Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Yaesu FT-950 vs. FT-2000  (Read 8046 times)
AE5EH
Member

Posts: 47




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: September 29, 2008, 08:28:10 PM »

"by KB9CRY on September 29, 2008     
Read W8JI's comments in the middle of the page:

http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6673"

SmileySmileySmileySmileySmiley!
Logged
KF7CG
Member

Posts: 812




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: October 08, 2008, 10:05:30 AM »

Remember that the FT2000 and FT950 have selectable roofing filters (crystal) ahead of the DSP this allows for more flexibility with what is done in the last IF/detector.

Also remember that as with most things electronic, the law of twice the performance at half the price every 5 years has a bearing on what the cost factor is.

As for what components are used where, the larger electronics market has quite an influence. Why did some of the revered boat anchors use sweep tube finals? They were inexpensive. Why don't we have antenna tuners with large high value capacitors? They are either prohibitively expensize or just plain unavailable.

In this day of mass-production if you can't sell 100 nillion of an item you don't produce it.

Now that I have thrown out all kinds of things to think about, let me say that I own an FT-950 and enjoy it. It works better than my Henry-Kenwood TS-511s did, better than my FT-101ZD MKII did, and better than my FT-847 did though I miss some of the features of the FT847. I would have purchased an FT2000 if my budget for radio gear had been larger. FT950 good compromise between price and performance.

KF7CG
Logged
KC0SKE
Member

Posts: 15




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: October 13, 2008, 08:01:21 AM »

Again, I'm sure I sound like a broken record, but you will all have to excuse my ignorance.

In a previous post a member wrote, that the FT-100MP MKV was better because it utilized crystals instead of DSP. In this past post I read that it has both crystals AND DSP. Can someone explain this to me. Also the previous post wrote that you would have purchased the FT-2000 if your budget was higher. Does this mean that it is a better radio but the money just isn't there. Or do you mean that it is a better radio but for the $1000 price difference only a fool buys the FT-2000 over the 950 which does ALMOST as much?
Logged
KG8JF
Member

Posts: 298




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: October 27, 2008, 05:29:35 AM »

I keep preaching for people to read the ARRL or Sherwood Engineering reviews.  You cannot compare 2 receivers without the data presented by these 2 services.  The K2 and K3 are not the "prettiest" radios out there, but they are tested performers.  Fit and finish matter, but when you are trying to dig out that new one, they don't matter......
Logged
AB3CX
Member

Posts: 622




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: October 27, 2008, 09:13:57 AM »

A Forum like this is not a place for a fair or thorough evaluation of a difficult topic like comparing the Yaesu Mark V to the FT-2000. Read the Rob Sherwood website on receiver performance. Alot of people live and die by that. As far as rig enjoyability, that's a different matter. For most hams under most circumstances, I feel the FT 2000 is more rig for the money and more flexible than the Mark V. FT-2000 used $1800, Mark V Field $1500 but then add the filters in, roofing plus 4 other filters brings cost up another $600 even shopping carefully. DSP in the 2000 is better than the DSP in the Mark V IMHO having extensively used both. If you need an ultimate contest rig, get the K3 or IC-7800 for $10,000
Logged
W3QE
Member

Posts: 9




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: November 01, 2008, 09:00:53 PM »

I owned FT950 and don’t now, why not? Because the FT450 is just as good and IMO the DSP is better and it cost half as much. Don’t own the FT450 now either. As far as I am concerned anything less than a PROIII or a K2, it’s equal IMO, is junk.


I looked at this http://www.w8ji.com/picking_the_right_radio.htm. Here is a guy who knows what he is talking about, a must read if you what the facts.
Logged
K3EY
Member

Posts: 50




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: November 16, 2008, 02:11:27 PM »

I agree with the K3 delivery comment...no radio is worth waiting till Armageddon to buy. I loved the K2 though, has one of the best receivers out there.

I owned a few different 950's all from new, yes stupid but so what I do that all the time buying trading selling. I do like the 950 for it's ergonomics and there it ends.

