My main concern is how long will the display last, without this the rig is
useless. It might be hard to beat the older rigs as some after 10 years you
can still see where your at.


"pfriedmanNoSpam" wrote in message
...
"Denis O' Flynn" wrote in message
...
Thinking of upgrading my station from a Kenwood 850 SAT. Rigs I am
looking at are the 1000 MP IV or the 756 PRO.

Any pros or cons a person should be looking out for?

any advice appreciated

de Denis EI6HB
ei6hb at eircom dot net


FWIW, I have both (note: the Pro, not the II or 3). You can read the specs
elsewhere and the reviews in various places. My personal comments a

I have them sitting side-by-side -- both feeding the same amp and
antennas. It is just as easy to power up one as the other. My fingers
almost always go for the Mark V. Partially this simply ergonomics. The
VFOs, for example, are smoother on the Mark V, all the buttons and knobs
are bigger (and I have big, fat fingers). The Mark V has a better
receiver -- which is most noticeable on the lower bands.
Negatives on the Mark V:
keyclicks (much improved since I added the Inrad "fix").
If you don't work CW, doesn't matter
needs filters for extra cost (semi-related: the inrad narrow roofing
filter helps quite a bit on crowded bands)
no 6m without an expensive transverter which is a semi-pain to use.
I have the transverter, but almost always use the Pro for 6m
Menu system from the 1970s. the good news is that these are set
and forget functions
No bandscope -- which I find quite useful on quiet bands (read 6m)
needs special power supply, so more money when it needs repair
big, heavy

Negatives on the Pro:
100w versus 200w.
Receiver not as good
I think the Mark V's antenna tuner is better, but I seldom use
either internal tuner
No Class A option


All that said, the Pro is quite a bit cheaper once you figure in the cost
of the extra filters for the mark V

Paul AB0SI