On 2-20-2012 20:54, Channel Jumper wrote:

Anyways the one club member that is more involved then the rest in
radio, actually works as a sub contractor for the state - bought one on
a whim.
He figured that for $100.00 he couldn't go wrong.

So Steve bought it and took it home and started to play with it.
He put it on the service monitor and he got out the Part 97 / sub part
15 specifications for a hand held amateur radio and also the book which
came with the radio and the specifications listed.

His radio, on the same service monitor he uses to test state owned
equipment, meets or beats the published report and specifications, along
with the specifications listed by the FCC for a device of this type.



Each and every time this cycle repeats itself, one of two things is
going to happen. Either the ham radio community will come to accept
that this is the way it is going to be and just accept that if they want
to buy a new radio, they are going to have to lower their standards and
buy this piece of crap, or they will have to be willing to pony up more
money to buy a Icom or a Kenwood or a Yaesu.



OK, I'm a bit confused. At the top, you say it meets or beats FCC
technical standards then and at the bottom, you say hams would be
lowering their standards buying this "piece of crap". So why is it
junk? Because it wears down a battery in use? So would a mobile or
base radio running on a car battery...