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] 2 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Why I sold my FT-2000D  (Read 10022 times)
W7VP
Member

Posts: 26




Ignore
« on: January 24, 2008, 12:54:15 PM »

Why I sold My FT-2000D

It has been more than 6 months since I bought my FT-2000D.  During that time I have patiently waited for the fixes to be made in the rig that have not been forthcoming.  As a result I regretfully decided to sell the rig at the kind of loss that bears out the fact that the equipment is seriously flawed.

Here are some of my reasons:
1.   The FT-2000 was promoted as a high end contest and DX rig.  Yet it was delivered with serious deficiencies. These include the following:
a.    Misrepresentation of the character of the so-called 3 kHz roofing filter.  This filter is not only not 3 kHz in bandwidth but in order to cover up the fact that it was not delivered with respect to the same measurement protocol as the 6 kHz filter.  The 6 kHz filter was measured at 6 dB down and the 3 kHz filter was measured at 3 dB down.  When compared to two other Yaesu products including the recently released FT-950, the reason is clear.  The impedance matching transformers were removed and a jury-rigged fix involving inductors and capacitors was installed resulting in a filter characteristic that had a knee on it and did not meet the usual design characteristics of such a filter.

One can surmise with a high degree of probability that Yaesu could not obtain a filter that met their requirements and made a last minute change in design that they have steadfastly defended in the face of considerable well-documented criticism.  The failure of Yaesu to admit this and make arrangements to remedy the situation is a demonstration of its serious lack of marketing integrity.
b.   Appallingly low IMDDR results, particularly in the 2 kHz regime.  A value of –62 dB is not even close to the state-of-the-art.  This in itself had caused many respected contesters to conclude that the rig is not suitable for contesting, particularly on CW.
c.   Poorly designed AGC circuitry that causes excessive unwanted signal attenuation during low signal conditions.
d.   Poorly designed volume control circuitry that results in the volume control not becoming enabled until rotated past 9 o’clock.
e.   Excessive input gain on the front panel mike input that makes setup of the mike, EQ and compression very difficult.
f.   Noise blanking and noise reduction circuits that are virtually useless.
g.   A DNR circuit that results in significant insertion loss and doesn’t work very well anyway.
h.    A notch filter that does not work with multiple signals.
i.   Significant variation in rigging as delivered requiring many to return the equipment for proper alignment.
j.   Burning out of receiver preamps when using the RX connection.
k.   Failure of the final amplifier section of the D model, including mine, requiring return of the equipment under warranty for repair.
l.   Numerous reports of owners being required to return the equipment multiple times for repairs.
2.   Unusually rapid decline in second-hand value of the equipment as more and more potential owners realize the problems with the equipment.  This condition has not been improved by the purchase of Yaesu by Motorola.  As one who has worked on takeovers for companies that are seeking a particular advantage from an acquisition, I have absolutely no hope that Motorola will advance the interests of amateurs with their purchase of Yaesu.  Their purpose was clearly to obtain Yaesu’s share of the commercial market, not its amateur market.  The general rule in such a case is to “take the cash and dump the trash.”  That is very likely what Motorola will do and is why the value of recent Yaesu equipment will very likely fall substantially.  The “Voice of Atlanta” dreamers are in deep denial
3.   Use of one of the FT-2000 forums by someone with a vested interest in the promotion of the FT-2000 to permit the disparagement and intimidation of anyone who has the technical background to identify and comment on the problems with the equipment.
a.   This situation is particularly offensive, as it has resulted in many of those with impressive credentials being so vigorously demeaned that they have abandoned the forum, leaving it without serious technical discussion.
b.   Indeed one of the moderators on the forum has been so biased that while he permits slanderous and demeaning comments to be posted by his friends he has censored replies.
c.   Several of the remaining members are self-aggrandizing without any semblance of accompanying credentials.  One of those person’s claims to be the “Voice of Atlanta,” even though that characterization is already owned by one of the Atlanta commercial radio stations. (Note that he even gave away a DMU to sell his FT-2000 for $1900 thus supporting the premise that the value has dropped considerably).
d.   The forum has been primarily to those who continue to promote ESSB in the face of rising criticism, including a proposed international regulation restricting it.

