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
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0 (iPhone Mail 7E18)
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Date:
Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:10:32 -0700
Reply-To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: RX difference between TS-480 and TS-2000?
From:
Kevin Nathan <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
<[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:
<AE.1C.20861.E1332BB4@louvi-msg>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines) 
Hi Steve,

I've used both and I think the 480 is the better receiver.

Very 73..



Kevin :)
Amateur Radio: K7RX

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 30, 2010, at 10:21, steve <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Just wondering if anyone has done a side by side  comparison of the  
> TS-2000
> and the TS-480 on receive? I would like to get another HF rig in the  
> shack.
> I'm willing to sacrifice some performance in favor of accessibility  
> inherent
> with Kenwood, since I have no sighted  help here.  Rumors still  
> abound of
> Kenwood debuting a new HF rig at Dayton in May,  but even if true,  
> not sure
> I would want to be the first in line for a new model.
>
> I know the 480 requires optional filters, but is the 480 a noticeable
> improvement  on  rx?
>
> 73, Steve KW3A

ATOM RSS1 RSS2