Why not look at the FT450? It's cheaper and performs just as well and in fact has a better DSP and is easier to set on the run.

I would not buy a FT2000 just on the negatives it has received consistently, doesn't make sense to me to not believe the majority plus Sherwood.

Truth be told and this comment is coming from someone who has owned them all---buy a PROIII and up or an old Drake or Kenwood  TS830 because everything else I have found that is new and priced below a  two grand has all the gadgets but nothing to write home about for raw performance.

R&L has the best price on the FT950 if you go with one.

Good Luck

K3EY
Logged
W3QJ
Member

Posts: 8




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: January 12, 2009, 02:37:50 PM »

"RE: Yaesu FT-950 vs. FT-2000 Reply
by KB9CRY on September 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
don't really have any preferences.


K3

Put that at the top of the pile and see what other/any other rig can knock it off. If you want the best, that will be continuously and easily upgradable, there's no other solution."

======================================================

I sure hope you're right Philip. I very much want to believe that.

I just bought one K3/100 s/n 1055. Five months old from K0FTC. This thing has the worst thinnest, wimpiest audio I've ever heard in a $2,900.00 XCVR. Okay for CW, terrible for voice. Latest FW, and RX or TX eq has little effect. It's on its way back to Elecraft. Hopefully Elecraft will make good on it. I'm may cost me more money, especially with the DSP board mods and 6KHZ filter I've requested. But I just can't imagine a $3,000.00 XCVR of anykind that sounds as bad as mine does. There has to be something wrong with it. It was probably a mistake to buy one of these sight unseen. Really the more I think about it, it was stupid for me to buy it already having a IC 7700, PROIII, and IC 7000. I should have bought an Orion II instead. Live and learn.

$2,900.00 is more for a scince project than I wanted to spend. That's before I realized it was going to be a science project.

73
W3QJ
Logged
NA0AA
Member

Posts: 1043




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: February 21, 2009, 08:25:13 PM »

The problem with the Sherwood report is that it is sorted by ONE and only one criteria, so if you want to compare them by any other, it's a total hand-job to cut and paste everything again.

But I'm not going to weight in, I just bought an FT-2000, and if it's a piece of junk then the radio I replaced was worse.

But everyone's dog hunts best.

I have not used the 950 but on a number/button count, the 2000 wins by a mile, which means less menu work to use all those features.

One of the problems I have with the icom and K2/3 is that they are much more menu stack driven.  Ease of operation in a home radio means a lot to me, far more than compact size - I got plenty of desk space, what I want is easy to operate.

But what the heck, I'm just an appliance operator anyway, according to the Real Amateurs [TM].
Logged
TANAKASAN
Member

Posts: 933




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: February 24, 2009, 06:36:28 AM »

1) Take a deep breath

2) Take a day off work and head on over to one of the big ham radio retailers. Explain your problem to them and ask to try the following rigs:

FT950
FT2000
IC756 Pro III (see 4 below)
Tentec Jupiter
K3

3) Take your time, get to know the feel and ergonomics of each rig. Unless you're really keen on getting a Yaesu read all the Eham reviews on all of the rigs in the above list.

4) Consider adding the Icom IC7600 to the list but be aware that this rig is fresh off the drawing board and there may be bugs. This rig is the replacement for the IC756 Pro III

5) Draw up a big list of the specifications of all the transceivers you like. Highlight all of the extra items such as the great QSK on Tentecs but also highlight all the things that might be missing or promised at a later date.

6) Make your purchase.

Tanakasan
Logged
NK5G
Member

Posts: 102




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: February 24, 2009, 12:05:42 PM »

Tanakasan has some of the best advise on this thread.

What it boils down to in any radio is features vs budget. Do some homework and buy what is best for you.
Logged
K8AC
Member

Posts: 1465




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: February 24, 2009, 02:13:16 PM »

"Tanakasan has some of the best advise on this thread. "

Except for the fact that the Tentec and K3 aren't sold through dealers or retailers and the 7600 isn't sold yet in the USA.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!