So I have taken my lumps, even though I tried, at frost to live with the problems.  So I will agree with the cheerleaders that the FT-2000 is a complicated rig requiring a lot of effort to set up.  What I won’t agree to is that it will end up as a rig meeting he expectations created by its promotion.  

73
Bill
W7VP  
Logged
WB2WIK
Member

Posts: 20636




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2008, 01:05:26 PM »

Don't hold back, tell us how you really feel.

:-)

Logged
W8KTH
Member

Posts: 4




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2008, 04:46:39 AM »

I completely agree with W7VP's assessment of the FT-2000 / D  products.  However, I did not have Bill's patience.  I had purchased an FT-2000 as a replacement for my FT-1000MP.  The fact that the 2000 could not hold a candle to the 1000MP was obvious from day one.  I "tried" to like the radio, but couldn't stand the AGC problems.  I sold my FT-2000 at a $700 loss, three months after buying it.  I have much other Yaesu equipment in the shack, but no more - Yaesu has lost my business for life.  Any owner / user who does not recognize the glaring deficiencies in this radio, should be using a TS-520...apparently that's all the radio they really need.

PS: I replaced the FT-2000 with an ICOM PROIII.  Can you believe it?  Every feature on it REALLY works !!!

73 de W8KTH
Logged
PA5CA
Member

Posts: 2




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2008, 06:11:57 AM »

I could not agree more, I own the FT2000 over 6 months
Used the FT2K in the CQWW SSB contest which turned out to be a deception. Her behaviour to strong nearby signals can be compared with low cost crap radios.
In addition to the tag list, many are complaining about misalignment of the radio which include mine as well.
Sale prices in Europe dropped considerable from 2600 Euro to 1900 Euro in les than six months… and I’m talking about new prices…! painstaking for me because I’m not able to sell my radio unless I accept a tremendous loss of money. (deeply in my hart I hope Kenwood bring out a new high end transceiver like the TS950SDX)

I wish all the FT2K users lost of wisdom and pray that Yaesu will come with useful solutions which I have my doubts because nothing happened sofar.

73 PA5CA (Frans)
Logged
W5VIN
Member

Posts: 5




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2008, 06:36:20 AM »

I have to echo the same comments as W7VP made and add some of my own personal experiences in dealing with Yaesu. Upon discovering the deliberate impedance mismatch in both narrow roofing filters and the problems this was causing I contacted Yaesu. At first they seemed interested and forwarded my findings to Japan. The response I received was less than professional stating that this was done to prevent stray oscillation from occuring in these filters at low temperatures. I find it impossible for a passive, non powered circuit with zero positive feedback to break into sporatic oscillation. They answered my rig was probably immune to these oscillations as I reside in a temperate climate.  The FT-2000 2 nd 3 Khz signal spaced poor IMDDR performance was improved by installation of an INRAD filter by Daniel, YO3GJC and myself. This was posted on http://www.mods.dk/ site.  IMDDR is hard to measure in the FT-2000 because of the wavering audio when injecting a steady signal. This is in time with the AGC timing and I believe it's root cause to be correcting steps in the AGC DAC are too coarse. This is evident by observing the S meter when a low level S5  or so signal is injected. The S meter has a tiny wobble which is exaggerated when measuring the audio output using an audio RMS meter which sways back and forth considerably. The steps in the ADC controls such as the audio and microphone gain are also too coarse. It's possible this was done to cut manufacturing costs. Either way this is a problem which will not be solved through a firmware update as some have been touting. At one time I did a lot of technical posting on an FT-2000 yahoo forum until my comments were no longer being posted. This particular forum is seriously lacking of technical expertise which a retired RF engineer and I provided. We both left this forum when it was taken over by people that expressed their personal experiences with the FT-2000 based on nothing but fluff. This same group is also waiting for that magical firmware upgrade that will solve all the FT-2000's problems. Meanwhile the previously owned prices are still in free fall. The overly aggressive DNR, the one tone DNF and the noise blanker that only works on ignition spikes are issues that will never be solved.
Most of my recent correspondance with Yaesu concerning what I consider problem areas remains unanswered. 73
Charlie  W5VIN
Logged
K3EY
Member

Posts: 52




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2008, 02:01:57 PM »

 I owned the FT950 which I understand is close in design to the 2000. I promptly sold it completely disappointed.

