I think I paid under $200 in 2004.  The new units WN-2 that run off USB 
are in the $500 range.   A lot of bucks for something that is only 
somewhat semi usable as a blind op.  Unless they have made some changes 
  in the later version.

73, Steve  KW3A

On 8/16/2012 7:21 AM, Gerry Learry wrote:
> Hello Steve, I have a wavenode but it isn't connected.  I bought it when
> they first came out, and I haven't looked at any of the software updates.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Forst" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 4:03 AM
> Subject: Re: Manual tuners
>
>
>> Howard,
>>
>> I put on my experimenter's hat and hooked up the 480, which is now the
>> back-up to the back-up radio.   I've always found the TW-1 to be a bit
>> low in the power readings.    I have another  device here, an old
>> Wavenode WN-1, which isn't really blind friendly, although  it does have
>> some speech.
>>
>> Numbers below show band followed by the power spoken by TW-1, followed
>> in parenthesis by the power shown by the Wavenode.
>>
>>
>> 160 = 100 (105)
>> 80 =96 (105)
>> 40 = 90 (104)
>> 30 = 91 (103)
>> 20 =  86 (102)
>> 17 =  80 (100)
>> 12 =68 (96)
>> 10 =  65  (80)
>>
>> As you can see, the TW-1 seems to drop off as you go higher in
>> frequency.    Now the little boy in the first row asks "How do you know
>> the Wavenode is  the accurate one?"  The truth is I can't be sure, but
>> here is the deal:
>>
>> The Wavenode is  computer controlled with a inline coax sensor.  It
>> reads the RF every  5 ms. or 20 times a second.   None of that means it
>> is any better than the TW-1 or anything else, but the Wavenode always
>> more closely matches the power setting of any radio it is connected to,
>> as compared to the TW-1.   Also the  Wavenode  more closely matches the
>> spoken  RF  output meter of the  TS-590, again as compared to the TW-1.
>>
>> I'd be interested to hear what your friend with the Bird meter says.
>> If you still get screwy numbers, you may want to check your carrier
>> level setting.    These settings can get screwed up easy and low carrier
>> level will give low output on  carrier modes, although I think it is not
>> band specific, and you seem to get  some high  numbers with your TW-1.
>> I'd think 3 or 4 times before messing around in the service menus.  If
>> you are convinced there is a problem, I would do a reset of the radio.
>>
>> Bottom line:  The numbers you post are what I would expect from my own
>> TW-1, with the exception of 160.   Maybe the tuner was in line on that
>> band?
>>
>> Sorry this was so long.
>>
>> 73, Steve KW3A
>>
>>
>> On 8/16/2012 4:36 AM, Howard Kaufman wrote:
>>> I was using a straight key in the CW position.  I see a 1.2 SWR on the
>>> internal dummy load in the tuner.
>>> I am wondering about the possibility of consistent inaccureacy of the
>>> TW1,
>>> so I will invite a friend over with a Byrd to see what that shows.
>>> If you or anybody else here has a ts-480 SAT, I'd appreciate knowing what
>>> they get for power output with a similar test.
>>> 48 watts on 160, 96 qwatts on 80, 95 watts on 40, 99 watts on 60, 97 on
>>> 30,
>>> 85 on 20, 91 on 17, 86 on 15, 85 on 12, 82 at the bottom of 10, 12 on 6.
>>> I am beginning to suspect the TW1, so if somebody else can try the same
>>> test, the results would be interesting.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>