|
Winradio WR-G303i & Ten Tec RX-320D
Has anyone done a side by side comparison of the Winradio WR-G303i and the
Ten Tec RX-320D? |
Monitoring Times in the August 2003 issue compared the two. The
reviewer liked them both but kept the G303i On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 16:41:00 -0500, "Pat Butler" 1234 wrote: Has anyone done a side by side comparison of the Winradio WR-G303i and the Ten Tec RX-320D? |
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 16:41:00 -0500, "Pat Butler" 1234 wrote:
Has anyone done a side by side comparison of the Winradio WR-G303i and the Ten Tec RX-320D? I have them both, and there is absolutely no comparison: The G303i is like a precision scientific instrument. Even the S-meter is accurately calibrated in dBm and uV. The real-time spectrum scope is such an eye-opener (literally) that it makes you wonder how you ever got around wihout it. Same applies to the variable IF bandwidth. Then open up both boxes (as your insatiable technical curiosity yet again prevails over practical warranty concerns), and what do you see? With the TenTec, you see old-style through-hole components with manually adjustable coils on a sparsely populated single-sided board which looks like a transistor radio from early sixties. Open the Winradio, and marvel at the beautiful subminiature components surface-mounted on both sides of several densely-packed multilayer boards, meticulous craftsmanship, and not a single adjustable component in sight. Then look at the control software and see similar differences in craftsmanship and professionalism. But granted, looks can deceive - put the receivers side by side, and what do you hear? Signals entirely burried in noise on TenTec, loud and clear (and beautifully visible on the real-time spectrum scope) on Winradio. Don't take my word for it, try it. George |
George:
I very much enjoyed your posting. But what sort of equipment do you use when running WinRadio, I'm talking PC and antenna setup here? Tom Welch |
"George Blomfield" wrote in message news:4009e0e0.2462200@news-server... Open the Winradio, and marvel at the beautiful subminiature components surface-mounted on both sides of several densely-packed multilayer boards, meticulous craftsmanship, and not a single adjustable component in sight. Yes, most disposables are made that way. |
"CW" wrote in message ... Yes, most disposables are made that way. Ouch! ; ) |
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 17:34:41 -0800, "CW"
wrote: "George Blomfield" wrote in message news:4009e0e0.2462200@news-server... Open the Winradio, and marvel at the beautiful subminiature components surface-mounted on both sides of several densely-packed multilayer boards, meticulous craftsmanship, and not a single adjustable component in sight. Yes, most disposables are made that way. Very astute observation. :-) The Winradio has never been professionally reviewed. The IP3 sucks... as do the rest of the published specs. Way way overpriced. Problem is that no one makes a decent affordable SW receiver. It isn't rocket science and this is 2004 isn't it? duh |
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 17:14:36 GMT, wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 17:34:41 -0800, "CW" wrote: "George Blomfield" wrote in message news:4009e0e0.2462200@news-server... Open the Winradio, and marvel at the beautiful subminiature components surface-mounted on both sides of several densely-packed multilayer boards, meticulous craftsmanship, and not a single adjustable component in sight. Yes, most disposables are made that way. Very astute observation. :-) A rather uninformed observation, considering the state-of-the-art of radio engineering in the year 2004, and a world of difference between the levels of craftsmanship applied to these two products which is obvious to anyone who actually bothers to look at the products before making such observations... :-) The Winradio has never been professionally reviewed. The IP3 sucks... as do the rest of the published specs. Way way overpriced. Not sure what you mean by "never professionally reviewed". Read the current (2004) issue of WRTH. Is this professional enough? And the other numerous reviews including one in Short Wave Magazine (also available on http://www.winradio.com/home/g303i-reviews.htm)? Problem is that no one makes a decent affordable SW receiver. It isn't rocket science and this is 2004 isn't it? I'd suggest that you look at Winradio G303i first, and *then* talk about rocket science in 2004... ;-) Nothing comes close. Try it for yourself, you'll see... :-) George |
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 11:17:53 GMT, (George Blomfield)
wrote: The Winradio has never been professionally reviewed. The IP3 sucks... as do the rest of the published specs. Way way overpriced. Not sure what you mean by "never professionally reviewed". Read the current (2004) issue of WRTH. Is this professional enough? And the other numerous reviews including one in Short Wave Magazine (also available on http://www.winradio.com/home/g303i-reviews.htm)? Problem is that no one makes a decent affordable SW receiver. It isn't rocket science and this is 2004 isn't it? I'd suggest that you look at Winradio G303i first, and *then* talk about rocket science in 2004... ;-) Nothing comes close. Try it for yourself, you'll see... :-) George I would love to see a ARRL tech review of the WR-G303i. A review of the 1150i wasn't impressive. I read the reviews on the Winradio wesbite- not impressed. Where have we heard "the am synch loses lock" before? :-) Cheers! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:30 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com