quality of rigs ht's/mobiles

[ki0lv]

I've purchased my fair share of ham radios. Since then I have become involved in commercial-end activities. Obviously emt's and the like need better "more reliable" radios.

Not to sound too blunt, but most ham radio's I've dealt with seem like toys. The features might be there, but it's not built for quality, to survive, rather be carried around with a stuffed pillow and constructed of mainly cheap plastic. Never the less, the prices are also still relatively high despite the quality.

I've noticed for example Vertex/Yeasu has a model that is basically a mirror image of the commercial line - only fitted with cheap plastic instead of the "guts" of the commercial line. Is this fair to the consumer - even if not commercial - because we still have licenses to use the equipment. I see ham radio at least a little above FRS quality...or at least should be...Do you agree?

Does anyone else notice this?

[KA3RFE]

Amateur equipment is not designed to be used in situations where they would routinely be abused.

Building ham stuff to the ruggedness of radsios used in public safety services would add a lot of cost. And commercial gear does not have "toy" value nor need fancy features. If you want ruggedness and toy features in one radio, you'd never afford it.

73

[AC0H]

You get what you pay for.

[WB2WIK]

It's why Motorola is still in business.

[AG3Y]

Some years ago, I did a dumb thing at a hamfest. I was holding an HT inside a leather case, and when a buddy said, "See that thing over there?" I replied, "You mean THAT thing?" and pointed at it with the HT. Well, you can guess what happened next. The HT went slinging out of that case and sailed about 20 feet out in front of me before crashing onto the cement parking lot! I thought the rig was going to be ruined, but aside for a few very minor scratches on the belt clip, there was absolutely no harm done!

I cannot imagine that sort of thing happening with today's "toys" !

No, I do not excuse the industry for turning HTs into FRS quality toys. There are many reasons why HTs should be able to take as much abuse as commercial service units.

However, I have seen a similar thing taking place in HF gear as well, and I believe that to be an ill-advised method to gain more profit from a very small and tight market. My Icom 720A is built like the proverbial brick outhouse, when compared with the units that came after it ( 735 etc. ) and I can only imagine that most cases on equipment today are molded plastic rather than the aluminum and steel jobs that were made back when Heath, Collins, Hallicrafters, etc. ruled the roost!

It's a sad situation, but consider getting a car that was built like our Dad's 40s and 50s Fords and Chevys ! I've heard that when two cars used to collide, they went "Crash", and now they just go "clunk"!

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif 73, Jim

[w8cbc]

My TS-440 has been through a bit of mobile stress the last few months. Temp extremes (-20 to +40 C) and, in the station van, sliding around on the dashboard, off on to the floor a couple of times. It's holding up quite well so far.

The newer models (TS-570 for example) do look rather lightly built in comparison.

[KF0RT]

Quote[/b] (kd8bsr @ Feb. 02 2006,16:26)]My TS-440 has been through a bit of mobile stress the last few months. Temp extremes (-20 to +40 C) and, in the station van, sliding around on the dashboard, off on to the floor a couple of times. It's holding up quite well so far.

The newer models (TS-570 for example) do look rather lightly built in comparison.
Dunno... The TS-570 is pretty stout. It's the same size as the TS-440 and actually weighs a half kilogram more than the 440.

73, Rob

[w8cbc]

It may be the LCD that gives me that impression. It's breakable-looking. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

I'm considering trading up for a used 570SG actually.

[WA2ZDY]

The fluorescent tube in the TS440 will break too - trust me, I've done it. Actually, if I find them, I'll post the pics of my 440 after it went down the stairs. If the mic hadn't been plugged in I think there would have been much less damage. As it was in 1988 I paid Kenwood $133 to fix the rig. The display tube, the circuit board the mic and headphone socket were on, the filter switch and the front panel were replaced.

Anyway, this is why except for my TS480 (a metal case on the drawer by the way) I have exclusively Motorola stuff. I just can't picture myself with a toy radio in my hand anymore.

Ooooooooooooh I'd better stop. I'm starting to feel elistist.

[ae6yd]

I've got a 10-year-old HTX-202. I was first licensed at 9, so you can figure it was horribly abused... Thing's a tank. Still works great. The factory rubber duck died, but I got another one. Now, I go to the local ham club and see some people's HT's and I'm afraid I'd break 'em.

It's really too bad. What happens when RACES/ARES gets activated and half of the HT's break? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[N1MLF]

I'll ditto the ruggedness of the 202. I've had one for about 13 yrs & it looks like its been thru a war zone. Still works like a champ.
A friend of mine recently got a small icom (don't know the model) but he cracked the display while he had it in his jacket pocket doing chores.
Another tough rig seems to be the yaesu ft-1500. Ive given one of them a good beating for 5 yrs or so & it keeps ticking.

Just my .02..

JW

[W3MIV]

A radio is much like a weapon. If you value it and depend on it, you will take care of it.

I have a Kenwood TH78A dual that was bought in 1992, and all I have replaced is the antenna and batteries. There have been lots of horror stories about the antenna connector on that little rig, but I simply replaced the very stiff issue ducky with a very thin, flexible ICOM antenna and have had no problems.

