Sony ICF2010
Peter A. Suazo
anyone have any experience with this radio? Is it worth $250? Is it a
quality radio? I am looking for something to listen to "stuff" on, but has
decent range.
Thanks
-Peter
n...@webtv.net
Depends on two things ... if you want the radio for the shortwave
advantages, and knowing for sure that the unit this guy wants to sell
you has NOT been damaged, or altered in ANY way.
If "affirmative" answers both questions, then it's worth the $250.
Rick W 999
anything that's been done to it. I think a newer model may be a better bet
because there are slight changes to the 2010 as the years have gone bye. Or so
I've heard. I lucked out with mine. It was only a year old and was in perfect
shape for $200.00.
If you compare it to an equally priced 909/398, the 2010 is about a third
better radio. (My opinion) It's an older design and if you have noticed,
nowdays they make things with a lot of plastic toy like parts.
McInnis Gaetjens
Thank you
Mr. McInnis Lee Gaetjens'
1234 Avenue D
Marrero, LA 70072
(504)340-1334
(504) 340-1134
Freaky...@webtv.net
Freeky...@yahoo.com
Mack...@juno.com
Circulation_...@juno.com
www.gecocities.com/SouthBeach/Club/2438.idex,htm
www.geocities.com/Southbeach/Club/2438/Index.html
darobin
not....also make sure no blown FET's and make sure the whip antenna is in good
condition (not loose or broken in any way). Also make sure all the buttons on the
front work and that your volume control is not (too) scratchy.
Rick Rikoski
more like it.
It is not user friendly, compared to the SW55 (my travel radio of choice);
has a thing for eating rf transistors and is bulky and heavy for a
portable.
Its technology shows its age: (15 years +).
Rick Rikoski
Chicago USA
Steve Phipps
I love mine and it's the last radio to go (well... maybe my 20 year old
Panasonic RF-2200) if I ever sell them all off...
Bulky and heavy, aged technology, and rf transistor eating can be good things!
Cheers,
Steve
Will White
lunch (IC-756, TS-570, FT-920, and *any* portable ever made) and give the top
shelf a good run for its money (IC-781, TS-850S/AT, even the R8-B) on AM SWBC
(true, these are mostly all designed as ham SSB radios, but I am comparing apples
to apples at least, and the principle can be generalized safely, IMO). Audio and
noise characteristics are wonderful, especially on the 'C' with 6 KHz crystal
filter, but the 'B' with its 4.8 KHz LC filter are pretty soothing too.
I have a 2010, which I use for casual SWL and mil/util data. I might use it more
for SWL if I got a decent outboard speaker, as the one Sony designed in,
typically, stinks. I hate the stock filters, and have been putting off getting
the Kiwas for years, <sigh>. It's a good radio, flexible, and marginally
portable. It says something that they are still selling essentially the same
radio in decent quantity 14+ years after it was introduced.
Next year's model is not *necessarily* better. Meaningful progress can be finite
in some areas, depending on your point of view.
Steve Phipps wrote:
> Bulky and heavy, aged technology, and rf transistor eating can be good things!
>
> Cheers,
> Steve
>
> Rick Rikoski wrote:
>
> > As for being a "Kick Ass Radio", I don't think so. Old, fat, mama, would be
> > more like it.
> >
> > It is not user friendly, compared to the SW55 (my travel radio of choice);
> > has a thing for eating rf transistors and is bulky and heavy for a
> > portable.
> >
> > Its technology shows its age: (15 years +).
> > Rick Rikoski
> > Chicago USA
--
Will White, KD7BFX
to reply, please click this link mailto:w...@asu.uswest.net
Alan Braswell
>As for being a "Kick Ass Radio", I don't think so. Old, fat, mama, would be
>more like it.
>
But still rated as the best available by "Passport" - "the only
portable to approach table top performance". (excluding the more
expensive portatops).
abra...@att.net
Alan Braswell
Houston, Texas
John Jackson
that the D battery life is not too long. But I run mine on batteries all the
time in my travel trailer.
