Help me make a rational choice about improving radio gear

[williaty]

For a long time (since the last threat matrix workthrough), we've known we really ought to be improving our communications hardware but it's managed to persistently get bumped by something else. Since this spring, the meager radio selection we have has saved our butts twice with respect to seeking shelter from the tornado on top of us long before any other warning was given. Today, something similar happened and I was able to get my wife to seek shelter before anyone at her facility knew there was a problem. As the entire regional area echoes with the sounds of generators and chainsaws, we've decided it's time to liquidate some badly performing stocks and buy some radios. We're not radioless, thankfully, but we're not where either of us want to be.

First, we need a handheld that's younger than us The one we have doesn't have batteries available for it anymore, is ancient, and has about as much RF power as a paperclip if you have to run it from AA batteries. That's easy, though, as the obvious choice is a FT-60R given what the market looks like at the moment.

Second, her car needs a permanent-install radio. We put a mount in the roof a couple of years ago when we had the interior of the car apart but we never got her a radio. Again, that's pretty easy as I have an IC-208H, so a ID-880H seems like the logical partner for it.

Beyond this, I'm not sure entirely what I want to do, but the 3rd need is for a 2m/440 rig to leave in the house permanently attached to the J-pole in the attic. Right now, the HT is attached as needed, but there's a bunch of drawbacks to that. 4th, we need some sort of an HF rig in order to receive regional and global information post-disaster.

With the last two, there's basically two ways to go: DC-to-daylight or separate boxes. If we go DC>Daylight, it's going to be an IC-7000 unless there's some new hotness on the market I don't know about. If we get separate boxes, the 2m/440 rig will be another ID-880H to limit the manual of arms (manual of radio?) we have to memorize. For the HF rig to pair to that, I'm not sure wither to get the IC-718 or the FT-450D.

With all that BS covered, here's my questions:

Would you go DC-to-Daylight or two separate boxes to cover 160m to 70cm and why?

If you'd go two separate boxes, would you want the IC-718 or the FT-450D and why?

[Kutter_0311]

I was... really hoping to have something useful to share. I'll just listen instead.

[L4tp]

There's a lot of studs there I don't understand. It seams to me that there are a bunch of frequncys and/or bands. What should a person be listening to or broadcasting on in the event of a disaster? So if a person was to have one handheld radio what should it be and what frequency should you tune to?

[nateted4]

You seem to have excellently thought through your problem. Both options presented are reasonable and workable. I was going to say another Icom, until I read you wanted to work HF as well. Then I thought DC to Daylight. On that call, I'd base it on price. That 7000 should be cheaper than an ID-880H and an HF rig.

I will ask, why not the Yaesu DC to Daylight Rig? They are cheaper than the Icom, and although they are nowhere as nice for DX as my buddy's K3, they are more than passable with their digital filtering. Just a thought. I've used the 7000 as well, and it's a fine radio. I guess the fair comparison isn't to either solid state DC/Daylight rig to the K3, but between each other.

One parting thought, HF operation requires a well thought out plan for antennas. In order to get a really good antenna setup you need space and height. Anything that doesn't have space and height is a compromise. A horribly frustrating compromise.

-Nate

[TacAir]

First, split is better - keep your HF and VHF as separate radio - that way if one fails, you are not entirely without comms.



The QST reviews, which are very technical are the first thing I look at when considering a radio set.
http://www.icomamerica.com/en/products/ ... Review.pdf

I would note idle power draw of 1.7 amps, no signal. 20 A on transmit, so buy a large battery if you plan on using this in an extended power out situation. The specs for S/n+N and sensitivity are about the norm for solid state radios.
Selectivity and overload will probably be the same (not so good ) as the IC-706, which I have used. If you aren't planning on contesting or working Field Day in a 50A station, this is likely not that big a deal, but you should be aware of it

The AGC is fixed, something I would find annoying, to say the least. Other wise, a solid, if somewhat pedestrian HF rig. At about 700 USD new, not too bad for a new rice box.
***************

The FT-450D - something I used this last week for field day. Our Base club station uses this as part of a "Go kit". Even on generator power, never a hiccup. Tuner was able to fire up an off-set Windom wire dipole at 30 feet with no issues and no "sparky fingers". (RF on the outside of the rig due to antenna discontinuity voltages)

What this has, that the Icom doesn't.
Antenna tuner built-in
A real CW filter, selectable
6 meter band

Idle power draw is 1.0 Amp, TX is the same 20 A as the other rig. The receiver offers better selectivity and sensitivity, as well as a tunable CW filter. Still going to need a big battery.
You will pay for the nicer features as the rig costs just under 1000 USD , new. Older 450s, where the tuner is optional can be found for a bit less.