I recently bought an ICOM V-8 (though I still don't know why, since I rarely use any 2m stuff) and it seems to be a very substantial radio. I will bet on the long run with it.

After all is said and done, no rig is a basketball.

[w8cbc]

Sort-of mobile - at least that's what it was meant for - see my review of the Collins R-392/URR. Mine's been through a war. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[AG3Y]

Yah, right, if you define "mobile" as being able to be carried aboard a Battleship ! ! !

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[w8cbc]

Let's just say I'd have hated to be the poor guy who had to hump that thing around in Vietnam.

[wa9cwx]

The mid 80s Icom talkies where pretty good. The 02 series. (that is what the RS 202 was modeled after).

Hams are not expected to be smashing their radios around, if you are going to do THAT, buy a Motorola.

I always thought the ideal physical model (other than Christe Brinkley), for a RADIO that was in a tough enviornment was the Military 'PRC 10' series of low VHF rigs. Now THAT can take punishment!

However I think the wt/pwr ratio is probably 5 lb per watt.

For just plain rugged 2 meter operation, it sure would be hard to top the old Icom and Standard radios of the mid 70s, and my favorit was, and still is, the old Hallicrafters TG 5 double channel 8 watt 2 FM rig, from about 1970 or so.

[WA9SVD]

It's not that difficult to understand; the manufacturers are responding to demand:

Small Size + lots of bells and whistles + light weight + low cost = the current crop of H-T's.

After all, plastic weighs less than metal.

[KI4GKW]

I've got a VX-150, dropped it on the side walk at church while runnign one day, scuffed the paint on the alluminum. While working i was carrying the 150, they needed a weather radio i turned to right channel and pitched it to them (locked of course), they missed and it hit the beach, no big deal bruched it off and cleaned out under the knobs later, worked fine.

The 150 is the hand held that I own, the family owns several, but the 150 is all i could afford to call my own. We also have a FT-60, V-8, and then the commercial handies, VX-900, Relm something, MTX, GTX, P1225, lots of radios and no shortage of mobiles either.

FT-5100/5200, rugged littel dual bander, We had one second hand for 8 years continuous in the mobile, worked great for the application, got replaced by the new FT-8800, and now i'm just looking for the extre power cord to set up cross band repeat. I also have a FT-7800 and Kenwood TM-331A, they are my desk babies.

In conclusion, I only run Yaesu mobile, I only carry Yaesu handies, I guess I like Yaesu. I've only had one problem with one bad solder joint, easy fix inside the mic. VX-150 is a tank in my opinion, seen lots of moto's in my few days and i think it could hold it's own with them. I've never had a problem with the Yaesu mobiles, while others have. I guess the thing to do would be to get one and use it, and if you find it's not going to work out, sell it, and if it is a Yaesu, you can sell it to me.

Paul

[K7JEM]

You get a lot more for your money with today's radios, and if you choose wisely, you get a tough radio too.

VX-150 is a good choice, around $100 and does everything you need an HT to do. Like has been said, it can take a lot of abuse.

In the late 70's, I got one of the first Icom 2AT handhelds here in the US (still have that radio). It was $249 and basically had no bells or whistles. That same year you could buy a new car for under $6000, and houses were selling for less than 50K.

Bottom line- radio equipment has never been less expensive with more features than it is right now. All radios are not built to the same standard of "toughness" but there are strong radios out there.

Joe

[kb0ctr]

I certainly do wish there were more durable HTs bieng built as I tend to be one who does put them thru alot of abuse. I've owned Yaesu and Kenwood brands, and I ended up going back to an old early 90s Kenwood TH-28A and TH-78A set of rigs, with them being the most reliable for me. Probably the worse I have owned has been an TH-79A, with it's constant messed up display issues.

[K8ERV]

You get what you pay for.

Or, more accurately, you pay for what you get.

TOM K8ERV Montrose Colo

[K0RGR]

I really haven't noticed, but I guess it's been a few years since I bought an HT. My FT-50 and VX-5 have been to Hell and back several times, and don't even look it. My new TM-D710 is smaller than the old 700, but appears to be mechanically better. The new VX-8 looks rugged and interesting - BlueTooth capability would be nice, and if it has real APRS capabilty (beyond just being a tracker) it will be a great little rig.

[ai4ep]

Based on past posts here in this thread, the YAESU vx - 150 and the R S 202 are the winners in the durability contest....

also read that you " get what you pay for "...and that is true with just about everything you buy these days...everything .

please remember this thread when you go out looking for a ht and a mobile unit.

Lots of good information.

[N5PVL]

No big fan of HT's, I have to admit that I've gotten good service - so far - from my Icom V85 2m talkie.

I bought this model because I ride around on a motorcycle with the HT on my belt, and manage to get caught out in the rain from time to time. The IC-V85 is "waterproof" though not billed as submersible. Seven watts out, and the battery seems to last forever compared to my past experience with HT's.

If I had a waterproof wallet to go with it, I'd be in great shape.

