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:
Steve Dresser <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 2 Feb 2008 16:30:32 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (63 lines)
Lou,

I'm surprised that you found problems with the 2000 on VHF and UHF.  A 
friend of mine, who does VHF/UHF work almost exclusively, has two (yes, 
count 'em, two) TS-2000s and loves them both.  I wonder if Kenwood has some 
quality control issues with noisy receivers in that radio.

Steve

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lou Kline" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 14:59
Subject: TS2000S -- Why the Critique


> Hi.
>
> The main reason why I lamb-basted Kenwood concerning the TS2000S is the
> receiver noise floor issue.  I didn't realize how bad it is until I 
> started
> doing some rig to rig comparisons during the VHF contest, and discovered
> that the Kenwood TS690 stomps the snot out of the TS2000S on 6 meters, and
> the TS790A stomps the snot out of it on 2 meters and 70 cm.  I already 
> knew
> the TS690 is quieter on HF, but the receiver sensitivity isn't as critical
> as it is on VHF/UHF.
>
> My take on it is this.  In any rig that I buy, it is receiver performance
> that I hold out for primarily.  Anybody can build a transmitter section
> that will do the job reasonably well--that isn't rocket science.  But it 
> is
> generally the receiver section that makes a rig exceptional or very bad,
> because let's face it folks--you can't work 'em if you can't hear 'em.
>
> My point is that for the cost of the rqadio, I think Kenwood could have
> paid a little more attention to receiver noise, and for the length of time
> that radio has been on the market, they could have come out with a revised
> version, if they cared at all.  Or even if they had a more expensive
> version that provided a first class receiver, I'm the kind of operator 
> that
> would spend the extra bucks to get something really good if it were in my
> means to do so.  My take on the TS2000S is that it is a good radio for
> folks that do casual operation on a lot of different bands, but for 
> someone
> who is looking for very good performance, it comes up short.
>
> That is my two cents worth.
>
> 73, de Lou K2LKK
>
>
>
> Louis Kim Kline
> A.R.S. K2LKK
> Home e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
> Work e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
> Work Telephone:  (585) 697-5740
>
>
>
> 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2