ad: UR5CDX-1

ICOM 7300 New at $850 / How low will this drive used market?

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by NN2X, Dec 4, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-2
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
  1. KK5JY

    KK5JY Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    You all may be right, and the 7300's on-air real-world performance may be dozens of dB worse than the lab results suggest it should be.

    However, if that is true, then lab testing is basically worthless, because it would mean that lab testing has no correlation with real-world performance. That's back to what I said earlier -- finding a radio whose performance in situ is terrible, but on the bench is fantastic, would mean that lab testing needs desperately to be changed. Otherwise, what good are lab tests, at all?

    The 7300 has some other weaknesses that certainly don't help its cause. E.g., it doesn't have a dedicated connector for a receive antenna. That suggests that most people are going to run their transmit antenna as the receive antenna, too. And I dare say most people don't know how to use a transmit antenna as a receive antenna. They turn the PRE on, the ATT off, and the RF gain to the right, until the S-meter is practically bleeding from all the noise. Then they complain about poor SNR, clipping, distortion, IMD, poor NB performance, etc. If people operate the 7300 this way (and there's no reason to suspect otherwise), it's no wonder its performance is compromised. Even the nicest superhet will eventually fold under that kind of abuse.

    I can't say you guys are wrong. I don't even have the gear to double-check the ARRL or Sherwood numbers myself, so I can't prove that those numbers are accurate. But if the 7300's receiver is as awful as some people are trying to make it out to be, there is something horribly wrong with lab testing (and using lab testing to select/shop for a receiver).
     
    WZ7U and SV2HZF like this.
  2. N0TZU

    N0TZU Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Well, let's not jump to extremes here.

    The 7300 isn't awful, far from it! It's a very popular "breakthrough" radio for its class and I'm sure it works very well for many hams. And, I don't think the receiver tests are worthless; I refer to them myself.

    My point is only that the tests in use today (ARRL, Sherwood, etc.) were developed for superhets, and as such they may not do a good job of representing some real life performance situations for some SDR receivers, if they have an essentially unfiltered front end before the ADC. There's always some limitation in how well any lab test can represent reality.
     
    KK5JY, KV6O and K7TRF like this.
  3. N8FVJ

    N8FVJ Ham Member QRZ Page

    The IC-7300 has definitely driven used gear lower in price.
     
  4. K3EY

    K3EY XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    You make good points actually and I agree.



    But trust me no matter what you twist tweak turn even with a loop antenna--I did that too--the 7300

    folds when my TS590SG is untouched and hears like nothing is there under contest and DX pile ups

    conditions. When the bands are quiet the receiver is great on the 7300 and the noise reduction is better than the

    TS590SG. But for a solid receiver under fire the Kenwood blows the Icom away. When it's bad and I want

    to operate, I don't even turn on the 7300 anymore just to get frustrated when I have a Kenwood that seems

    immune to what kills the Icom.
     
    1 person likes this.
  5. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    ARRL equipment tests for transceivers often include real-world condx, where an operator assesses how it worked for him (or her) using antennas and making contacts; Rob Sherwood mostly has not done that, and sticks with testing receivers under lab condx.

    Back in the day when Dave K1ZZ would occasionally write up the "operating" assessments, those were really good as he could bring the rig to his home station (big beams on big towers) and rigs would get clobbered as they might at many of our home stations. Some of the others don't do that: "I used it at home with my G5RV and found..." isn't the same.:p

    I wish they would do more of that...even using the W1AW big beams on towers, if they can switch those from the bulletin/code practice transmission stations to an operating bench. I don't know how easy that is for them to do.
     
  6. K1OIK

    K1OIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    I long for the day of Dave, K1ZZ. He got on the air too.
     
    WD4ELG likes this.
  7. N1FM

    N1FM Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Hi Burt,

    Congrats on your successful contacts with kids and keeping them interested in technology.

    See page 72 for Dave Sumner's latest at the ITU.
    Coincidentally, there's a pic of an IC-7300 and an SCS Dragon P4 Modem in the layout.

    https://www.itu.int/en/itunews/Documents/2019/2019-05/2019_ITUNews05-en.pdf

    Views of the
    International Amateur
    Radio Union on WRC‑19
    agenda items
    David Sumner

    73 de FM
     
  8. K3EY

    K3EY XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    He still does. I hear him going 3o wpm on the bands quite often.
     
  9. K1OIK

    K1OIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Yes I see the 7300. Last week I traded my Flex 6400M for a 7300, a tuner, an amplifier and cash. In the 7300 unlike the Flex the noise blanker works, it sounds better, and I don't have time to get lunch before it boots up and the 7300 has not crashed yet nor has it blue screened my computer.. When Elecraft brings out the K4, Flex will be on the way out
     
    WD4ELG and (deleted member) like this.
  10. WD4ELG

    WD4ELG Ham Member QRZ Page

    Very well-said, Burt. That's why I sold my 5000 and got a 7300.
     
    K1OIK likes this.

Share This Page