[amsat-bb] Re: Icom 910H vs. Kenwood TS2000

w4upd updwrb at bristor-assoc.com
Mon Nov 30 06:56:21 PST 2009

With watt/swr meter in-line I have found my IC-910 to actually go down 
to as low as 1 - 2 watts. It have used it in a QRP mode at this level 
many times. I know that the brochure states 5 watts for 2/70cm and 1 
watt for 1.2ghz, but found it to actually go lower, but still go to full 
power as advertised.

Reid, W4UPD

Bruce Robertson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Greg Dober <almetco at comcast.net> wrote:
>> Not trashing the 2000, but when it first came out I sold a TS-450 and an
>> Icom 910 thinking that "one box" would be great. So, I purchased the 2000.
>> Well, within one year, I sold the 2000 and bought a TS-870 for HF work and
>> another IC-910.  I could have lived with it as an HF radio and a UHF/VHF
>> repeater radio.  The "birdies" drove me crazy on certain sat frequencies.
>> Not sure if that was ever fixed? It had more bells and whistles such as
>> adding the sats name to the menu etc, but I thought the 910's receive
>> capabilities were second to none for weak signal work.  I still love my
>> second IC-910!  Still have the TS-870 too.
>> Of course, all is one man's opinion.  This could become the "great debate"
>> thread.  hi hi
> I own a TS-2000. I have tried just about every solution for the
> birdies, and have found none that works well. Thus you have to be
> willing to lose SO-50 and AO-27 with this radio. Further draw-backs
> for this rig and satellite work is that the lowest adjustable power is
> 5w. I plan to install longish antennas in the near future, and with
> them my transmit power will be, in many cases, excessive no matter how
> low I set the TS-2000.
> I haven't used an IC-910, but I understand it has an excellent
> reputation. I note that 5w is the minimum power for it also, but other
> ICOM radios have an internal pot that allows you to adjust this low
> point. Does the IC-910 as well? If price is a consideration, note that
> the ICOM rig will require the purchase of additional filters, whereas
> the TS-2000 has fully-adjustable filters in place. I very much like
> this feature.
> I am very happy with my TS-2000 as an all-in-one rig, but if I could
> own two rigs, judging by the comments here and elsewhere I would
> probably get a IC-910 (or a software defined radio with
> transverters!).
> 73, Bruce
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: amsat-bb-bounces at amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces at amsat.org] On
>> Behalf Of Tom
>> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 8:02 AM
>> To: amsat-bb at amsat.org
>> Subject: [amsat-bb] Icom 910H vs Kenwood TS2000
>> I plan to purchase a new home transceiver in the next few months and I've
>> narrowed my choices between a 910H and a TS2000. Thinking only of satellite
>> operation (ignoring the HF capability of the TS2000), is there a general
>> preference in the Amsat community of one over the other? Reasons?
>> Thanks for your opinions.
>> Tom, KØTW

More information about the AMSAT-BB mailing list