|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Speak Out
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
|
|
1-10 of 29 messages
|
Page 1 of 3
Next
|
|
IC-703Plus vs. Yaesu FT-817ND Opinions Needed
|
Reply
|
|
by KG4KKZ on March 21, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm curious about the pros and cons between the Yaesu FT-817ND and the ICOM IC-703Plus.
The price of the 703Plus has jumped from 399 to 699, and the nicad (ugh) battery pack, etc...are all extras.
The Yaesu FT-817ND seems to have more features, less power, and include the battery pack for $100 less.
I've read the reviews for both...and other than the 10w versus 5w output power, it seems that the FT-817ND is a much better deal for the buck.
Any thoughts will be helpful.
Thanks.
Rick Dennis
KG4KKZ
|
| |
|
RE: IC-703Plus vs. Yaesu FT-817ND Opinions Needed
|
Reply
|
|
by K6BQ on March 21, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I agree with your thoughts. I would definitely go for the Yaesu.
The Icom has a bigger screen - that's a personal thing. The IC also has a built in antenna tuner, but if you're operating QRP, you need as much help as you can get - use a resonant antenna!
For 399, it would have been a good deal. For the current price - the Yaesu is smaller, has a better receiver (that may be a personal opinion), and will definitely do a good job for you. Good luck!
73 de K6BQ, Jeremiah
|
| |
|
RE: IC-703Plus vs. Yaesu FT-817ND Opinions Needed
|
Reply
|
|
by K7VO on March 21, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
OK, I've owned both radios and both are good for different purposes. First of all, the IC-703Plus was never $399. $549 was as low as it got. The original IC-703, which didn't have 6m and did have serious design flaws, was closed out for $399.
The Icom IC-703Plus has a superb receiver. The Yaesu FT-817ND has a very mediocre receiver which is subject to severe front end overload. You can pull out a weak signal next to a strong one on an IC-703Plus. You'll never do that in a million years on the FT-817/FT-817ND. The IC-703Plus has a built in antenna tuner. The Yaesu does not. The IC-703Plus has built in DSP noise reduction. The Yaesu does not. The IC-703Plus has excellent transmitted SSB audio. The Yaesu does only if you add the Collins SSB filter or the W4RT One Board Filter option. You can use a stock IC-703Plus on CW. Don't even think about it without the CW filter on an FT-817ND. You pretty much have to do the One Board Filter (at an additional $269) to turn the FT-817ND into a decent performer.
Bottom line: the Icom is much more radio for the money.
Having said all that there are some advantages to the FT-817ND. It does 2m and 70cm, all mode. The Icom does not. It is truly tiny and the Icom isn't. The battery pack is internal on the Yaesu and the Icom uses an external battery. For true portable use with the smallest, lightest radio the Yaesu FT-817ND is the superior choice. Just add $269 for the W4RT filters and you are good to go.
The smaller display on the Yaesu never bothered me. There is a mode which gives you a much larger frequency display but less other information which is useful for mobile. 5W vs. 10W == 3dB or a barely noticable difference. That really is a non-issue to me.
It really depends on how you intend to operate. If you are thinking a home radio that can also go picnic table portable once in a while go with the IC-703Plus. If your main interest is VHF/UHF or you intend to do a lot of backpacking and truly portable operation the FT-817ND makes sense. Chances are you'll enjoy either radio.
72,
Caity
K7VO/9
|
| |
|
RE: IC-703Plus vs. Yaesu FT-817ND Opinions Needed
|
Reply
|
|
by W3JJH on March 22, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I own a pair of 817s that are mostly used by a scout unit my son and I are part of. They're nice radios for base camp use but a bit too power hungry for backpacking. I've used them as QRP rigs at home with ho-hum results. The 703 is a better HF rig. I almost bought one to use at home.
If you don't need VHF/UHF coverage, take a look at the TenTec Argonaut V. I bought mine instead of a 703. IMHO (and you'll hear plenty of "Amens" to this), the Argonaut V is the best deal going in factory-built low-power rigs. It isn't as good a performer as the Elecraft K2, but you don't have to spend 40 hours building it. A new Argonaut will cost you less than a 703 and the extra filter(s) you need for decent CW performance. If you don't want to pay for a new Argonaut, you can probably find a good used one for a bit less than the cost of a new 703.
|
| |
|
RE: IC-703Plus vs. Yaesu FT-817ND Opinions Needed
|
Reply
|
|
by WB2WIK on March 22, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I owned (past tense) an FT-817 and currently own an IC-703+.
Unless I need the rig as an all-band "handie-talkie," there's really no comparison in performance or usability.
One thing I didn't see anyone else mention is the IC-703+ has a speech processor, which works on SSB. The FT-817ND doesn't, and its modulation when used on SSB is really lacking punch which is sorely needed when you only have five Watts to work with. On CW or digi modes, doesn't matter, but when I hear an FT-817ND on SSB, I can almost always tell that's what it is, simply due to the crappy audio.
The Argo V has outstanding modulation and sounds like a more powerful rig on the air (SSB).
Good luck whichever way you go!
WB2WIK/6
|
| |
|
RE: IC-703Plus vs. Yaesu FT-817ND Opinions Needed
|
Reply
|
|
by AD5X on March 22, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I've had both, but sold the FT-817 about a month after getting the IC-703. Two other IC-703 advantages not yet mentioned: It has a memory keyer built-in, and it draws less current than the FT-817 for a given power output. My FT-817 needed 1.9-amps at 5-watts, and my IC-703 draws 1.6-amps at 5-watts. At 10-watts, my IC-703 draws 2.1-amps.
Phil - AD5X
|
| |
|
RE: IC-703Plus vs. Yaesu FT-817ND Opinions Needed
|
Reply
|
|
by KG4KKZ on March 22, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have been remiss in describing my needs.
I need a rig that can work acceptably from a base setup with external amp, but most importantly a rig that can send and receive SSB and CW on a battery pack.
Despite my license class, I have no real ham experience.
If an Argonaut can run off batteries, I'm open to that.
|
| |
|
RE: IC-703Plus vs. Yaesu FT-817ND Opinions Needed
|
Reply
|
|
by K7VO on March 22, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The Ten Tec Argonaut V is very, very power hungry. It is not really suitable for battery operation. Based on your needs it really does sound like the Icom IC-703+ is the right answer for you.
External amp? Try the rig without before you spend money. You may find that with a decent antenna you get through most of the time with a better signal than you'd imagine. I run <10W almost all the time. I do have more power when it's needed but you'll be surprised at how often it isn't.
72/73,
Caity
K7VO
|
| |
|
RE: IC-703Plus vs. Yaesu FT-817ND Opinions Needed
|
Reply
|
|
by W5ESE on March 24, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> or you intend to do a lot of backpacking and truly
> portable operation the FT-817ND makes sense.
If you intend to do alot of backpacking, consider
getting a low current consumption rig like a Small
Wonder Labs SW+ (heck, it's only $54!). It only
draws 16 mA (when receiving), so will last a long
time from a set of AA's. Another good choice is
the Wilderness Radio SST (still less than $100).
The FT-817 slurps down alot of current, even when
the receiver is squelched (250 mA). When the
squelch opens, it draws 450 mA. That's more
current than the SW+ or SST draw when transmitting!
I wouldn't compromise on my home or "picnic
table" portable rig when awesome rigs which can
be dedicated to backpacking are so inexpensive.
73
Scott
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
Forum, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Forum Manager.
|
|
|
