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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: New Transceiver Reviews  (Read 537 times)
ZR1PJA
Member

Posts: 66




Ignore
« on: Yesterday at 10:10:16 AM »

I dont really know where to put this topic other than Elmers.
Recent reviews of both the new Icom and Yaesu transceivers have come up with either 5/5 or anything from 3/5 and lower scores.
The negative reviewers are actually more precise and factual in their reviews where the top reviewers seem to be patting themselves on the back for buying them.

The transceivers deserve honest reviews as one is investing in a hobby that is not cheap.

Be fair to the hobby and those who share it.
Logged
K0UA
Member

Posts: 1621




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: Yesterday at 10:36:16 AM »

Oh, yeah, the negative reviewers are REAL factual in their reviews.  You betcha. Like this guy, who doesn't even own the transceiver, but disagrees with the Yaesu engineers choice of final transistor. Never mind that it works perfectly and has 2 100 watt transistors that are run at a 100 watt level.  Nope he HAS to give it a 1 because they didn't consult with him.  Reviews are a waste of time and server space, because a guy like this can "review" a transceiver he doesn't even own or hasn't even tested and keep its score down for a long time. And then he is Pizzed because Yaesu didn't reply to him. Yehaw.

"I owned FT-857D and FT-817ND. I considered to replace those radios with FT-891, but after reading ARRL review and comparing this radio with different radios at HRO, and decided not to move forward with FT-891. My main concern is PA. I reviewed PA design, and it uses two RD100HHF1C transistors. Those transistors have significant gain reduction when frequency increases. It makes them a poor selection for multi band HF/VHF PA. In comparison, IC7300 uses transistors RD70HVF1, that have about the same gain on HF and VHF frequencies, and make possible to make good linear PA. I already contacted Yaesu and expressed my concerns, but Yaesu did not provide any response or comments. "
Logged
KS2G
Member

Posts: 767




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: Yesterday at 12:37:50 PM »


The transceivers deserve honest reviews...


On-line assessments from individual users are subjective, not dishonest.

The "fan boys" are honest in their praise -- they really DO think the rig they love is great -- as are "nay sayers" -- who think the radio they hate is junk.

Getting the consensus of on-line comments is fine -- but better to look at really subjective assessments like the in-depth reviews with lab-test results in QST, lab-test figures from Sherwood and reviews in Radcomm.



Logged
W4KYR
Member

Posts: 1657




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: Yesterday at 12:56:47 PM »

Oh, yeah, the negative reviewers are REAL factual in their reviews.  You betcha. Like this guy, who doesn't even own the transceiver, but disagrees with the Yaesu engineers choice of final transistor. Never mind that it works perfectly and has 2 100 watt transistors that are run at a 100 watt level.  Nope he HAS to give it a 1 because they didn't consult with him.  Reviews are a waste of time and server space, because a guy like this can "review" a transceiver he doesn't even own or hasn't even tested and keep its score down for a long time. And then he is Pizzed because Yaesu didn't reply to him. Yehaw.

"I owned FT-857D and FT-817ND. I considered to replace those radios with FT-891, but after reading ARRL review and comparing this radio with different radios at HRO, and decided not to move forward with FT-891. My main concern is PA. I reviewed PA design, and it uses two RD100HHF1C transistors. Those transistors have significant gain reduction when frequency increases. It makes them a poor selection for multi band HF/VHF PA. In comparison, IC7300 uses transistors RD70HVF1, that have about the same gain on HF and VHF frequencies, and make possible to make good linear PA. I already contacted Yaesu and expressed my concerns, but Yaesu did not provide any response or comments. "

Thanks for bringing that up, I saw that review and was thinking wtf? He's reviewing a radio that he doesn't even own...
Logged

The internet and cellphone networks are great until they go down, what then? Find out here. 
https://www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php/topic,111948.0.html

Using Windows 98 For Packet...
K0UA
Member

Posts: 1621




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: Yesterday at 01:43:22 PM »

Oh, yeah, the negative reviewers are REAL factual in their reviews.  You betcha. Like this guy, who doesn't even own the transceiver, but disagrees with the Yaesu engineers choice of final transistor. Never mind that it works perfectly and has 2 100 watt transistors that are run at a 100 watt level.  Nope he HAS to give it a 1 because they didn't consult with him.  Reviews are a waste of time and server space, because a guy like this can "review" a transceiver he doesn't even own or hasn't even tested and keep its score down for a long time. And then he is Pizzed because Yaesu didn't reply to him. Yehaw.

