"Ray" ) writes:
But you're making a false anachronistic comparison. A FRG-7 also sucks
when compared to an ICF-2001 from the same era.

Well...I never mentioned the FRG7...my criticism was toward the Panasonic
RF-4900 only. I can't say a thing about the Yaesu FRG7 since I have never
owned one..but I have owned the Yaesu FRG-100 and can say I was very

It's a false comparison to say that the FRG-7 will be better on the basis
of the FRG-100 which was a later model than even the ICF-2001.

impressed with this receiver. There is nothing Panasonic has made that has
impressed me...not even the famed RF-2200 which is probably the best
Panasonic ever did, although still a "toy" shortwave for kids.

The Bell&Howell is a toy for kids. The RF-2200 wasn't (perhaps for adults;
kids can't be bothered recalibrating at 100 kHz intervals). Besides, the
poster also asked about MW performance, where the FRG-7 was the worst of
all receivers tested by WRTH. The RF-4900 was listed as having the best
audio quality of any receiver under $1000, due to full-wave diode
detection, and the best internal speaker of any set tested, including
the Drake R-7. The FRG-7 only comes close if modified internally, and
an external speaker is added; it should only be considered if DXing
& BFO stability are major concerns.

To answer your questions, consult the 1980 WRTH, which compares them for
just those criteria, and explicity lists the pro's & con's. The unmodified
versions were both rated "fair" overall. The 4900 performs slightly better
on MW, according to them, which isn't saying much, since the FRG-7 was the
worst performer on MW of any set tested.