I wrote a review on eHam on the 950 and was blasted by mental midgets. I even wrote a article due to my negative experience of writing a review about that Yaesu, plus past reviews I wrote.   It has not yet been posted.

It seems when some people receive junk for their hard earned money, well it magically becomes the best of the best and by God no one better even suggest otherwise.

Just yesterday a freak made a brief appearance on the eHam review section calling the author of this topic a moron. It was deleted in a timely manner. Too bad the manager must constantly delete moronic replies.

It's almost like a false religion the reactions are so strong. I fine it fascinating at the same time feel sorry for the fools who can't accept reality but instead try twisting reality to fit their comfort zone.

The FT9509 was my last Yaesu. I have owned just about everything made and the only radio that keeps me satisfied is the PRO line Icoms.
Logged
TANAKASAN
Member

Posts: 933




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: January 27, 2008, 03:04:37 AM »

As hams we now find ourselves in an interesting situation. Kenwood appear to be withering on the vine, there have been no new releases of HF transceivers from them for a long time. Yaesu have major quality control problems and/or design issues with the 950, 2000 and 9000 rigs, the support forums are filled with sob stories from unhappy hams. That leaves Icom, who continue to shine with their IC-7800.

Yes, I know that there's also Tentec and Alinco but compared to the big three they're a minor players, especially outside the USA.

It's my understanding that the IC-7800 project had the personal backing of the president of the company and it shows. Icom have put their hearts and souls into that rig and if I had the cash to spare (fat chance) I'd buy one in a heartbeat.

Tanakasan
Logged
W5VIN
Member

Posts: 5




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2008, 04:43:11 PM »

I own an old Pro2 Icom with an INRAD roofing filter and it will work circles around the FT-2000. I did not have to memorize the manual to learn it's operation. There has been too much hype in making a pigs ear (FT-2000) into a silk purse. Yaesu needed to generate capitol and raise the bottom line to make their sale to Motorola more attractive. The amateur who bought any of their latest products got caught up in this by paying good money for products that utilize obsolete parts. I researched several of the transistors and IC's in the FT-2000 and FT-950 and found them to be N.L.A. It gets tiresome hearing someone ramble about how we got our money's worth. If a rig is one year old and it's RF preamplifier transistor 2SC3356 is obsolete that is not a good way to do business.
Charlie  W5VIN
Logged
W7VP
Member

Posts: 26




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: February 02, 2008, 07:42:21 AM »

More and more ridiculous reviews are showing up on the reviews section.  The most recent entitled "Comprehend" is one of the most assinine.  It uses the same concept of trashing anyone who has an adverse opinion relating ot the fT-2000 without even the slighest semblence of analysis of the good and bad features of the rig.  Expertise is not their long suit so they must demean anyone who does have expertise.  As I said before, reading the manual 50 times will not solve the problems of the FT-2000 and those who say it will are the ones who have neither the desire nor the ability to comprehend.
Logged
N7RST
Member

Posts: 470




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: February 04, 2008, 05:25:33 AM »

I have run into at least 3 individuals with similar stories.  I went and purchased the 950 thinking it might have some of the issues addressed but found I could not get the radio to "hear" on low bands with high noise or QRM. I think both the FT-2000 and FT-950 share the same close in noise weakness and ARRL review of the 950 should bear that out.

Read Rob Sherwood's info on the 2000.  With mods and upgrades you can dramatically improve the 2000.  Without it, not much luck.

I am glad I parted with my FT-950.

Logged
PD2R
Member

Posts: 131




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: February 04, 2008, 07:57:16 AM »

I keep reading about the 2000, the 950 and even the 9000. No one has mentioned the 450.
I was led to believe that the 450 was based on the same technique?
I do not have the technical skills to fully understand what every author is writing about but I do understand that Yaesu is having big problems with their new rigs.
Thinking off purchasing a FT 450, reading this tread makes me wonder. Or is the 450 a different story?
It is too bad that Ten Tec´s are hard to come by here in Holland. I would sell my FT 990 and ad the money for my planned FT 450, go for the Jupiter and (for the time being) do without a back up rig.
Logged
N7RST
Member

Posts: 470




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: February 08, 2008, 08:18:46 AM »

