> satisfied
>>> with your own observations, then that is good.
>>>
>>> but just try to remember this the next time someone posts to the list
>>> about
>>> another sma snapping off the radio when it is dropped or impacted.
>>> In 6 years of being on this particular hams list, I've never heard of
>>> that
>>> happening to a BNC connecter on an HT.
>>>
>>> 73
>>> Colin, V A6BKX
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Michael Thurman" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2011 3:24 PM
>>> Subject: Re: HT suggestions please
>>>
>>>
>>>> well i can tell you having had radios with both there is nothign wrong
>>>> =
>>>> with sma in fact I have found sma connectors to e more rugged than bnc
>>>> =
>>>> :) and they feel more solid ont he ht thanthe old bnc antennas that =
>>>> tended to wobble and wiggle around
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 2, 2011, at 4:26 PM, Dan B Dyer Jr,/Danny wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Is there even any multiband HT that's made today that has BNC rather =
>>>> than=20
>>>>> SMA? Singlebanders, yes, but multibanders? I don't know of any. =
>>>> Danny.
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----=20
>>>>> From: "Jeff Kenyon" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2011 4:05 PM
>>>>> Subject: HT suggestions please
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>>> --=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DAVGMAIL-331B0580=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain;
>>>>>> charset=3D"iso-8859-1"
>>>>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> Hi everyone, I am thinking of purchasing a new HT. I think that my =
>>>> F6A =3D
>>>>>> has just about had it, and If I do decide to go a head and get a new
>>>>>> =
>>>> one =3D
>>>>>> I want one with a BNC connector since all of my other radios have the
>>>>>> =
>>>> =3D
>>>>>> BNC connector, and the F6A is the only one with SMA. Any suggestions
>>>>>> =
>>>> =3D
>>>>>> would be helpful, and thanks in advance.
>>>>>> --=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DAVGMAIL-331B0580=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg=3Dcert; charset=3Dus-ascii
>>>>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>>>>> Content-Disposition: inline
>>>>>> Content-Description: "AVG certification"
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>>> Version: 8.5.449 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3542 - Release Date: =
>>>> 03/31/11=20
>>>>>> 06:=3D
>>>>>> 34:00
>>>>>> --=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DAVGMAIL-331B0580=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D--=20
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
