FT1000MP 200watt classic oldie or new Icom 7300?

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by WA9JOQ, Oct 31, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
  1. K0UO

    K0UO Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    I agree the 7300 is an ENTRY LEVEL radio, but still the Best bang for the buck.
    I run all the new rigs (Low to High end)

    K0UO Rhombic Antenna Farm is located at the Kansas QTH with over Two miles of Wire in the Air & On the Air
     
    K2XT likes this.
  2. WA9JOQ

    WA9JOQ XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Thanks to all for your info and opinions which I found most helpful..learned a lot. I have decided to first improve on my current vacation qth portable vertical antenna situation given the fairly close quarters lay of the land. In the big picture the antenna should be my first priority anyway. Will hold on to the FT450D for now and avoid my impulse for shortcut solutions. Thanks to all again and 73...Bob
     
    KE0GXN and K0UO like this.
  3. N8FVJ

    N8FVJ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hey, FT-450D works and has DNR for SSB.
     
    KE0GXN, K0UO and WA9JOQ like this.
  4. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    It should be entry-level at its price point, which is incredibly low for the feature set.

    The 7300 obviously cannot compete with more sophisticated rigs (I see the new FT-101D reviewed in November QST has about the best receiver they've ever tested, but it's in the $4K range), but I don't think there's ever been another "entry level" HF transceiver quite like it.
     
    K0UO likes this.
  5. N8FVJ

    N8FVJ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Some IC-7300 were selling for $900 new. Nothing in that price range with the features ever was marketed. It also pushed the price of newer used gear lower.
     
    WA9JOQ and K0UO like this.
  6. KE0EYJ

    KE0EYJ XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    The problem is that certain individuals are saying previous owners of this rig are running it incorrectly, after they state that they weren't happy with its performance in some situations. And they are go so far as to accuse us of running the rig wrong. A might bit presumptuous.

    Nobody is arguing that this isn't a good entry-level rig. What at least 3 previous owners are saying is that this is an entry-level rig, lacks decent filtering like many entry-level rigs do, and is not the best choice for situations where you are faced with electrical noise. As stated, my former somewhat crappy (and I say that knowing it's almost half of the price of the 7300) FT-891 was able to hear DX signals on 40m that the 7300 totally lost in the city noise.

    If you want a rig with decent filtering, you need to look at something other than the 7300. Besides the stats -- its glaring issues (rejection of low band noise from typical city sources) are not something that Sherwood measures for.

    I have a distinct feeling that the 7300 is going to lose a lot of its luster when the sunspots come back, bands open up, and the internal batteries begin failing.

    Just in time for Icom's next Sherwood wonder.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2019
  7. W4ZD

    W4ZD Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Gotta disagree with you, Dave, on one point. The FT950 is not a LOWLY transceiver. It's a GREAT rig. I have one, use it as my main rig. Love it. Getting perhaps a bit long in the tooth, but it is the equal of many current rigs costing more, IMHO. :)
     
  8. W7UUU

    W7UUU Super Moderator Lifetime Member 133 Administrator Volunteer Moderator Platinum Subscriber Life Member QRZ Page

    Haha! Just a turn of phrase - I love my FT-950 and use it daily. There's a reason I've not sold it :)

    Dave
    W7UUU
     
    W4ZD likes this.
  9. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    I never owned an FT-950, but one of my closest ham friends did: K4OWR in TN. We used to be neighbors in NJ when he was K2OWR.

    He bought a new 950 and seriously disliked it. He finally traded it for an IC-756PROIII and said, "Holy cow, what a difference!" and stuck with the Icom for whatever reasons.

    He's in the country and doesn't have much local noise, I'd suspect (acres of property, no close neighbors, ham shack in separate outbuilding away from the main house), so I "think" the dislike of the 950 and the "more likes" for the Icom were probably based on stuff other than noise.

    But for sure, different strokes. I suspect a lot of "likes" or "dislikes" are based not only on the local environment, but operator taste (how easy it is to use, for them). Kinda like Windows/Mac/Linux.:p
     
  10. W4ZD

    W4ZD Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    I suspect the vast majority of rig preferences these days could be classified as "operator preferences." The Rx and Tx performance of most mid to high-end rigs are beyond the ability of most humans to discern. Gotta take them into the lab and use a lot of expensive test equipment to discern differences, which exist primarily on paper. Can you really hear a difference on receive? Can the guy you're QSOing with really hear a difference when you transmit? In most cases, I doubt it, given usage in a real world scenario.

    My FT-950 doesn't have a touch screen or a band scope or a few other touted features of many modern rigs. Bummer, but I would likely not use them anyway. I find touch screens annoying. I find band scopes about as useful as an appendix. But that's an operator preference, not a defect or asset. I much rather tune across a band and "discover" the signals there. I have a panadapter for my FT950, which I've never used. It came as part of the package deal when I bought it. I should probably sell it, but I keep thinking that maybe one day I'll get curious, hook it up, install the software, and see what all the hoopla is about.

    We're all slightly to incredibly different in our rig preferences. I guess I would classify myself as "easy old school." Bells and whistles seldom impress me. If I can hear you (reasonable sensitivity and selectivity) I find that the best DSP processing unit, e.g., I possess is between my ears. It takes effort and practice, but those are things I enjoy. :)
     
    WA9JOQ and W7UUU like this.

Share This Page