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 >