The ICOM is physically smaller.
The FT has a back light for the display, a nice touch for night operation where you don't have a lot of light at the operating position.

In the end, you will have to ask your self if the 300 USD (or so) difference is something you are willing to pay for a much better receiver, lower idle power consumption, built in tuner and 6 meter operation.

The performance difference will really matter if you are forced to use a simple wire dipole or other compromised antenna system.

Good luck!

(Me? At home an FT-990, oldie but goodie - field rig is an FT-714)

[Radio guy]

I agree the Icom 7000 is not a great choice for bug out situations due to its high current needs on receive. They are also reported to be finicky when the battery voltage drops a bit and the receive performance is marginal as TacAir mentioned. I know several people who supposedly upgraded from a 706MKIIG to the 7000 and now they want their old 706 back. I run a 706MKIIG mobile and its great but if I run out of gas and need to operate the radio for an extended period without the engine running I'm screwed.

The Yaesu FT857 seems to be popular with the HF pack crowd with decent performance and reasonably low receive current. I have one and its ok but I'm used to a little better performance so it doesn't get used much these days.

I would also recommend a manual antenna tuner for all out tune anything anywhere situations. I used to carry an LDG auto tuner (I've owned many) and more often than not at the time I need it most they refuse to tune a G5RV or other common antenna that it tuned just fine at another location and height. Now I carry an old Dentron Jr tuner which tunes just about anything and never fails. Ever.
Radio Guy

[TacAir]

As other folks may be interested - I'll mention the new kid on the block - YouKits, out of mainland China. They have a new 4 band HF transceiver that shows in the spec sheet as drawing only 200mA in RX, it is only a low power (20 watts) radio
(http://www.youkits.com/TJ4A/SPECIFICATI ... %20TJ4.pdf)

[KYZHunters]

Williaty,
Put me in the separate box category. I've had and FT-100 (160-2 meters +440 mhz) for a decade and have, for almost the whole time, had a separate 2m/440 rig sitting next to it. What I found trying to use the FT-100 for both was that the type of communications I was doing was so different that a single box just didn't do it for me. On one hand, I did HF stuff: DX, rag chewing and a variety of nets. On VHF/UHF, it was all local businesslike comms. I can't say why, but it just worked out better having two boxes.

I guess the other things I've learned owning a do-it-all radio is that it isn't, in the long run any cheaper, and is probably more expensive to have both. I've not laid the numbers down side by side, but really good VHF/UHF gear is pretty damn cheap. Over the last decade I've upgraded the capabilities of my VHF/UHF operation three times; if I stuck with the one box answer I couldn't have afforded to do so.

All that being said, I do like having the ability to do it all on one radio if I had to. The few times of taken the FT-100 mobile and portable, it was great to have it all in one box, but those times can be counted on one hand. Also, though I very rarely use SSB on VHF/UHF, it's nice to have it as an option, but when I do it again, 'nice to have' won't play strongly in my decision making.

Let us know what and how you decide this issue.

[KJ4VOV]

redacted

[williaty]

After looking at it a bit harder, the IC-718 is off the list due to the somewhat high current draw while just monitoring. If I can just buy my way into 30-40% less power consumption, that makes the requirements on battery pack Ah a lot less. That makes the only two contenders for an HF rig the FT-450D and the Kenwood TS480SAT. They're priced within pennies of each other, have similar power demands, and both seem to be well liked. Any thoughts?


On the 2m/70cm front, I read up more on the 880H and found a lot of people saying that they were pretty disappointed in the analog FM performance of the thing, suspecting that Icom had spent more of the purchase price on the DSTAR circuitry. That makes me wary of buying it because no one around here other than Franklin County ARES uses DSTAR at all. I think that punts me over to the FT-7900R for that rig. As far as I can tell, if you pay more to step up in the Yaesu VHF/UHF model line, you don't actually get anything useful for the extra money you're spending.

[KJ4VOV]

After looking at it a bit harder, the IC-718 is off the list due to the somewhat high current draw while just monitoring. If I can just buy my way into 30-40% less power consumption, that makes the requirements on battery pack Ah a lot less. That makes the only two contenders for an HF rig the FT-450D and the Kenwood TS480SAT. They're priced within pennies of each other, have similar power demands, and both seem to be well liked. Any thoughts?