( My son's Yaesu VX-7R ?-bander is submersible )

I too have a Rat-Shack HT-202 that is battle-scarred but still 100% functional, if you don't count the battery pack.

I don't think the HT-202 would respond well to a soaking, so I'm taking this as evidence that with HT's at least, they are getting tougher.

Note that a lighter, plastic-cased radio is less likely to take damage from a drop than a heavier, metal-cased rig. - Reduced inertia, and the more flexible, more malleable plastic absorbs some of the shock that otherwise would be transmitted to internal components.

[PA5COR]

The Icom Q7 and Kenwood TH F7E have seen some serious abuse here

Just replaced the AA NiMh batteries with 3900 mA types bought on an ham fair yesterday.

The Q7 is 10 years old, used at work and dropped several times on concrete, works like new.
The Kenwood TH F7E running fine, both were not designed for recue or policework in mind, but for ham use, still both are rugged enough.

;)

[k0mb]

If you think that the crop of HT's is delicate, I'd like to show you my I-phone after one drop to pavement!

[NI3B]

Based on past posts here in this thread, the YAESU vx - 150 and the R S 202 are the winners in the durability contest....

also read that you " get what you pay for "...and that is true with just about everything you buy these days...everything .

please remember this thread when you go out looking for a ht and a mobile unit.

Lots of good information.

I have an Icom IC-2200H 2 meter mobile in my truck and the internal speaker is junk. The receive audio out of the internal speaker is useless. A friend's IC-2200H is similar. You definitely need an external speaker when using the Icom IC-2200H. Also, the IC-2200H is useless in high RF areas such as cities. The intermod rejection is very poor.

I also have a Yaesu FT-60R which is a 2/440 (not simultaneous receive) HT that I paid about $170 new. The audio quality out of the little internal speaker is far superior than the IC-2200H. Also, the receiver in the FT-60R is terrific and I can even use it in the city! And, it's extremely rugged and durable.

So, how can a little HT perform better that a mobile? :confused:

Best,
Brian

[EI8DRB]

If you think that the crop of HT's is delicate, I'd like to show you my I-phone after one drop to pavement!

you're kidding, right? I've dropped mine a good few times... mostly face down, and it has barely a scratch on it.

[k0mb]

you're kidding, right? I've dropped mine a good few times... mostly face down, and it has barely a scratch on it.

Nope, wish I was. One drop and the case is cracked.

[KC9MUK]

I own an ICOM V-82, a U-82, and a 2SRA. The V-82 and U-82 seem like tough radios. I've dropped the V-82 more than once without any problems whatsoever. It and the U-82 are heavier built than the 2SRA. My guess is I am going to get many years use out of the V-82 and U-82. A friend of mine has a Yaesu FT60R, and it seems like a tough built radio too.

[WA2ZDY]

As said by JEM, it's economics. In August 1981 I paid $249 for m IC2AT. Then I had to add a $32.99 CTCSS encoder myself. 27 years later it still works even with all the scars. Today's rigs full Bells and whistles cost $129. Do you really want to go back?

[ai4ep]

one of the best built cb radios is a cobra 25....drag it down the road by the mike cord and later it will still keep on talking

[ka5s]

FCC mandated performance is not all that stringent. GOOD performance is harder. When the GOVERNMENT wants equipment it gets even better: see the NTIA Red Book Chaper 5 for stability, selectivity and spurious requirements for modern radios. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/redbook/5.pdf

For example, their HF band frequency tolerance runs +/- 20 Hz for SSB. More stringent for more power and in some services and less so for very low power. Until very recently we've done well to get 5 PPM -- 20 Hz at 75 meters, yes, but 140 Hz at 28 MHz. Off channel spurs -63 dB for a 100 watt rig. More for higher power. The FCC says we have to suppress HF band spurs by 43 dB.*

And receivers?
"The passband shall be no greater than the authorized bandwidth of emission and the slope of the selectivity characteristic outside the passband shall be 100 dB/kHz. " The FCC says nothing about Part 97 receiver performance. That's why my old FT-920 unmodified had an utimate rejection of just 50 dB.

Cortland
KA5S

*(d) For transmitters installed after January 1, 2003, the mean power of any spurious emission from a station transmitter or external RF amplifier transmitting on a frequency below 30 MHz must be at least 43 dB below the mean power of the fundamental emission. For transmissions installed on or before January 1, 2003, the mean power of any spurious emission from a station transmitter or external RF power amplifier transmitting on a frequency below 30 MHz must not exceed 50 mW and must be at least 40 dB below the mean power of the fundamental emission. For a transmitter of mean power less than 5W installed on or before January 1, 2003, the attenuation must be at least 30 dB . A transmitter built before April 15, 1977, or first marketed before January 1, 1978, is exempt from this requirement.

[wa6apn]

In the HT line I vote for Motorola, used HT600's and MT1000's for quite awhile. Yes I know you can't program them on the fly and there pretty basic. Now have 2 GP68's a VHF and a UHF not as rugged as the 600's or 1000's but you can program without the computer and RSS. 73,:cool::cool: