I myself have pretty much given up on Amateur Grade Equipment all together. It doesn't matter who makes it, they all have relaxed their standards. It all started when I purchased a Yaesu VX-7R. After taking it home, I looked at it on an IFR-1200 service monitor (which I've never done to an Amateur Radio). I viewed the TX swing 1.6kHz off frequency. I returned to HRO with my service monitor in hand to find out just what was going on. Well the gentleman behind the counter kept handing me different portables (as he was a tech himself). He viewed me testing them one by one, and tried to look the other way in embarrassment (he tried to take away the attention of other hams in the store at that time so they wouldn't see my findings). After showing him just how far out of specs his portables were (frequency stability and deviation). I asked him the question, How is this so? He clearly stated, "It's Amateur Radio equipment" while giving me a look like what was I too expect from Amateur Radio equipment.
I have an older model Yaesu FT-50R and stuck it on the IFR. It was great! Frequency and deviation were beautiful. It appeared as though through testing of later and later model portables, the later model it was, the worse my findings became. I refuse to purchase another Amateur Radio Portable again. I only buy commercial portables now. Another thing, all this wide band RX is for the birds. If I'm in a heavily RF congested area, the receivers blast open with trash, also deafening the receiver to the point the radio is useless. I was tired of not being able to use my ham equipment at hill top sites while mobile. I have replaced it all with commercial gear and now I can hear again. I'm certain that most of you already knew this. But for those of you who didn't. It's just something to think about. Oh, and one last comment, most every Amateur Radio potable is unable to do split Tone PL's. One Tone PL for TX and another Tone PL for RX. I don't know why that is so. It would just take a little extra code writing, but what do we expect, It's Amateur Radio Grade Equipment. Paul Metzger K6EH ------------------------------ On Mar 14, 2007, at 19:23, Eric Lemmon wrote: > Nate, > > Several years ago, I chastised ARRL Labs for failing to report the > basic > 2-way radio performance parameters of 12dB SINAD sensitivity, voice > deviation limit, CTCSS deviation limit, and center frequency > accuracy. I > did not get a satisfactory answer, but I suspect that there is a > reluctance > to disparage the performance of name-brand Ham radios. > > Nearly every Amateur 2m radio I have tested has CTCSS deviation far in > excess of the EIA/TIA recommended level of 750 Hz, and that level > is not > adjustable in most radios. Alinco radios are the worst in this > regard, > because the radios are made with fixed resistors that set the CTCSS > deviation level, which usually is two to three times the proper > level. An > Alinco tech stated that the exact level wasn't important, only that > it was > "high enough!" I own several Alinco radios that were delivered > with CTCSS > deviation above 1500 Hz, and I modified them to bring their > emissions within > industry standards. Such blatant disregard for industry-recommended > deviation levels is certainly not limited to any one manufacturer! > > My ICOM IC-207H mobile radio needed adjustment to bring the center > frequency > and deviation within ICOM specs, but the model received rave > reviews from > users who didn't realize how imprecisely the radios were tuned at the > factory. > > I realize that not every Ham has the test equipment to verify on-spec > performance of a new radio, but I would like to see much greater > care taken > in fixing the critical performance parameters, before the radio > goes out the > door. Moreover, I would like "Amateur-Grade" to mean simply that > the radio > will operate on Amateur bands, not that it has been "dumbed-down" to > eliminate important performance adjustments in the name of reduced > selling > price! > > 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 5:27 PM > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: fixed-audio? > > On 3/14/07, nj902 <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:wb0emu%40arrl.net> > wrote: > >> Another post suggested checking the frequency response of your >> repeater. Definitely - do that. Try it a various deviations. You >> may be surprised at how ugly it gets. > > Sure would be nice to see ARRL labs do a shootout of repeater > controllers with tests like this one... they spend days and days (and > page after page) testing out $10,000 HF rigs... > > You'd think they could put some hard numbers behind the performance of > the various repeater controllers out there every couple of years from > the lab as a small article in the VHF/UHF month/edition. > > What kinds of tests would YOU like to see done in a "repeater > controller shootout" article? Maybe someone could write one up and > submit it... obviously a giant chart of features is probably a > must-have for such an article, too... > > Nate WY0X > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
