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
Sender:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:03:19 -0700
Reply-To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
From:
Butch Bussen <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (41 lines)
I'd say you're right on all counts, they're cheap is their main 
attraction and they talk a little which helps.  THey are also ready to 
transmit anywhere out of the box as the uv-5 was type accepted.  They 
are a software defined radio as I understand it.  I have several of the 
uv5s and an f6.  The f6 is a much bettetr radio, better receiver 
selectivity and from what I've read much cleaner on transmit than the 
chineese radios.  But you can't beat the price, a replacement battery 
for my f6 cost me $70.
73
Butch
WA0VJR
Node 3148
Wallace, ks.


On Sat, 18 Oct 2014, Alan R. Downing wrote:

> I know zero about Baofeng radios.  If I were to ask the question, why does
> one buy a Baofeng radio instead of a Kenwood, Icom, or Yaesu, what would the
> answer be?  When I have read posts about Baofengs, it seems to me that no
> one claims that Baofengs are superior to the major three in some way,
> perform better than the big three, or have better quality than the top three
> brands.  I am left with the impression that Baofengs are nothing more than
> cheap.  Is my perception correct?  Or am I missing something here?
>
>
>
>
>
> Alan
>
>
>
> Alan R. Downing
>
> Phoenix, AZ
>
>
>
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2