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: Rig Reviews (without antennas?)  (Read 922 times)
VE3GNU
Member

Posts: 86




Ignore
« on: January 15, 2009, 07:04:10 AM »

In order to have some credibility---shouldn't all rig 'reviews' be required to include what antenna(s) are used for the assessment(s)?
i.e. a rig gets a 'lousy' grade because the 'reviewer/operator' has a poor/inefficient antenna---or the rig gets a 'glowing' report on account of the operator/owner has a log-periodic at 100' plus---
---seems logical to me, and something I've wondered about for a long time-----
Ernie
Logged
N4CQR
Member

Posts: 566




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: January 16, 2009, 09:45:07 AM »

At the risk of starting another eHam pissing match let me say this. Your suggestion has merit. Problem is, there is the chance (read, risk) of there being conflicts due to antenna opinions.

A lot of people use a G5RV type of antenna. And, a lot of people refuse to believe they can actually work. So a radio reviewed using a G5RV would be less accurite than one reviewed with a resonate, 50 ohm, properly intalled, exact height, etc. dipole.

Then comes the review by the ham who clames to have a six over six over six monobander setup. I think you see where I am going.

Take care and have pleasant weekend.

Craig
 
Logged
N8EMR
Member

Posts: 235




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2009, 07:40:05 PM »

Since most rig reviews are  superficial and subjective in nature why does it matter what antenna is used.  A typical just got the radio and made one contact today. I love the radio 5/5 is hardly a review. Most if any reviews have a lab grade measurements taken. The best you get is my XXXX sounds better than my YYYY.

Logged
N3OX
Member

Posts: 8847


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2009, 08:35:08 PM »

"Since most rig reviews are superficial and subjective in nature why does it matter what antenna is used. "

Yep, I agree.

Would-be buyers just need to realize that user reviews are what they are, brief, subjective opinions, some of which are useful and some of which have some hidden agenda and some of which are accidentally misleading for lack of comparison.

I don't think requiring this or that of reviews would be useful.  I think that the best reason to have eHam reviews with number scores at all is to weed out real lemons.  

New rig got 1.5/5 reviews after 85 people write in?  Hmm....

But other than that, I think buyers should just read all the reviews of a product they're interested in and take a carefully thought-through average of the actual comments in the text, more or less ignoring the numbers.

73
Dan
Logged

73,
Dan
http://www.n3ox.net

Monkey/silicon cyborg, beeping at rocks since 1995.
KB2NAT
Member

Posts: 10




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2009, 03:57:26 PM »

I agree with the idea that it would be good to know what antenna(s) is/are being used with a rig.  However, I also wonder what the original reason for the purchase of a particular rig was:  ease of use, cost, looks, brand name, size, or simply pure specifications.  I think some would enjoy using a particular unit more with a G5RV or vertical than an uncomfortable (to them) rig with a beam at 50'.  Others, by situation, may simply be using a small stealth antenna based on Housing Police or like to run QRP.  Anyway, just some thoughts.  I enjoy reading the input on these things.  Thanks to all of you who give thoughful comments.
Logged
W3LK
Member

Posts: 5639




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: January 30, 2009, 08:12:13 AM »

The type of antenna used has no bearing on how a specific radio works, looks, feels, etc. Changing types of antennas does not change any of the specs or operating features.

Saying I use an XXX antenna and made yyy contacts with it and xxx radio is useless information.

73,

Lon - W3LK
Naugatuck, Connecticut
Logged

A smoking section in a restaurant makes as much sense as a peeing section in a swimming pool.
ZENKI
Member

Posts: 956




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2009, 05:29:54 PM »

"Since most rig reviews are superficial and subjective in nature why does it matter what antenna is used. "

This statement includes the ARRL reviews. While the measured data is useful, most of the text is subjective.

It would be nice if the ARRL reviewed radios to  known standards, like the ETSI standards.

Do a search for ETSI EN 300373-1. This is the  testing
standard for marine HF transceivers. The standards that marine radios should meet  are clearly explained and easily understood. This is how the ARRL  should review radios. Better still why dont the manufacturers  use a testing regime and protocol like this?  

Using standards  like this you would at least know that a radio meets basic standards and anything else  beyond the basic test standard that cant be measured  is subjective nonsense. You would certainly know if you comparing oranges with oranges.

Trying comparing diffrent radios for audio output power to make an informed decision! Its just about impossible, using the ETSI standard you could do that.

END

Logged
TERRY_PERRY_EX_W3VR
Member

Posts: 70




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2009, 07:59:18 PM »

"On my order forms, I have a little section for "REMARKS". You would not believe the number of people who have bought my stuff just because of the positive eHam reviews."

Sounds like a good deal if its working for you.


"But how fair is a system in which the ham business offers its customers perks and/or payola if they promise to go to the eHam "Product Review" page to submit a positive review?Huh?"

Who's doing this?

You know for fact people are getting paid to give positive reviews in the Eham product reviews?

If so, can you prove it?

W3VR
Logged
TERRY_PERRY_EX_W3VR
Member

Posts: 70




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2009, 07:12:27 AM »

Bill,

Congratulations on your website, and ham business. I like the retro look of the website, and it looks very clean and functional.

Best regards,

Terry
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!