Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List  (Read 721 times)

KD7RDZI2

  • Member
  • Posts: 689
Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« on: March 21, 2023, 02:12:28 PM »

Which radio, say among the last 20 of the list, would you think are still good radios? Considering also other aspects, like easy to mod/repair, audio quality (TX also), ergonomics other than performance?
Logged

W0CKI

  • Member
  • Posts: 637
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2023, 02:21:01 PM »

You're asking a lot of others to look at the list. What radios of the bottom 20 interest you?
Logged

VE6EI

  • Posts: 15
    • HomeURL
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #2 on: March 21, 2023, 02:23:16 PM »

As long as you're not looking to operate in a crowded contest or DX environment, a couple of these radios would be OK. The TS-520 is a rugged old workhorse, as is the FT-101E. If you're looking for a rig with solid state finals, the FT-980 is much-loved by some hams, though is significantly more complex to maintain. From what I've heard, stay away from the FT-ONE unless you're looking for a major challenge in troubleshooting & alignment.

Joel, VE6EI
Logged

N5XJT

  • Posts: 93
    • HomeURL
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2023, 02:56:28 PM »

Simple choice - the 520 is a rugged radio and works well.  Alternatively consider the Kenwood TS-450, another workhorse at a good price.  Look for one with a built in tuner.
Logged

K6SDW

  • Posts: 526
    • HomeURL
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2023, 03:18:43 PM »

A lot older rigs may require repairs at some time in the future, are you good at troubleshooting and repairing electronic circuit problems? Replacement parts may be a problem as well. Typical component failures are capacitors and tubes. Also, mechanical problems crop up such as intermittent switch and relay issues.

GL/73
Logged

WA3SKN

  • Member
  • Posts: 8124
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2023, 03:51:16 PM »

What are you looking for in a radio?

-Mike.
Logged

WB6BYU

  • Member
  • Posts: 20894
    • Practical Antennas
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #6 on: March 21, 2023, 04:13:30 PM »

I wouldn't necessarily limit yourself to the bottom of the list.
There are a number of older radios that, while not at the top
of the list, do reasonably well.

First, consider what characteristics are most important.

For repairability, consider solid state rigs that use through-hole
parts, that aren't computerized.  I have a Ten-Tec Argosy 525
from 1980, and a Corsair from some  years later.  Either may
require rebuilding and re-greasing the PTO shaft, but otherwise
there is plenty of room inside for repairs and modifications,
and most of the parts are relatively common.  (And, if you can't
find one of the ICs, it probably can be improvised around.)

The main issue with the Argosy (non-digital) is the string drive
for the coarse dial readout:  the elastic gives out with age, and
it is a pain to have to keep replacing it.  But the Corsair (and
the later Argosy 525D with digital readout) don't have that
problem.  The 525D also has much better front-end overload
performance than the non-digital version.  There are several
other Ten-Tec rigs of that vintage - not as common as
YeaComWoods, but I generally find the ergonomics convenient.

With any radios of that age, you can run into corroded connections.
Plan to unplug and re-plug the internal cables a few times, and
tighten down the ground screws on the circuit boards, to keep the
contacts clean - it's amazing how many quirky problems can be
fixed that way.

There are lots of other possible rigs as well.  I have a TS-450, as
mentioned previously, and it still works well, too.  The only major
service has been the audio output amp, and it turns out I had one
in my parts drawer I could have used - it's pretty common.

And, with other radios that age, be gentle on the finals.  Yes, most
of them have SWR shutdown, so antenna faults shouldn't be an
issue, but if you try to run too much power into a bad load you can
over heat the finals in many rigs.  An external cooling fan isn't a
bad idea.   Many of the final transistors had relatively short
production runs, and replacement finals may not be available,
although with a bit of modification other types often can be made
to work.

Whatever you get, try to test it out beforehand with the seller
(a listing in a club newsletter might be a good way to find a local
seller you could pick it up from in person, and get a demo).

W0CKI

  • Member
  • Posts: 637
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2023, 06:22:37 PM »

Kenwood TS830S. With ssb and cw filters and caps replaced. Output 100 watts, new tubes perhaps. I’ve had several Kenwood hybrids, they’re terrific radios that can last forever if properly cared for.
Logged

W7CXC

  • Member
  • Posts: 335
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2023, 06:54:35 PM »

Not sure if it is on the list or not but.... the Kenwood TS450SAT is a fine rig. Go for about $500. Great auto tuner and fine audio. Had one for many years and have always been sorry I sold it. Rugged, never had one problem over about a 25 year span. It just worked and worked well. A knobs and buttons radio. As to your choice ... suggest you read the reviews. 73's David
Logged

KA4WJA

  • Posts: 1601
    • HomeURL
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2023, 08:19:34 PM »

kd7rdzi2,
I tried to ignore this thread, as it's been beaten to death over the years....but, thought maybe I could add something useful?  (if not, at least I'll be brief)

Which radio, say among the last 20 of the list, would you think are still good radios? Considering also other aspects, like easy to mod/repair, audio quality (TX also), ergonomics other than performance?

