WIerd, I've had this email address for over ten years and been getting email
all day. Is there a space between Comast and .net. It looks like you may
have inserted a space which would have caused the error message to be sent.
What's up,
dave
----- Original Message -----
From: MR. B
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 7:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] kendecom repeaters on 220
Dave,
I sent a note to your calls...@comcast.net and received this return:
Your message cannot be delivered to the following recipients:
Recipient address: wa3...@comcast.net
Reason: Illegal host/domain name foundPlease send me contact information --
Thank You,
Ron
WA3GIN wrote:
We had a Mark 4 on 2m, for many years. Transmit audio the best we ever
heard. Rec was fine. The Controller was Old school but it did what it said it
would.
For a Military repeater converted for the commercial marketplace in the 70s
I think they did an OK job. You can still get service for them too!
Anyone looking to buy a 2m Mark 4 in great condition; to play with or as a
back-up or for a portable unit, email me direct.
We upgraded to Kenwood TKR. Nice, easy to program but the audio doesn't
come close to the Kendicom's.
73,
dave
wa3gin
----- Original Message -----
From: n...@no6b.com
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] kendecom repeaters on 220
At 10/18/2009 10:28 AM, you wrote:
>Hey guys,
>
>I'm working with a group and have given them several suggestions for
>repeaters on 220 including hipro, ge, moto, etc.
>One thing i don't know much about is the kendecom, and thought i would
ask
>since they want to know.
>As far as relyability, good, bad?
In a word, bad. The RXs are salvageable, & do have some strong
points. The internal squelch is NG IMO & needs to be replaced, preferably
with a Micor squelch. The TXs & internal controller are junk.
Best bet for 220 is a converted GE or Micor, or find a Midland 13-509 to
split apart.
Bob NO6B
