Thread
:
SX-28 Scarce? I Don't Think so!!
View Single Post
#
67
January 14th 04, 10:07 AM
Posts: n/a
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 00:47:50 UTC,
(AComarow) wrote:
Subject: SX-28 Scarce? I Don't Think so!!
From: NoSpam
Date: 1/12/04 8:36 PM Eastern Standard Time
I don't like the peep-hole windows like Hammarlund used. A radio
should have a BIG scale and big knobs.
NC-270
SX-62
The metaphore scales are confusing too, HRO, Collins. It's too much
like looking at a movie through a soda straw. Don't get me started
on digital displays. What's that, a bunch of numbers. It doesn't
show me where the station is in the context of the band.
SX-101A, now there is how 40 meters should be splayed out.
de ah6gi/4
With due respect, the NC-270 was just a cheaper, tarted-up NC-303. But I guess
if you like blue...
Avery W3AVE
No, the 303 didn't have all the bands in front of you the way the
NC-270 did.
I have a theory about these radios. I have a pal who is a "spec"
reader. You know the type. He doesn't have a good feel for
"real-world" phenomenum but he can memorize numbers and parameters.
A lot of radio guys are "spec" readers, 3rd order intercept,
fractional microvolt sensitivity, the more esoteric, the better they
like it.
The real world ain't a bunch of specs. It's how you use the tool,
not the size in mm.
The NC-270 had a nice look, a unique color scheme, that flywheel on
the tuning knob, and decent enough electronics.
I really appreciate BIG slide rule scales and smooth tuning knobs
with some heft to them.
I'm not saying that the '303 wasn't a great radio. It was.
I simply appreciate a radio with the scales in front of you. My
old SX-101A was a nice radio. It gives you a better feel for the
band layout than, say, an S-Line, HRO, or one of the new digital
boxes.
I like maps because I can see that "this" is close to "that". You
don't get that sense from a digital radio.
Anyway, these are all interesting and fun.
de ah6gi/4
Reply With Quote