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: Kenwood TS950SDX or FT1000D  (Read 1051 times)
WS4V
Member

Posts: 16




Ignore
« on: July 09, 2002, 11:24:10 PM »

Hello to all! Knowing what is known about rigs and if
one had a chance to buy a like new used FT1000D or Kenwood TS950SDX what would be the better choice?
I realize this is a tough question to answer but I am having a hard time deciding on which one to lean towards.
The FT1000D may have a 50 watts advantage which is negligible but the TS950SDX seems to have a few more advanced features and a more updated/sophisticated look to it. Plus, there is DSP implementation in the 950SDX.
I use CW about 75% of the time and enjoy DX'ing and contesting.
I've already ruled out the 775dsp (just can't warm up to the large amber readout and too close to a 781 I use) and 870S (the TS2000 seems more advanced).
Any help would be appreciated.
Tnx and 73!
Logged
K8AC
Member

Posts: 1465




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: July 10, 2002, 07:30:13 AM »

Don't make a decision based on the DSP functions of the 950SDX - you'll be VERY disappointed.  While the SDX is a very good rig, the DSP functions as they relate to receive mode are virtually worthless.  The "comb filter" which appears to be designed for SSB use is not described in the Kenwood literature as to operation, and in fact, it appears to do nothing other than to introduce a notch in the audio around 1600 Hz.  So, it does reduce noise, but in a very questionable manner.  For CW, there's an audio peaking function provided by the DSP circuitry, but I found that of not much value as it reduces the audio gain quite a bit.  The DSP does NOT eliminate a carrier or heterodyne as you would expect.  You'd be much better off with an external DSP unit, such as a Timewave.  Even my old Autek QF-1A filter performs better than the SDX's CW peaking filter.  The internal DSP unit functions in transmit mode in the SDX, apparently providing many capabilities, such as CW waveform shaping, controlling audio bandwidth, etc.
Logged
WB2WIK
Member

Posts: 20542




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2002, 11:58:52 AM »

Having used both rigs quite a lot, I'd favor the 1000D for just plain, flat-out performance on crowded bands.  This is difficult to quantify with test data, it's more of a "feel" issue.

A lot of FT1000MP and MkV lovers might have forgotten that these rigs are both "cheapie" spinoffs based on the more sophisticated and more costly 1000D, and the older model outperforms the newer ones.

WB2WIK/6
Logged
K7KCS
Member

Posts: 27




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: July 24, 2002, 11:01:56 AM »

1.  Go to the ARRL web site and print out the product tests on each machine you are interested in.
2.  Create a table with attribures on the left side and the rig names accross the top and enter the test  data in the table . . . . .when complete you can compare.
3.  Do not rule out the 775DSP.


73's  Tracy K7KCS
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!