Yaesu, Kenwood and Icom have all made receivers that looked like they were a
copy of the transceiver(or is that verse vica?), but looks can be deceiving.
My guess is that probably ten times as many transceivers are sold and as a
result they don't cost that much more than a look-a-like receiver. I
haven't done that much checking but IIRC they always add a few bells and
whistles to the receiver as well as a built in power supply. Granted a
transceiver will use more current and run hotter. As far as performance on
the ham bands in SSB would probably favor the transceiver and performance in
the AM SWL bands would probably favor the receiver. One definite advantage
of getting the transceiver is if the SWL wants to be a ham he is one step
closer with the equipment.

--

73
Hank WD5JFR
"Cmd Buzz Corey" wrote in message
...
jwb wrote:
what would be a major diffrence in shortwave reception using a
transceiver like a icom 725 compared to using just a shortwave reciever
like icom r-75?
thanks jack



There would be very little if any difference. In a transceiver you are
paying for the transmitting part of the radio as well as the receiving
part. Now unless you have a license to get some use out of the
transmitting part, then you have wasted some of your money.