FTDX-1200 vs FTDX3000 receivers

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by KI4ODO, May 22, 2018.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: QSOToday-1
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
  1. KY5U

    KY5U Subscriber QRZ Page

    This is really a self enforced MANDATORY thing you must do. Yes it will work out the box but it will work as good as a 5000 if you take the time to learn the radio. Same for the 1200 and FT950. I remember the 950 got nasty reviews by ham zombies who didn't realize they bought something WAY over their heads. My FT950 performs on transmit exactly like the 3000 (menus are different). The 950 receiver is the same receiver used in the 5000 second receiver. The noise reduction is the same. Of course the 3000 has more display functions and a mo-better receiver than the FT950.
  2. KA2K

    KA2K XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    If perception is reality then forget the specs. I have both the 1200 and the 3000. I put them side by side for a reception comparison. I adjusted the audio menu items to be identical, since they are different from the factory (the 3000 default settings are set higher - more treble and metallic sounding out of the box). For the test I had both radios connected to the same antenna with an A-B switch. I disconnected the microphones since they would not be used for this test. I spent several hours tuning around the bands and switching between radios. The result was that my ears, try as i might, could not make a choice between the two radios as far as noise floor, reception clarity and selectivity goes. BOTH radios were equals to my ears. I wanted the 3000 to outperform the 1200 considering I had just bought the 3000 but that did not happen. The scopes on both radios are so small as to be virtually useless so the real-time scope feature of the 3000 is not a big deal to me. The 1200 is an awesome entry level radio and with the audio menu items set to defaults has a fuller richer sound than the 3000 with less ear fatigue over time. I have never experienced a situation where I wished I had the 3000 over the 1200. I use the 3000 as my daily radio and keep the 1200 as a backup. I do appreciate the extra antenna input on the 3000 and there are more connection options on the back. I prefer having the frequency display of the 1200 where it is part of the TFT display. I also like TFT display of the notch, width and other settings of the 1200 where they light up or dim when on or off, as opposed to the individual small on/off lights near the knobs on the 3000. The 1200 is a newer release radio BTW. 3000 has been around longer. Just my opinions, take them for what they're worth.
    Last edited: May 24, 2018
    N1LUE, VE3GZB and K2XT like this.
  3. US7IGN

    US7IGN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Even in cq ww?
    N1LUE likes this.
  4. N1LUE

    N1LUE Ham Member QRZ Page

    I agree.
    KA2K likes this.

Share This Page

ad: chuckmartin