"I owned FT-857D and FT-817ND. I considered to replace those radios with FT-891, but after reading ARRL review and comparing this radio with different radios at HRO, and decided not to move forward with FT-891. My main concern is PA. I reviewed PA design, and it uses two RD100HHF1C transistors. Those transistors have significant gain reduction when frequency increases. It makes them a poor selection for multi band HF/VHF PA. In comparison, IC7300 uses transistors RD70HVF1, that have about the same gain on HF and VHF frequencies, and make possible to make good linear PA. I already contacted Yaesu and expressed my concerns, but Yaesu did not provide any response or comments. "

Thanks for bringing that up, I saw that review and was thinking wtf? He's reviewing a radio that he doesn't even own...

I had a hard time swallowing that one as well.  Almost as good as the guy with the icom 7300 and his screen saver comes on after a half hour of inactivity, and he wonders why the screen goes dark and the power button blinks with a green light.  That one was just born of ignorance, but that review of the Yeasu engineers choice of finals of a rig he doesn't even own... Well that one just "frosted me". 
Logged
VE3WGO
Member

Posts: 190




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: Today at 07:00:11 AM »

With all of the opinions that get wrapped into reviews, maybe it's time the review data base simply removed the number score.  

The other option is to add another number so we can have one scale for product value, and another scale for outright performance, but this just adds complication.

Anyway, we can learn a lot more from the descriptive part of a review than from the numbers.  I think most readers agree that the reviewers' score numbers are misleading and sometimes don't even make sense:  "Excellent radio....  4/5"  or  "I love it but the display is too small.....  2/5",  or   "Programming it is a dog and the receiver is terrible, but it's only $50.... 5/5".    

Sure, we can try to ignore the numbers, but it's easier said than done.  I vote for removing the numbers completely

73, Ed VE3WGO
Logged
K9MHZ
Member

Posts: 1489




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: Today at 07:09:43 AM »

....You betcha. Like this guy, who doesn't even own the transceiver, but disagrees with the Yaesu engineers choice of final transistor. Never mind that it works perfectly and has 2 100 watt transistors that are run at a 100 watt level.  Nope he HAS to give it a 1 because they didn't consult with him.  Reviews are a waste of time and server space, because a guy like this can "review" a transceiver he doesn't even own or hasn't even tested and keep its score down for a long time......
Yessir.  One really weird guy in Texas decided that he'd have an ongoing review-a-thon of the Icom IC-9100 even before he actually owned one.  Posted something like four or five "reviews," giving everyone updates of the new things he discovered since his previous review.  Of course he slammed the radio, and then told the world how he was warming up to it as new reviews were posted.  The poor moderators had to keep deleting each of his previous "reviews" as he posted more.  Why they even humored this putz was beyond me.

We've got some bizarre guys in our hobby.
  
« Last Edit: Today at 07:15:34 AM by K9MHZ » Logged
K0UA
Member

Posts: 1621




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: Today at 07:24:24 AM »

With all of the opinions that get wrapped into reviews, maybe it's time the review data base simply removed the number score.  

The other option is to add another number so we can have one scale for product value, and another scale for outright performance, but this just adds complication.

Anyway, we can learn a lot more from the descriptive part of a review than from the numbers.  I think most readers agree that the reviewers' score numbers are misleading and sometimes don't even make sense:  "Excellent radio....  4/5"  or  "I love it but the display is too small.....  2/5",  or   "Programming it is a dog and the receiver is terrible, but it's only $50.... 5/5".    

Sure, we can try to ignore the numbers, but it's easier said than done.  I vote for removing the numbers completely

73, Ed VE3WGO

I think you may be on to something good there.  Just let the reviewer say his piece no matter how ignorant or brilliant, and forget about the numbers.  Don't let some ignoramus drag down the score for months at a time. Just don't have a score at all.
Logged
K0UA
Member

Posts: 1621




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: Today at 07:26:44 AM »

"We've got some bizarre guys in our hobby."

Yes we do. You hit the nail on the head there.
Logged
ZR1PJA
Member

Posts: 66




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: Today at 02:11:27 PM »

Just using the Icom IC 751a as an example? Is it really that good?
I think that it is a great transceiver and I love using it but the rating is very confusing with avg of 5/5.

Also why does a transceiver get penalised on after sales service. Surely that should go under another heading.
 
I have owned great transceivers but did not like the functionality but that does not deserve giving the radio a bad rating.

Sherwood rating is too overwhelming for me aa I am not yet up to that standard of everything technical however regardless of that i still use my ts440 and get good signal reports and more importantly i love the receiver and audio quality.

It is like watching TV programs where cars are evaluated.... views vary so widely it is scary.

I think that being able to touch feel and play before buying a rig is better than reading reviews which give preconceived ideas.

I was listening last night to two guys on 80 boasting about their new rigs. I have no idea what settings they used but their audio was terrible. I am sure that it was not the rigs fault but it was not pleasant to listen to and they were complimenting each other.....
My friend tuned in and he could also not tidy up the audio.

Looks like operator problems rather than rig problems.

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!