1)  Of course, "the list" is arranged by "close-in (2khz) receive IMD3", and this spec is important to a very very small percentage of hams (those into serious CW contesting, especially 160m CW contesting), and as such Rob's list is a nice place for them to analyze various radios.
And, for some hams to look / compare / and dream, etc...but other than that, it's not all that useful in choosing a radio.  :(

You're asking about rig choice using other criteria (which is good), but asking specifically about radios at the bottom of a "list" arranged in a way that has little value to the "average" ham?   Sorta' makes this a moot discussion, yes?

For many years now, I've made it clear that I eschew using the "list" as a way to choose your radio.
As has been discussed over and over again AND mentioned / talked about by Rob Sherwood himself, there are many other factors that far outweigh this small spec!
See this discussion here, with quotes from Rob himself.

Choosing a Rig and Sherwood's List

https://www.eham.net/community/smf/index.php/topic,128776.msg1194749.html#msg1194749


So, I feel weird actually replying here.  :(
But for fun alone, I'll have a quick stab at the premise (although, you do need to weed out some things here first....in order to get actual usable answers, such as only 5 of the bottom 20 are HF transceivers).


2)  Only 5 of the "bottom 20" are HF transceivers....most of the "bottom 20" are SW receivers.
So, that limits you to just those 5 rigs as "answers".  And, none of those 5 are great rigs.
But, while it ain't gonna' be a great rig to try on the CQWW contest weekend, if I had to pick one, the ole' Kenwood TS-520 would be my choice from that group, along with maybe the old Yaesu FT-101E, in a distant second place.


3)  But, if you're asking about the "bottom 20 HF transceivers".....that opens it up quite a bit..
The "bottom 20 HF transceivers" run from the old Yaesu FT-757 all-the-way up to the FT-891....
And, this includes some well-respected rigs in their day, as well as a couple that are still well-thought-of and "competitive" even in our modern 21st Century.

And, if I had the time to go over all of those 20 rigs to determine which ones would be have best ergonomics, etc., that would actually get you some usable answers...
But, I just don't have the time to do that, right now.
So, I'll use the knowledge I have from using many of those rigs over the years, and/or looking at them and dreaming of them nostalgically from afar.

For nostalgia I'd pick the Signal One CX-11a for a home rig....and the ole' reliable Icom IC-735 for a back-up rig and/or a mobile/portable rig (I used one mobile for a while).
Those two rigs being in positions #2 and #3 "in the top 5" of those "bottom 20 transceivers" to hang-onto and use daily, along with the Yaesu FT-1000MP MarkV Field being in first place on the list.
(with the #4 position being the Kenwood TS-570s.....and the Drake TR-4C finishing in 5th place, again mainly for nostalgia).

So, here's my top 5, of the "bottom 20 HF transceivers" (they'll all work well and get you many contacts, should be fairly easy-to-use)
Yaesu FT-1000MP MarkV Field
Signal One CX-11a
Icom IC-735
Kenwood TS-570s
Drake TR-4C  (just for nostalgia)

Then the next 5, all close together, and in no particular order.  These will still get you contacts and be easy-to-use...
Icom IC-7000
Icom IC-751
Kenwood TS-870s
Yaesu FT-1000D
Kenwood TS-430

The problem with most of the above radios is they're all getting quite long-in-the-tooth and may need parts that are unobtainium, or difficult/expensive to repair....so, your criteria of easy to mod/repair might be be stretched a bit.  hi hi

The rest of those "bottom 20", I wouldn't want in my ham shack, and most of them I would never wish to ever hear on-the-air again.
(and special mention to the worst of the worst.....the old FT-757, the FT-ONE, and the KWM-380....with the FT-2000 and FT-980 coming close to them in that group....yes, I know some hams "love" the '2000 or '980, although not as bad as the 'ONE or the '380, they suffer from the noisy synth malady and on-the-air, on SSB, they should be on 11m...)


4)   If I had to pick "just one" from these, it would be the IC-735....it is easy-to-use / has good ergonomics, has good performance, is easy-to-use portable, mobile....and, big enough to be a good rig for your home station....it's pretty reliable, but still repairable... 


Okay, I hope this meets your criteria?

73,
John,  KA4WJA
« Last Edit: March 21, 2023, 08:27:58 PM by KA4WJA »
Logged

ZS1DX

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #10 on: March 22, 2023, 12:10:21 AM »

Why must it be a rig from the bottom of the Sherwood list?

Please tell us what your budged is, as well as what your operating goals/preferences are.

Or is your request merely a mental exercise?

