Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Drake R8B compared to Icom R71A (with mods)
Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B
compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the better receiver? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Drake R8B compared to Icom R71A (with mods)
denny wrote:
Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the better receiver? In the end, they are probaly so close that IMHO, you should consider the ergonomics and other "features". The ICOM is based upon a long line of radios and has the ergonomics of a radio, e.g. lots of knobs and switches. The Drakeis based more upon their line of satellite TV receivers and while it has the perfomance from a long line of high quality communications equipment, it has the ergonmics of a modern TV receiver. E.g. lots of buttons and indicators. I prefer the older style ergonmics, you might prefer the modern style. If you plan to control the radio via a computer, the Drake allows you to control more functions, the ICOM less. The ICOM needs an RS-232 to TTL converter, the Drake has an RS-232 port in it already. As for reliability, the ICOM has one "gotcha". The programing for the microprocessor is loaded into battery backed up RAM, instead of EPROM. Eventually the battery dies and the radio has to go back to ICOM for reprograming. Until then the radio is unusable. You can buy a third party upgrade kit which replaces the RAM with an EPROM. Just to stir things up, I suggest that you also consider the Kenwood R-5000 too. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Drake R8B compared to Icom R71A (with mods)
denny wrote:
Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the better receiver? R71A was the benchmark for many years. It was the standard receiver used by three-letter agencies for monitoring. It even found its way into the military. Sensitivity is good. Selectivity can be exceptional, and when working crowded bands for a contact deep in the noise, there are few that are it's rival. In stock form. For hobbyists, not so hot. Audio is poor, and like most rigs built for professional users, it really doesn't deliver it's best performance without a superb antenna. Don't misunderstand...most any antenna will get you going, and performance will be very good. But to get the best out of R-71, you really need as professional an antenna and transmission system as the agenicies for which it was built. That said, you can still find an array of filters for it, ceramic, crystal and mechanical. Ergonomics are reasonably good, with most every function on its own switch. And, in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing, it's quite the cannon. Even on a random wire. R-71 does not have a few of the more luxurient features that some in the hobby consider essential, today. Drake R8B was built more in line with today's hobbycraft users' needs. Again, don't get me wrong...it's a very high performance receiver....but it's not intended for the kind of installation you'd encounter on a hidden island where men-in-black are listening to racks of receivers for the clandestine, untoward, and subversive. R8B has a cleaner layout than R-71, with much more luxurient features, ear pleasing audio, and ergonomics more in line with the needs of a less military user. Side by side, the Drake will be more pleasant to operate for long periods of time than R-71. And on simpler antennae will produce the same or better results. I had an R71 for many years, and still miss it, today. And R8B wasn't around when I bought mine. But, if I were looking for a heavy hitting receiver, today, and those were my choices, I'd probably have more inclined toward R8B. Widening the field abit, I'd recommend looking also at AOR's AR-7030+, Palstar's R30 (and its variants), Ten-Tec's RX-320D, RX-350, RX-340, and if you can find them, Lowe's HF-150, HF-225, and HF-250. Though HF-150 isn't in quite the same class as the others. Basic, small...but its lack of features is more than offset by it's potent performance. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Drake R8B compared to Icom R71A (with mods)
D Peter Maus wrote: denny wrote: Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the better receiver? R71A was the benchmark for many years. It was the standard receiver used by three-letter agencies for monitoring. It even found its way into the military. Sensitivity is good. Selectivity can be exceptional, and when working crowded bands for a contact deep in the noise, there are few that are it's rival. In stock form. For hobbyists, not so hot. Audio is poor, and like most rigs built for professional users, it really doesn't deliver it's best performance without a superb antenna. Don't misunderstand...most any antenna will get you going, and performance will be very good. But to get the best out of R-71, you really need as professional an antenna and transmission system as the agenicies for which it was built. That said, you can still find an array of filters for it, ceramic, crystal and mechanical. Ergonomics are reasonably good, with most every function on its own switch. And, in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing, it's quite the cannon. Even on a random wire. R-71 does not have a few of the more luxurient features that some in the hobby consider essential, today. Drake R8B was built more in line with today's hobbycraft users' needs. Again, don't get me wrong...it's a very high performance receiver....but it's not intended for the kind of installation you'd encounter on a hidden island where men-in-black are listening to racks of receivers for the clandestine, untoward, and subversive. R8B has a cleaner layout than R-71, with much more luxurient features, ear pleasing audio, and ergonomics more in line with the needs of a less military user. Side by side, the Drake will be more pleasant to operate for long periods of time than R-71. And on simpler antennae will produce the same or better results. I had an R71 for many years, and still miss it, today. And R8B wasn't around when I bought mine. But, if I were looking for a heavy hitting receiver, today, and those were my choices, I'd probably have more inclined toward R8B. Widening the field abit, I'd recommend looking also at AOR's AR-7030+, Palstar's R30 (and its variants), Ten-Tec's RX-320D, RX-350, RX-340, and if you can find them, Lowe's HF-150, HF-225, and HF-250. Though HF-150 isn't in quite the same class as the others. Basic, small...but its lack of features is more than offset by it's potent performance. I once owned a Yaesu FRG-7700 from Gilfer. What is interesting is that when I had some serious noise issues here, a fellow from our now defunct FCC Monitoring station south of here showed up with what I guess would be their 'covert' vehicle, and it had a FRG-7700 in kind of a rack on the passenger side. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Drake R8B compared to Icom R71A (with mods)
dxAce wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote: denny wrote: Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the better receiver? R71A was the benchmark for many years. It was the standard receiver used by three-letter agencies for monitoring. It even found its way into the military. Sensitivity is good. Selectivity can be exceptional, and when working crowded bands for a contact deep in the noise, there are few that are it's rival. In stock form. For hobbyists, not so hot. Audio is poor, and like most rigs built for professional users, it really doesn't deliver it's best performance without a superb antenna. Don't misunderstand...most any antenna will get you going, and performance will be very good. But to get the best out of R-71, you really need as professional an antenna and transmission system as the agenicies for which it was built. That said, you can still find an array of filters for it, ceramic, crystal and mechanical. Ergonomics are reasonably good, with most every function on its own switch. And, in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing, it's quite the cannon. Even on a random wire. R-71 does not have a few of the more luxurient features that some in the hobby consider essential, today. Drake R8B was built more in line with today's hobbycraft users' needs. Again, don't get me wrong...it's a very high performance receiver....but it's not intended for the kind of installation you'd encounter on a hidden island where men-in-black are listening to racks of receivers for the clandestine, untoward, and subversive. R8B has a cleaner layout than R-71, with much more luxurient features, ear pleasing audio, and ergonomics more in line with the needs of a less military user. Side by side, the Drake will be more pleasant to operate for long periods of time than R-71. And on simpler antennae will produce the same or better results. I had an R71 for many years, and still miss it, today. And R8B wasn't around when I bought mine. But, if I were looking for a heavy hitting receiver, today, and those were my choices, I'd probably have more inclined toward R8B. Widening the field abit, I'd recommend looking also at AOR's AR-7030+, Palstar's R30 (and its variants), Ten-Tec's RX-320D, RX-350, RX-340, and if you can find them, Lowe's HF-150, HF-225, and HF-250. Though HF-150 isn't in quite the same class as the others. Basic, small...but its lack of features is more than offset by it's potent performance. I once owned a Yaesu FRG-7700 from Gilfer. What is interesting is that when I had some serious noise issues here, a fellow from our now defunct FCC Monitoring station south of here showed up with what I guess would be their 'covert' vehicle, and it had a FRG-7700 in kind of a rack on the passenger side. Yeah....long ago, in a life far, far away, there was an FCC monitor in my neighborhood. 11 meters was the Wild West in those days, and he had a cluster of receivers in a rack in his panel truck. Really exciting stuff for a Jr High Schooler back then. I've not worked FRG-7700. How did it handle compared to your benchmark rigs? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Drake R8B compared to Icom R71A (with mods)
D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: D Peter Maus wrote: denny wrote: Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the better receiver? R71A was the benchmark for many years. It was the standard receiver used by three-letter agencies for monitoring. It even found its way into the military. Sensitivity is good. Selectivity can be exceptional, and when working crowded bands for a contact deep in the noise, there are few that are it's rival. In stock form. For hobbyists, not so hot. Audio is poor, and like most rigs built for professional users, it really doesn't deliver it's best performance without a superb antenna. Don't misunderstand...most any antenna will get you going, and performance will be very good. But to get the best out of R-71, you really need as professional an antenna and transmission system as the agenicies for which it was built. That said, you can still find an array of filters for it, ceramic, crystal and mechanical. Ergonomics are reasonably good, with most every function on its own switch. And, in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing, it's quite the cannon. Even on a random wire. R-71 does not have a few of the more luxurient features that some in the hobby consider essential, today. Drake R8B was built more in line with today's hobbycraft users' needs. Again, don't get me wrong...it's a very high performance receiver....but it's not intended for the kind of installation you'd encounter on a hidden island where men-in-black are listening to racks of receivers for the clandestine, untoward, and subversive. R8B has a cleaner layout than R-71, with much more luxurient features, ear pleasing audio, and ergonomics more in line with the needs of a less military user. Side by side, the Drake will be more pleasant to operate for long periods of time than R-71. And on simpler antennae will produce the same or better results. I had an R71 for many years, and still miss it, today. And R8B wasn't around when I bought mine. But, if I were looking for a heavy hitting receiver, today, and those were my choices, I'd probably have more inclined toward R8B. Widening the field abit, I'd recommend looking also at AOR's AR-7030+, Palstar's R30 (and its variants), Ten-Tec's RX-320D, RX-350, RX-340, and if you can find them, Lowe's HF-150, HF-225, and HF-250. Though HF-150 isn't in quite the same class as the others. Basic, small...but its lack of features is more than offset by it's potent performance. I once owned a Yaesu FRG-7700 from Gilfer. What is interesting is that when I had some serious noise issues here, a fellow from our now defunct FCC Monitoring station south of here showed up with what I guess would be their 'covert' vehicle, and it had a FRG-7700 in kind of a rack on the passenger side. Yeah....long ago, in a life far, far away, there was an FCC monitor in my neighborhood. 