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: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: IC-746 vs FT-920  (Read 508 times)
PT2GW
Member

Posts: 7




Ignore
« on: February 15, 2001, 09:41:29 AM »


I am planning to purchase a new radio and considering my needs (a good HF radio especialy for 80/40 meters) and budget I think IC-746 and FT-920 are the better choices.

The Yaesu has a better look (in my opinion), a receiver antenna jack that I consider a plus and I think it is more confortable to operate than Icom. The IC-746 has quad conversion, a better DSP, more filter slots and probably a better receive. Six and two meters are not important to me.

Many messages and articles have been writen comparing  the diferences and qualities of 746 and 920 but I would like to read more opinions about them from everyone and especialy from the ones that operate both radios side by side.

Thanks a lot and 73,

Rogerio - PT2GW
Logged
WB2WIK
Member

Posts: 20595




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2001, 11:57:38 AM »

Everybody will have opinions.  Here's mine, based on using them essentially side-by-side in a contesting situation: Go with the Yaesu.  Contests require fast and easy (no thought required) band, & filter changes, more easily and quickly accomplished with the FT920.  And using them both with 1500W amplifiers running to antennas in the same field at the contest site, the Yaesu's receiver performed better under these harsh conditions.  If you will never actually use multiple HF rigs next to each other, and will never operate contests, than these two issues will not be terribly important to you.  Don't know how easy it is to buy new ham gear there, but here in the States, it's pretty easy to walk into the store, for example HRO has 12 stores in 8 states, and actually use the rigs for a while prior to making your decision.  Then, you'll have the most important opinion of all -- your own!  Good luck & DX to you!
Logged
KC9L
Member

Posts: 9


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2001, 06:43:04 PM »

Rogerio-

Can't comment on the 920 but there's a few guys here with a 746 and it is a very durable radio.  They have used it in Field Days and it did quite well.  Everyone I've talked to with one really enjoys it.  Like the other fellow said, hopefully you can compare both side by side.

73 and have fun! Chris KC9L
Logged
VK6BCP
Member

Posts: 6




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: February 16, 2001, 01:54:44 AM »

Go and buy the IC 746. Its the better radio for you. As you said you like to work on 40m. If you do this at night you can do it with success with the IC 746, but not with the Yaesu. I had them both, the Yaesu will deliver you a lot of phantom-signals, caused by the strong broadcast stations around 6 Mhz. Also the 746 is much better in this point as the more expensice 756 PRO. So the best value for money is the 746.

Vy 73 Walter, VK6BCP (HB9CAI - DJ4VN)
Logged
KA2UUP
Member

Posts: 388




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: February 21, 2001, 07:54:10 AM »

Go with the 746.  Can't beat it for the price, it is durable and has all the coverage you need.  After using it straight for some time with my MFJ-1798 vertical antenna, I bought an Ameritron Tuner and that has really expanded the matching to almost 1:1 on the 10-80 bands, even thought the internal tuner will do a good job.

The filters I have are for the 9MHz slots (500 Hz CW narrow and 1800 Hz SSB narrow) and work very well.  The DSP is top notch.  Suggest you get a small outside speaker or use headphones instead of the built in speaker.

Good luck.

Bert, KA2UUP
Logged
N4UE
Member

Posts: 296




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: February 21, 2001, 02:03:44 PM »

Walter. I must take exception to you comments about the 756PRO. I have used every brand and almost every model of old and modern radio. Many of them in the last year. Over 300+ rasios have come through my shop. I have at the present time:

a Collins 75A-4
a Collins 51J-3
Icom 745 (bought new)
Icom 706g (bought new)
Drake TR4-C (I had a R4, R4A, R4B, and several R4Cs)
An EAC R-390A with TMC 591A SSB converter
Ten Tec SP-325

Although I have used 746s, I do not own one. Almost every 'complaint' about the PRO is made by someone who doesn't know how to use digital filters. The PRO runs rings around all of the above radios. I routenly use mine on CW with the selectivity down to 50 Hz. One must spend some time playing with a PRO and the PBT. If you attempt to use it out of the box, you may be disappointed. The 746 has filter slots which can accomodate some very usefull filters. Bang for the buck? It's definatly the 746. Top performance is the PRO. You will notice that Signal One now uses the Pro as the basis of their high $ Military radio.....

My $ .02 worth, morth everything you paid for it.

ron
Logged
KB6TRR
Member

Posts: 32




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: February 24, 2001, 09:47:57 PM »

Go with the FT-920. I was faced with the same choice about 8 months ago. Went to a local HRO and spent almost an entire day comparing rigs and that included everything from receiver selectivity and sensitivity to ease of use. The FT-920 is a very intuitive radio to use, everything you need is at your fingertips rather than hidden by multiple menu layers. I do not believe you can go wrong with either radio, but if you want a radio with a minumum of hidden features, with everything you need out in the open, the 920 is the choice. Good luck, and as a previous writer stated very well, the only valid opinion is your own, the advice you get here is worth what you paid for it, if possible operate both rigs then you will know for sure.
73
Leo(KB6TRR)
Logged
Pages: [1]   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!