Yaesu FT 920?
Chris Dorn
Hello,
I am considering the purchase of a Yaesu FT920. I have read most of the
resources that I could find on the internet, but would appreciate any
user feedback. A lot of the dealers suggest that the Icom 746 is a much
better radio. How is the 746 that much better? I realize that the
additional 2M coverage is nice, but I don't like the Icom interface and
ergonomics all that much. I have heard that the early 920s had some
problems, but that these were corrected in later production. Looks like
the 920 really doesn't sell much anymore. Would appreciate any comments.
Chris VE6RDC
STEVEN L UMBACH
Hi Chris. Try to pin down exactly why the dealers say it is a much better
radio - selectivity, sensitivity, dynamic range, receiver quietness, imd
performance, ?? My bet is they may be overstocked in them or want to sell
you a more expensive radio. In my opinion if you don't care about two meters
then the FT920 would be the one to get. It is a LOT bigger and better laid
out for a base rig, too bad it does not have a built in power supply though.
QST gave the FT920 a favorable review. Hams I have talked to like them a lot
and comment that the FT920 has an outstanding receiver. I have a FT1000MP
and can not comment on personal experience, but I am sure others will. Good
luck. -- Steve N9ROU
Chris Dorn wrote in message <6ndgoi$d2g$1...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>...
wb6...@my-dejanews.com
Hi Chris,
Well, I had a 920 for 10 days and took it back but it's not what it sounds
like. I really liked the 920 alot. The only reason I took it back was I had
wanted a 1000MP to begin with and decided that I had better go get what I
really wanted so I wouldn't be unhappy later. The 920 has a great receiver,
the DSP is outstanding. At my QTH, I suffer from some very strong local
signals and the DSP did an outstanding job allowing me to work in close to
the 'offending' signals. The ergonomics are nice also, although after using
a Kenwood for a year, having the audio gain on the other side took a bit of
getting used to. I've never had an Icom hf rig so I really can't comment but
I'd be surprised if the 746 was any better than the 920. If any Icom rig
would be a better comparision it would be the 756. Now, when I get my 1000MP
in about a week, hopefully it's as good as the 920 HiHi. Good luck on your
decision. 73's Jim WB6YAW
In article <6ndgoi$d2g$1...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>,
cd...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (Chris Dorn) wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I am considering the purchase of a Yaesu FT920. I have read most of the
> resources that I could find on the internet, but would appreciate any
> user feedback. A lot of the dealers suggest that the Icom 746 is a much
> better radio. How is the 746 that much better? I realize that the
> additional 2M coverage is nice, but I don't like the Icom interface and
> ergonomics all that much. I have heard that the early 920s had some
> problems, but that these were corrected in later production. Looks like
> the 920 really doesn't sell much anymore. Would appreciate any comments.
>
> Chris VE6RDC
>
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
n8...@qsl.net
I posted a similar question, and had three people respond to me in email. All
3 said the FT-920 was not a mistake, had a great rx, and that the units
shipping now do not have anything to complain about. One person told me that
putting it beside his FT1000MP he was unable to hear the difference. The
review in QST was in the OCT97 issue, and if you compare it to other recent
QST reviews in the price class, it does very well indeed.
It seems to me that the more expensive a rig is, the slower the obsolecense
time-table ( and the smaller the market ). So you may think the $3000.00
radio is better because it hasn't been replaced in 3 years, but that's wrong.
There's a lot of new $1700.00 radios being sold by comparison to the $3000.00
units. Each new offering has more to offer in the same price class, and it's
just a matter of getting one which doesn't need to be sent back for a bug
fix. At this time, the FT-920 is mature in the manufacturing cycle, and a
very good radio for the money.
Ken
In article <6ngi4t$d3a$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
Christopher
the FT-920. Then I set eyes upon the IC-746. I was curious about the
performance of both. Please remember that all along I had my heart set on the
FT-920. So I asked the salesmen to hook up both radio's on the same antenna
via a switcher box. I listened to a distant station on 40 meters on the
FT-920, messed around with the DSP, well the station cleared right up.
Impressive performance. Then I tried the same on the IC-746. Well what can I
say the station was a lot stronger with out any pre-amps or DSP even in. So
being very impressed with that. Played with the DSP on the IC-746. The result
was, stronger signal on the IC-746 anyway. Then a very clean station. So I
walked out with an IC-746 that day. I have never turned back.
Chris Dorn wrote:
> Hello,
> I am considering the purchase of a Yaesu FT920. I have read most of the
> resources that I could find on the internet, but would appreciate any
> user feedback. A lot of the dealers suggest that the Icom 746 is a much
> better radio. How is the 746 that much better? I realize that the
> additional 2M coverage is nice, but I don't like the Icom interface and
> ergonomics all that much. I have heard that the early 920s had some
> problems, but that these were corrected in later production. Looks like
> the 920 really doesn't sell much anymore. Would appreciate any comments.
>
> Chris VE6RDC
--
Christopher - ch...@nospam.cpcherry.demon.co.uk
=== THE TOUGHEST MAIL FILTER EVER - MY DELETE BUTTON ===
Remove "nospam." in the e-mail address to reply.
David Ho (de AF4BH)
Chris:
While I agree with you that being able to capture weak signals is very
important to a radio, I just wonder if you knew that the FT-920 had 2
separate FET RF amplifiers. These preamps are switchable to give you 2
receiver characteristics:
Higher sensitivity (MOS FET) (default to 21MHz and up)
Lower gain, good strong signals handling (J-FET) (21MHz and below)
Applying the MOSFET to a noisy 20M, 40M, or 160M band can give a better
swing on the meter, and yes, louder signal. But it also allows more
background noise and strong adj. signals to come and invade your QSO.
I don't know how the 2 rigs were configured at the time you ran the test,
nor the frequencies and modes were used. I do notice that switching from
the J-FET frontend to the MOSFET frontend won't lose any readability (all
modes) of the incoming signal. However, strong signals can be handled a
lot better and S/N is better, too. Having IPO (Intercept Point
Optimization) on the FT-920 is icing on the cake.
I think that one should also consider how a receiver handles strong
signals when come to listen to the weak ones.
If the "2 seperate RF amplifiers" in the FT-920 is the only key to compare
against the "2 Step Preamplifier" in the IC-746, I would much like my
FT-920's receiver performance without a doubt.
Just my 2 cents...
Best 73!
de David Ho, AF4BH
Covington, KY USA
E-Mail: dav...@one.net
Seth Miller
thread, maybe even with a subject mentioning your topic rather than
"Yaesu FT 920?". Just a suggestion...
Bart Senior wrote:
>
> How does the IC-756 COmpare to the IC-746? Can anyone tell me?
>
> Also, are there more thanone version of the IC-756. I noticed the
> price went up, was there an associated improvement in the radio? I
> read something about DSP. Was this added to the newer version?
>
> Any advice would be apprciated. I'm looking at possible picking one
> of these up for a base rig.
Bart Senior
Christopher
> signals when come to listen to the weak ones.
>
>
> Best 73!
>
> de David Ho, AF4BH
> Covington, KY USA
> E-Mail: dav...@one.net
>
> On Wed, 15 Jul 1998, Christopher wrote:
Having ran the IC-746 for two months. I can say it is very good at rejecting strong
signals. I have a fellow ham 3 streets away. It handles his 450 watt out put fine.