Need suggestions.

[W9PSK]

I don't have to think again; I've owned both. The 735 is head and shoulders above the 897D with respect to phase noise and wide spaced rejection. IMO it also has better modulation quality when used with any sort of decent microphone (that's subjective). The 897D has some interesting features but its DSP is very fundamental and not terribly useful.

One of the "tests" I do is to connect a small rig like these to my tower mounted 8L beam on 20/17/15/12/10 to see how it rejects KVOH, a local SW BC station that runs 1.25 million watts and is literally up the street from me. Many rigs completely collapse on 30m and 17m (the station operates in the 31m and 18m broadcast bands) and wipe out those bands. The 897D is in that "collapse" category. The IC-735 passes with flying colors.

All depends on your environment.

Good luck using it for PSK31 when you need a narrow filter. The PBT on the 735 will only allow you to barely block out one side of the waterfall or the other. That's it. The 897D allowed me to create a 500hz filter. You cannot do that with a 735. The 897D would also allow me to use the optional CW filters on PSK31. You cannot do that either with the 735. On digital modes, the 897D kicks the 735's butt coming and going. Nothing you can say will convince me otherwise. I don't have 1.25 million watt stations close to me, so that doesn't matter to me one bit.

[W9PSK]

How hard is it to disconnect the mic when doing the digital thing?

Just depends on how lazy you are! I have an aversion to constantly unscrewing and screwing things into the radio. It gets on my nerves quickly.

[KO6WB]

Go to Radio Shack and get a box and the mic connector that's the same as the one on the IC735. Put the mic connector on one side of the box and on the other have a cable come out that plugs into the IC735's mic. In between the connector on the box and the cable going to the rig put a switch in the mike lead. Plug your current mic into the connector on the box. When you run digital just switch the mic off.
Done, no extra charge.
BTW there are always ways to get a rig to switch in the narrow filter and still maintain the same frequency difference by using the USB or LSB selections. You would normally be able to do that if you had a RTTY selection. The tone that comes out of the rig will be a lot higher pitched. During the early days of decoding CW I went with a high pitched tone so the PLL circuit I had would lock on to the signal faster. It works but you have to have the 500Hz filter and make the rig switch to it. I also cascaded two narrow filters with a little amplifier to overcome the insertion loss. The shape factor was fantastic and signals quickly disappeared when tuning them out. Prior to the DSP days.
Have fun
73
Gary

[WB2WIK]

Good luck using it for PSK31 when you need a narrow filter. The PBT on the 735 will only allow you to barely block out one side of the waterfall or the other. That's it. The 897D allowed me to create a 500hz filter. You cannot do that with a 735. The 897D would also allow me to use the optional CW filters on PSK31. You cannot do that either with the 735. On digital modes, the 897D kicks the 735's butt coming and going. Nothing you can say will convince me otherwise. I don't have 1.25 million watt stations close to me, so that doesn't matter to me one bit.

I'm guessing you don't have the FL-32 500 Hz filter installed. I always did. With the 500 Hz filter, to run the RX as narrow as the 897D is (for PSK31), you'd want to run SPLIT, with VFO A on SSB to allow PSK31 transmission, and VFO B on CW but set to the same frequency to allow reception using the 500 Hz filter. Works like a charm and makes the 735 exactly as narrow as the 897D selected to 500 Hz. Try it! It works...