The Sony is a whole lot easier to use than my Collins R390-A, especially when I
try to carry the R390A around for a couple of yards.
John Jackson
Rick Rikoski wrote:
> As for being a "Kick Ass Radio", I don't think so. Old, fat, mama, would be
> more like it.
>
chris
will wrote in and said:
> Agreed. My Drake receivers R4-B and R4-C eat most new, mid range rice-
> boxes for
> lunch (IC-756, TS-570, FT-920, and *any* portable ever made) and give the
> top
> shelf a good run for its money (IC-781, TS-850S/AT, even the R8-B) on AM
> SWBC
> (true, these are mostly all designed as ham SSB radios, but I am comparing
> apples
> to apples at least, and the principle can be generalized safely, IMO).
> Audio and
> noise characteristics are wonderful, especially on the 'C' with 6 KHz
> crystal
> filter, but the 'B' with its 4.8 KHz LC filter are pretty soothing too.
a bad sounding radio either.. i too have compared it to a couple of
newer hf rigs ( kenwood ts-440at and ts-140) and my drake didn't skip
a beat :) whatever they heard i heard and sometimes i heard something
they couldn't..i believe and i may be totally wrong that it has
something to do with having a lower noise floor and a bit better front
end ..in this version , which after i talked with tony at rl drake a
couple of times about it, i found out this was the very last run of
the r-4a models before they went to the b based on both serial number
and a tube position.i have the .4 , 1.2 , 2.4 , and 4.8 khz lc filters
and all of them make this radio sound a WHOLE LOT better than the two
kenwoods i heard. i may be stepping out of bounds here and make some one
who just spent 800 bucks on their hf rig a little mad but that is only
my opinion..overall? i love it . i used to think it was a so-so radio
till i got some swbc band crystals and finally started doing some heavy
duty dx'ing.and so far i have been continually surprised by what it can
do :) now granted it isn't gonna be a watkins johnson hf-1000 but for a
90 dollar radio it will suit me just fine :)
had to throw my 15 cents worth in..
chris
monitoring in kentucky with drake r-4a and sangean ats-803a
George Zimmerlee
>
> A guy just offered to sell me a used Sony ICF-2010 Shortwave radio for $250.
> anyone have any experience with this radio? Is it worth $250? Is it a
> quality radio? I am looking for something to listen to "stuff" on, but has
> decent range.
Please be advised that this radio has a serious problem with
the connection between the battery terminals for the D-cells
and the circuit board. The only cure for it is to take the
set apart, this is not at all intuitive, and solder pieces of
wire from the terminals to the contact points on the circuit
board.
Also the AA-cells will cause a dim display and bizarre operation
when they drain down.
Also this set is notorious for blowing out the front end
transistor if you are dumb enough to connect an external
antenna to the external antenna jack, which has not diode
protection. The whip is diode protected, not the external
antenna jack.
The means of tuning SSB and CW is not the best, it jumps
in 100 hertz intervals. Better to get a set with a real
BFO if you intend to copy SSB and CW.
Many have criticized the quality of sound from the small
speaker, I don't. If I wanted a stereo, I would have
bought a stereo.
If it looks worn, I wouldn't go more than $150. and then
only if you are competent to do the modifications to deal
with battery power intermittents. With Asian crap, you
have to expect this.
--
George Zimmerlee Research on Criminal Government
geo...@atlcom.net http://www.atlcom.net/~geozim/index.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------
Current feature: The Evidence to Impeach President Clinton
The Evidence Against BATF and FBI
FCC Chairman Kennard Put On Notice
Book Review: Tainting Evidence (FBI Crime Lab)
J W Schermerhorn
Although some 2010's do have these problems (below) there are plenty
that don't so I wouldn't let this discouraged you from buying one. If
the set is only a few years old the $250 price is fair but I wouldn't
pay more than $200 for the older ones. Remember,the 2010 has been around
for 15-years! It really depends on how much use it's had. It's still one
of the best portables.
mike
than 5 years and have never had a problem with either set of batteries. And
call me dumb, but I get excellent reception with an external antenna, and
I've never blown the front end. If you're really concerned about that, I
believe there are plans floating around on the internet to install your own
protection.
My two cents worth,
Mike
In article
<B5ABB5D5DC1D74D5.C5F70D2F...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
t>, geo...@atlcom.net wrote:
> George Zimmerlee Research on Criminal Government
> geo...@atlcom.net http://www.atlcom.net/~geozim/index.htm
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Current feature: The Evidence to Impeach President Clinton
> The Evidence Against BATF and FBI
> FCC Chairman Kennard Put On Notice
> Book Review: Tainting Evidence (FBI Crime Lab)
--
to reply remove no-spam from address
Patty Winter
mike <mfo...@autobahnno-spam.mb.ca> wrote:
>On the other hand, there are those of us who have owned a 2010 for more
>than 5 years and have never had a problem with either set of batteries. And
>call me dumb, but I get excellent reception with an external antenna, and
>I've never blown the front end. If you're really concerned about that, I
>believe there are plans floating around on the internet to install your own
>protection.
And it isn't that hard to replace the transistor; I had to do it
once. BTW, I've had my 2010 for more than 12 years. Yes, things
get weird when the AAs run down, but it's easy enough to pop in
new ones. I haven't had any problems with the D cells. If indeed
this was only a problem with serial numbers before 45,000, then
it was fixed loooong ago, because my radio from 1986 has a serial
number in the 82,000 range.
I don't know what an appropriate resale price is, but a 2010
in good condition is certainly worth considering.
Patty
George Zimmerlee
>
> On the other hand, there are those of us who have owned a 2010 for more
> than 5 years and have never had a problem with either set of batteries. And
> call me dumb, but I get excellent reception with an external antenna, and
> I've never blown the front end.
If your 2010 sets on a table, is never transported anywhere and is never
subjected to vibration, you will experience no problems.
Connecting a large outdoor antenna to the external antenna jack
and leaving it connected is a sure-fire means of subjecting the
front-end to a blow out. One persons experience where they escaped
damaged is not the rule. There has been plenty of write up on the
lack of robust design in this area of this set. Lack of robust
design is also responsible for the battery power intermittents.
Again, the rule still stand, you have to expect this
with Asian crap.
George Zimmerlee
> If indeed this was only a problem with serial numbers before
> 45,000, then it was fixed loooong ago, because my radio from
> 1986 has a serial number in the 82,000 range.
WRONG, this was still a problem with Serial No.309373.
Patty Winter
George Zimmerlee <geo...@atlcom.net> wrote:
>Patty Winter wrote:
>> If indeed this was only a problem with serial numbers before
>> 45,000, then it was fixed loooong ago, because my radio from
>> 1986 has a serial number in the 82,000 range.
>
>WRONG, this was still a problem with Serial No.309373.
Well, I don't know the source of the "45,000" information that
someone else posted. But since my serial number is well below
309373 and I haven't had any problems (I don't even know what
the symptoms would be--intermittent power when running from
the D cells?), obviously it isn't a universal problem. So it
might be something for a potential buyer of a used 2010 to
check for, but not to be scared away from an otherwise good
radio by.
Patty
Alan Braswell
>On the other hand, there are those of us who have owned a 2010 for more
>than 5 years and have never had a problem with either set of batteries. And
>call me dumb, but I get excellent reception with an external antenna, and
>believe there are plans floating around on the internet to install your own
>protection.
Same here on all counts. Based on what I've read in several years of
monitoring this ng, these problems are the exception, not the rule.
Benjamin A. Wallace
Reading these various threads should provide the information and caveats
and guidance for anyone considering the Sony 2010.
Ben
George Zimmerlee <geo...@atlcom.net> wrote in article
<B5ABB5D5DC1D74D5.C5F70D2F...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
t>...