Watch out!  There are many pro-Yaesu folks on here and you are liable to get hate e-mail. I did for my posting on my former FT-950 from some lid.  Didn't bother to read my info.  I have heard many of the same complaints from other contest ops on the FT-2000. You have to implement a number of upgrades to get it to sing better in contests from what I have been told.  Glad to see your detailed post!
Logged
W5VIN
Member

Posts: 5




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: February 13, 2008, 06:31:38 AM »

Hate Mail:
I'm probably the recipient of more hate mail over comments I made about the FT-2000. The area I mostly looked at was the roofing filter section trying to get a handle on why this transceiver has such poor close spaced IMDDR test results. After it was all said and done my tests proved to be quite accurate as a lot of amateurs have parted with their FT-2000 at considerable monetary loss.
When Yaesu first started the firmware upgrade program they listed what parts of the transceiver were being improved by that upgrade. After a couple of firmware upgrades they no longer listed what if anything was improved. I read postings where all sorts of features were improved when in reality that area could never be improved by software tweaking. Some of the areas the FT-2000 has problems in only a hardware change can help.
I really do not care about the hate mail. I have been a Yaesu fan ever since the FT-101 days and their products were always superb. The latest series of transceivers they brought to market were introduced before the bugs were worked out. A clever marketing scheme offset the shortfall on the engineering end. The FT-2000 has been my last Yaesu and with the MOtorola buyout this series of transceivers may well be the last we see from Yaesu.
Charlie  W5VIN
Logged
AD4C2006
Member

Posts: 20




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: March 18, 2008, 07:56:29 AM »

There is nothing better in a person that his honesty and W5IVN has used his,If others will hate him for telling us the truth about the FT-2000,who cares? We live in a free country where everybody has the right to express freely.
Lets put more cents here.In the process to purchase a new radio as I do almost every year because I like to try all the models of the main brands on the market,I put my eyes on the FT-2000 because I saw it really beautiful,I loved it since I saw it at Orlando hamfest last year but I had the great luck to have a close friend who owned one (He doesn't own it anymore) and let me visit him one night to play with it for about 3 hours,but it took me just two hours to realize it didn't meet my expectation,I tried it overnight on 160M the tough band and it was totally impossible to pull weak stations from Europe no matter you use the DNR,or whatever feature it had,on the other hand with strong stations like 30 or 40 dB over,AGC was not enough and I heard always distorsion.Roofing filters specially the one for 3 Khz was a big lie,it does nothing,a station at 3 Khz with more than 20dB will kill whatever be in your freq,extremenly noise receiver in any band,nevertheless my friend had by the FT-2000 his 756Pro3 and when I changed same antennas to the Pro3 WHAT A HUGE DIFFERENCE,everything worked fine,weak stations were pulled from the noise,no AGC overload,nice sweet audio,so guess which radio I ended up buying? Yes you are right !! I own now a IC-756Pro3 and I will not replaced it for ANY YAESU.
Oh by the way for the guy who asked for a FT-450,DON'T YOU EVER BUY THAT PIECE OF S.......you will be really disapointed.
Thanks to all who read.
Yaesu please WAKE UP !!
Logged
AE5EH
Member

Posts: 47




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2008, 05:37:41 AM »

Hello folks,

I'm not going to get into it with anyone.

And hello to you Hector. Good to see you on the IC7000 reflector. Thanks for your information and help on and off the reflector.

I had the FT2000D, FT897D, FT950. While they weren't horrible radios, they didn't do it for me. They all worked well, no failures. But they were not for me.

With radios, or anything else, I always say for me that my favorite ********* is the one that does what I want it to do for what I'm willing to pay for it, and it makes little difference to me who makes the thing whatever the thing may be. To get more you have to pay more. If that's what you want. And of course it does help to know what "that" is.

I'm sure all mfr s have a dog or two, but I've yet to get one here lately from Icom. So far with the IC7000, IC756PROIII, IC910H, and now the IC7700 I'm as happy with these radios as anything I've had in a while. The build quality and performance have suited me just fine. Sure, you will pay more than comparable models from others but, you get more. Like anything else in these threads, how much more is, and will always be a subject for debate.

Just opinions from insignificant little me.

Terry-AE5EH

Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Next   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!