PING: Bill Crocker- Your opinion, please...
 

Bill,

Thanks again for the earlier response on the Pro 82.

The plot just thickened for me (much to my delight):

Your opinion please:

Icom R-5 or Yaesu VR120D

The Yaesu has a bunch of small frequency gaps, but many complain of the
slow scan rate of the R-5. Which of the two would you suggest?

Thank you for your reply.

Much Respect,

Charlie Chan

I don't know if I can give you an unbiased opinion, as I currently have a
Icom R5 for sale!

Both the Icom R5, and the Yaesu VR120D, are excellent radios. My R5 is
unblocked. I'm not familiar with the 120D's gaps, other than cellular.

I don't think the scan rate of the R5 is slow at all. Most all the Icom's,
Yaesu's, Alinco's, etc, scan slower than Radio Shack's /GRE, and Uniden
Bearcats. But I personally do not think it presents a listening problem.
You wouldn't want to try an scan 100 channels, as it would take awhile to
make the rounds!

Click here, and compare the specs on the two:
http://universal-radio.com/catalog/widerxvr.html

Bill Crocker



"Charlie Chan" wrote in message
...
Bill,

Thanks again for the earlier response on the Pro 82.

The plot just thickened for me (much to my delight):

Your opinion please:

Icom R-5 or Yaesu VR120D

The Yaesu has a bunch of small frequency gaps, but many complain of the
slow scan rate of the R-5. Which of the two would you suggest?

Thank you for your reply.

Much Respect,

Charlie Chan

I just took a quick look at the specs between the two. The Icom has almost
twice as many memory channels, and support for CTCSS/DTCS decode!

Bill Crocker


"Charlie Chan" wrote in message
...
Bill,

Thanks again for the earlier response on the Pro 82.

The plot just thickened for me (much to my delight):

Your opinion please:

Icom R-5 or Yaesu VR120D

The Yaesu has a bunch of small frequency gaps, but many complain of the
slow scan rate of the R-5. Which of the two would you suggest?

Thank you for your reply.

Much Respect,

Charlie Chan

Bill,

Again, thanks. After reading this, I decided to order the R-5. Thanks
for the background info and your opinion.

I appreciate it.

Best,

Charlie Chan



"Bill Crocker" wrote in
:

I just took a quick look at the specs between the two. The Icom has
almost twice as many memory channels, and support for CTCSS/DTCS
decode!

Bill Crocker


"Charlie Chan" wrote in message
...
Bill,

Thanks again for the earlier response on the Pro 82.

The plot just thickened for me (much to my delight):

Your opinion please:

Icom R-5 or Yaesu VR120D

The Yaesu has a bunch of small frequency gaps, but many complain of
the slow scan rate of the R-5. Which of the two would you suggest?

Thank you for your reply.

Much Respect,

Charlie Chan

"Charlie Chan" wrote in message
...
Bill,

Again, thanks. After reading this, I decided to order the R-5. Thanks
for the background info and your opinion.

You do know that the US version has part of the 800 MHz band blocked by
mistake? Unless Icom fixed the problem that is.


I appreciate it.

Best,

Charlie Chan



"Bill Crocker" wrote in
:

I just took a quick look at the specs between the two. The Icom has
almost twice as many memory channels, and support for CTCSS/DTCS
decode!

Bill Crocker


"Charlie Chan" wrote in message
...
Bill,

Thanks again for the earlier response on the Pro 82.

The plot just thickened for me (much to my delight):

Your opinion please:

Icom R-5 or Yaesu VR120D

The Yaesu has a bunch of small frequency gaps, but many complain of
the slow scan rate of the R-5. Which of the two would you suggest?

Thank you for your reply.

Much Respect,

Charlie Chan

"DeWayne" wrote:

You do know that the US version has part of the 800 MHz band blocked
by mistake? Unless Icom fixed the problem that is.


DeWayne,

Unfortunately, that's by design by Icom for US sales.

My issue between the Yaesu and the Icom was the freq gaps in the 300-400
MHz area. (Frequency Gaps: 339-340, 351-352, 372-373, 384-385, 396-
397).

I do believe I'll be quite happy with the R5.

Thanks for writing.

Much Respect,

Charlie Chan

"Charlie Chan" wrote in message
...
"DeWayne" wrote:

You do know that the US version has part of the 800 MHz band blocked
by mistake? Unless Icom fixed the problem that is.


DeWayne,

Unfortunately, that's by design by Icom for US sales.

You misunderstood. Icom blanked out some legal 800 MHz freqs in the USA
versions.

Sad part is, the guy who helped him with his questions has an un-blocked
Euro version R-5 for sale.

Dan

"Charlie Chan" wrote in message
...

"DeWayne" wrote:


You do know that the US version has part of the 800 MHz band blocked
by mistake? Unless Icom fixed the problem that is.


DeWayne,

Unfortunately, that's by design by Icom for US sales.


You misunderstood. Icom blanked out some legal 800 MHz freqs in the USA
versions.

Dan,

Sad is in the eyes of the beholder.

1. I had the scanner ordered before I became aware that Bill had a Euro
version for sale.

2. The 800 MHz blocked coverage isn't that important to me for what I
want the scanner for.

3. As a rule, I prefer to buy new.

Thanks for your opinion just the same.

Charlie Chan



Dan Conti wrote in :

Sad part is, the guy who helped him with his questions has an un-
blocked
Euro version R-5 for sale.

Dan

"Charlie Chan" wrote in message
...
Dan,

Sad is in the eyes of the beholder.

1. I had the scanner ordered before I became aware that Bill had a Euro
version for sale.

2. The 800 MHz blocked coverage isn't that important to me for what I
want the scanner for.

I think we didn't explain properly. Parts of the US 800 MHz band are
blocked, not just the cell band.

DeWayne


3. As a rule, I prefer to buy new.

Thanks for your opinion just the same.

Charlie Chan



Dan Conti wrote in :

Sad part is, the guy who helped him with his questions has an un-
blocked
Euro version R-5 for sale.

Dan