Good luck and 73,
Christian ZS1DX
Logged

KT4WO

  • Member
  • Posts: 425
    • homeURL
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #11 on: March 22, 2023, 02:09:35 AM »

I will put in a 3rd(or was it 4th) for the Kenwood TS-450SAT.
25 years and works great. Is the RX as good as a 7300?
NOPE....But for "most" it works fine and is "pretty" :)
Logged

W1VT

  • Member
  • Posts: 6067
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #12 on: March 22, 2023, 06:18:35 AM »

How about going to a radio club and accepting donations of broken rigs to learn how to do  repair work?
Most clubs could use a skilled repairman.  Especially since shipping has become so expensive!

These days a lot of hams don't have a big antenna and low noise location needed to justify a top of the line radio with a high dynamic range.
The big antenna generates the huge signals at the top of the range and the low noise allows  you to pull in signals at the bottom of the range.
Hence the  huge difference between the strongest and weakest signals.

If you run modest antennas that may cut down signals by 10 dB or more.  NVIS or low to the ground antennas will make signals even weaker.
As will shortened compromise antennas.

It is possible to lose many S  units from the bottom with just one noisy electrical device.

I think a QRP radio needs a great tuning knob that works well.  As well as an operator who understands CW and propagation.
Those two are far more important that scoring high on Sherwood's list if you want to have fun with QRP.
Like the difference between a Jedi with a lightsaber and a Stormtrooper with a blaster.  Jedi's are deadly.  Stormtroopers rarely hit anything.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2023, 06:28:17 AM by W1VT »
Logged

KA4WJA

  • Posts: 1601
    • HomeURL
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #13 on: March 22, 2023, 07:30:46 AM »

Christian,
I kinda' assumed that this was actually just a question of "what do you think?"....as you put it, a "mental exercise".  :)
As, he mentioned no budget, no specific operating modes, not even a general "application"....which is why I was hesitant to even reply.  (but I did....hi hi)

Why must it be a rig from the bottom of the Sherwood list?

Please tell us what your budged is, as well as what your operating goals/preferences are.

Or is your request merely a mental exercise?

Good luck and 73,
Christian ZS1DX

Anyway, if anyone wishes a more complete / serious discussion of all of this, have a look:
"Choosing a Rig and Sherwood's List"
https://www.eham.net/community/smf/index.php/topic,128776.msg1194749.html#msg1194749


73,
John,  KA4WJA
Logged

KA4WJA

  • Posts: 1601
    • HomeURL
Re: Sherwood - Choosing among the bottom of the List
« Reply #14 on: March 22, 2023, 07:39:53 AM »

BTW, for those interested in why having some radio at the top of the "list" is almost a waste these days....please have a look at that other thread/discussion!
Where you'll see that the limiting factor of our receivers is (not just our local noise levels) mainly the other TRANMITTERS on the air!
It is our own transmitters polluting our own airwaves that keeps many of our receivers from reaching the potential!
  :(


1)  For anyone that actually wants a serious answer to this "question", have a look at the rather lengthy discussion here:
Choosing a Rig and Sherwood's List

https://www.eham.net/community/smf/index.php/topic,128776.msg1194749.html#msg1194749



2)  And, also reread what Zack wrote here, he hits the nail on the head....

These days a lot of hams don't have a big antenna and low noise location needed to justify a top of the line radio with a high dynamic range.
The big antenna generates the huge signals at the top of the range and the low noise allows  you to pull in signals at the bottom of the range.
Hence the  huge difference between the strongest and weakest signals.

If you run modest antennas that may cut down signals by 10 dB or more.  NVIS or low to the ground antennas will make signals even weaker.
As will shortened compromise antennas.

It is possible to lose many S  units from the bottom with just one noisy electrical device.


3)  Also, no matter what HF rig you have, no matter what technology (super-het, IF-DSP, direct-sample-SDR, etc.) the RF Gain and attenuator are your friends!  :)
This is especially true if you're plagued with a good deal of local RFI....or operate summertime on 80m, in Florida!

Remember that whatever "dynamic range" you have, you might not be able to redesign your receiver....but you can move this dynamic range up / down to suit the conditions / noise / signals / etc. at that particular time.  :)

Every HF ham rig made in the past 50 years has more than enough "sensitivity", and (unless you're using small antennas in very quite locale) on bands below 15m, there is no need for any pre-amp!  In many cases, turning the RF gain down is also good, below 15m.
(and, of course, nighttime on 40m, 80, and 160m...turning the RF Gain down is always good!)
And, some times, even switching the attenuator on can be good!
(besides, nobody wants to listen to noise. hi hi)


Okay, I gotta go....
I hope this helps our original poster here?

73,
John,  KA4WJA
 
« Last Edit: March 22, 2023, 07:55:54 AM by KA4WJA »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up