11 meters was the Wild West in those days, and he had a cluster of receivers in a rack in his panel truck. Really exciting stuff for a Jr High Schooler back then. I've not worked FRG-7700. How did it handle compared to your benchmark rigs? It served me well and then I bought a Drake R7 in 1984. I used them both for a few years, then I got the Kenwood R-5000 and sold the Yaesu. I had some better filters installed in the '7700 from Gilfer, and I certainly heard a lot of stations on it. I guess what got me back into the hobby back in '82 or so was the digital readout. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Drake R8B compared to Icom R71A (with mods)
dxAce wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: D Peter Maus wrote: denny wrote: Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the better receiver? R71A was the benchmark for many years. It was the standard receiver used by three-letter agencies for monitoring. It even found its way into the military. Sensitivity is good. Selectivity can be exceptional, and when working crowded bands for a contact deep in the noise, there are few that are it's rival. In stock form. For hobbyists, not so hot. Audio is poor, and like most rigs built for professional users, it really doesn't deliver it's best performance without a superb antenna. Don't misunderstand...most any antenna will get you going, and performance will be very good. But to get the best out of R-71, you really need as professional an antenna and transmission system as the agenicies for which it was built. That said, you can still find an array of filters for it, ceramic, crystal and mechanical. Ergonomics are reasonably good, with most every function on its own switch. And, in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing, it's quite the cannon. Even on a random wire. R-71 does not have a few of the more luxurient features that some in the hobby consider essential, today. Drake R8B was built more in line with today's hobbycraft users' needs. Again, don't get me wrong...it's a very high performance receiver....but it's not intended for the kind of installation you'd encounter on a hidden island where men-in-black are listening to racks of receivers for the clandestine, untoward, and subversive. R8B has a cleaner layout than R-71, with much more luxurient features, ear pleasing audio, and ergonomics more in line with the needs of a less military user. Side by side, the Drake will be more pleasant to operate for long periods of time than R-71. And on simpler antennae will produce the same or better results. I had an R71 for many years, and still miss it, today. And R8B wasn't around when I bought mine. But, if I were looking for a heavy hitting receiver, today, and those were my choices, I'd probably have more inclined toward R8B. Widening the field abit, I'd recommend looking also at AOR's AR-7030+, Palstar's R30 (and its variants), Ten-Tec's RX-320D, RX-350, RX-340, and if you can find them, Lowe's HF-150, HF-225, and HF-250. Though HF-150 isn't in quite the same class as the others. Basic, small...but its lack of features is more than offset by it's potent performance. I once owned a Yaesu FRG-7700 from Gilfer. What is interesting is that when I had some serious noise issues here, a fellow from our now defunct FCC Monitoring station south of here showed up with what I guess would be their 'covert' vehicle, and it had a FRG-7700 in kind of a rack on the passenger side. Yeah....long ago, in a life far, far away, there was an FCC monitor in my neighborhood. 11 meters was the Wild West in those days, and he had a cluster of receivers in a rack in his panel truck. Really exciting stuff for a Jr High Schooler back then. I've not worked FRG-7700. How did it handle compared to your benchmark rigs? It served me well and then I bought a Drake R7 in 1984. I used them both for a few years, then I got the Kenwood R-5000 and sold the Yaesu. I had some better filters installed in the '7700 from Gilfer, and I certainly heard a lot of stations on it. I guess what got me back into the hobby back in '82 or so was the digital readout. That was certainly ground breaking territory, back then. And a lot of kids I knew were drawn to the hobby because of it. I was still using a Hammarlund BC-794 Super Pro that I'd aligned within an inch of its life. Finding frequencies, even with the analog dials, was a snap. Still, it turned off a lot of my friends, who were determined to go digital. Of course, that was when the noise floor was low, and the bands were full of stations like WNYW. And BBC/WS was still largely an entertainment medium. So, that variable IF served me very well with some fine audio. Except for the Hammar, and a couple of Nationals that I'm putting up for sale, everything else I've got has a digital readout. Digital readouts aren't as fun as spinning the analog dials. But the rigs today are a whole lot easier to work. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Drake R8B compared to Icom R71A (with mods)
The R8B is a more modern receiver with an excellent sync detector. BTW
Denny there is an R8A and R8B available on Ebay now. -- Brian Denley http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html "denny" wrote in message ... Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the better receiver? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FA: ICOM R71A | Shortwave | |||
FS: Icom R71A Mint or Trade Drake R8 + Cash | Shortwave | |||
FS: Icom R71A Mint or Trade Drake R8 + Cash | Swap | |||
F/S Icom R71A | Swap | |||
F/S Icom R71A | CB |