On the 2m/70cm front, I read up more on the 880H and found a lot of people saying that they were pretty disappointed in the analog FM performance of the thing, suspecting that Icom had spent more of the purchase price on the DSTAR circuitry. That makes me wary of buying it because no one around here other than Franklin County ARES uses DSTAR at all. I think that punts me over to the FT-7900R for that rig. As far as I can tell, if you pay more to step up in the Yaesu VHF/UHF model line, you don't actually get anything useful for the extra money you're spending.

Two thoughts:

First, if your local ARES is using D-Star you'll probably want that capability. If it wasn't used much in your area, yeah, I'd ditch it and save the money, but if the SHTF you may be cursing yourself for not having D-Star to follow the ARES traffic.

Second, if you're going for a dual bander, go for the FT-8800. Yeah, it's double the price, but it's a true dual with dual VFO's and cross band capability, which comes in really handy to boost the range of your HT.

[williaty]

Two thoughts:

First, if your local ARES is using D-Star you'll probably want that capability. If it wasn't used much in your area, yeah, I'd ditch it and save the money, but if the SHTF you may be cursing yourself for not having D-Star to follow the ARES traffic.

Second, if you're going for a dual bander, go for the FT-8800. Yeah, it's double the price, but it's a true dual with dual VFO's and cross band capability, which comes in really handy to boost the range of your HT.

Franklin County ARES is using it. DelCoARES, my group, has barely progressed beyond spark-gap. Other than potentially being able to hear what's going on down there in case it's getting bad enough to affect me, there's really no point to my having it. At this point in time, generally if there's something going on in Franklin bad enough that we need to know about it, their net control calls our net control to let us know about it.

I would be more inclined to go along with having DSTAR if people weren't saying the analog circuitry, which I'll use 100x more often, was compromised.

I can honestly say I've never seen a case where the cross-band-repeat was actually useful. I suspect that some of this is because I come from the Land of the Great Big Flat, so even a modest height repeater has a footprint several counties across. Hell, I'm in the center of Ohio and we have to use tone squelch because you can hear the repeater from Columbus and the one from Cleveland that are on the same frequency and both have LOS to my area. Anyway, the only thing a dual-receive radio has ever done is to be confusing when both sides talk at once.

How often do you see it being necessary in the real world?

[KJ4VOV]

I can honestly say I've never seen a case where the cross-band-repeat was actually useful. I suspect that some of this is because I come from the Land of the Great Big Flat, so even a modest height repeater has a footprint several counties across. Hell, I'm in the center of Ohio and we have to use tone squelch because you can hear the repeater from Columbus and the one from Cleveland that are on the same frequency and both have LOS to my area. Anyway, the only thing a dual-receive radio has ever done is to be confusing when both sides talk at once.

How often do you see it being necessary in the real world?

You're talking to a guy who has three rigs in the cab that are usually all on.

What I've found helps a lot is remote speakers. I mount each in a different location (either side of my head from the cab roof and another down by the dash) and then I can tell from what direction the sound is coming from what frequency it is. Usually one rig will be the local repeater (which I'll keep the volume higher on), another will be on 520, and the third (if not being used for APRS) will be on a second repeater.

The cross band repeat though, that I use quite often, just about every public service event, but then our terrain here has a lot more variation than yours. Usually I'll mast mount a dual band J-pole on the side of the truck, up about 24' or so (higher as needed up to about 50') and then use my HT on UHF (all our PS events use a VHF simplex frequency as our primary) and low power to reach the truck, which sends it out on VHF high power. That conserves my HT battery life and lets me hit all the stations on the net direct (I'm usually net control) unless it's the Cannonball (Cannonball Century bike ride - course is 50 miles long and they always want the NCS at the start/finish). For ARES, I have a second dual bander (FT-8500) in the back of the truck setup as a dedicated cross band, with its own Comet SBB2. I use that mostly when I'm stationed in a shelter or other building and not the NCS. UHF on the HT gets me out of the building a lot better than VHF would, and again I get the advantage of longer battery life on the HT but still high power.

[KJ4VOV]

redacted

[mikester]

I think a DC to Daylight rig is a great thing to have, but I would not want it as my only radio. It is frequently handy to have more than one radio going at a time.

We have local NBEMS & Easypal nets that work on a variety of different bands (80-6M) and we end up doing various coordination, troubleshooting, etc. on 2M at the same time. It would not be doable with only one radio. We also have a mixed voice/digital 2M net and it is great to be able to work any band from HF to 440 without having to change the Signalink jumpers/cables over for a different radio.

I would recommend an 857D and a decent dual-bander like a tm-d710 or FTM-350. Those would allow you to communicate with and track each other on APRS in real time simultaneously as well as have separate HF capability for regional nets, etc.