Anyone have any regrets on buying an IC-9700?

Discussion in 'VHF/UHF - 50Mhz and Beyond' started by KN4DQE, Jun 14, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: K5AB-Elect-1
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
  1. KN4DQE

    KN4DQE Ham Member QRZ Page

    I am just curious. The price has already dropped to about $1700. I've read that some issues that folks have had with weak signal work. There is also mention of no support of 9600 bps for packet radio? Is that true?
     
  2. KA0HCP

    KA0HCP XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Had mine for four years, still love it.

    -I have never heard of an HF radio supporting 9600 bps Packet. That is faster than allowed/possible for HF.
     
  3. KN4DQE

    KN4DQE Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well shoot....I meant 9700, not 7600! Wish there was a way to modify the title of this thread....Mods if you see these please correct.

    Thanks
     
    KA0HCP likes this.
  4. N5SMO

    N5SMO Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    The radio does not have a TNC built in, but just like any other radio with a soundcard interface, running packet is easy with a USB cable and the right SW on a PC. There was enough drift on 23cm when it was first released to make very narrow bandwidth modes like FT8 difficult. However, the latest Icom firmware update now allows for continuous syncing with an outboard 10Mhz reference or GPS disciplined oscillator. So...no regrets here. It's a great versatile rig.
     
  5. KN4DQE

    KN4DQE Ham Member QRZ Page

    It looks like a great radio - I may end up getting one, but I really with the other big players would come out with something comparable. Competition is good!
     
  6. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    I wish they would have included 6 meters, so it could be a general-purpose VHF "Rover" rig. It's small, it's light, it's cute, but the rovers almost all use at least 50-144-432 and many add 222-1296 and higher bands also.

    But without six meters, it's not much of a rover rig and that would prevent me from buying it.
     
    WD4IGX likes this.
  7. WA9SVD

    WA9SVD Ham Member QRZ Page

    I've been saying for over 30 years that a "killer" V/UHF rig, also very desirable by Techs, was a 6M, 2M, 70 cm (and possibly 23 cm) multi-mode transceiver, with output of 50-100 watts on all bands, except perhaps 23 cm. It would be a rover's dream.:cool:
     
  8. W4EAE

    W4EAE Subscriber QRZ Page

    6m, 2m, 1.5m, and 70cm multi-mode >=50w transceiver is my dream :)

    Until then, 50W FM, SSB, & CW on my FT-991A will do just fine.
     
    WD4IGX likes this.
  9. N0DZQ

    N0DZQ Ham Member QRZ Page

    As to date, I have had NO problems with the 9700 and it looks good next to the 7300. I knew of the frequency instability issues prior to buying one and am waiting on the release of the VK1XX frequency lock modification. Yes, Icom could have done better but this simple fix will rectify the shortcomings on weak signal work. I found it has also interfaced well with my existing satellite and remote operations software.

    As far as the 9600 baud issue for packet, it is a non factor here. The radio wasn’t designed for that application. I agree it could have been a nice feature but then again so would been the inclusion of DMR.
     
  10. WA9SVD

    WA9SVD Ham Member QRZ Page


    The (FT-991A) radio may well have those capabilities. But how well they compare to a dedicated V/UHF only multi-mode radio is another matter, regarding sensitivity, selectivity, etc. Rovers are typically V/UHF operators anyway, and HF isn't in their preview (most of the time) when roving. Even as an adjunct, they don't want their V/UHF operations to be hampered by trying to use HF at the same time, with a single "DC-to-Daylight" radio.
     

Share This Page