What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

I’m anticipating being in a position to be able to transmit rather than just lurk on the amateur bands shortly. On that basis I’m after a transceiver to use to get some contacts to start with and to use for the usual tasks when it comes to home brewing equipment (when I’ve done the intermediate of course).

I’m looking at 20/40m band SSB and CW mainly at the time as that’s the simple target of my antenna ideas currently. Not VHF (yet). I’m limited currently to 10W on HF so a big PA is not required.

Is there anything from the 70s to 80s, transistor only which isn’t synthesised but is a relatively decent transceiver worth looking out for? I want to avoid complexity if possible and a massive outlay to start with. Something solid and reliable with maintenance possibility. Digital readout would be nice but not essential. This will be run from home only so no portability requirements.

Alternatively are there any transceiver kits which are useable in this space. I have enough test gear to be able to build and align anything pretty much.

I will likely be purchasing something else mobile later on (ft-817) but budget does not allow at the time as I’m in the middle of a house move and apparently it being dark outside isn’t a substitute for fitted curtains ;D

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

To be honest, the price some of the gear you are looking for is that close to a decent modern Transceiver, it is hardly worth looking at stuff from the 70s and 80s.

A modern (ish) TRX will normally have a lot more features, modes and bands than some of the older kit, is going to be a lot easier to use, and will be able to run foundation license power levels with ease.

Pretty much anything with Valve finals will not be happy at 10 Watts.

I would steer clear of the 817 personally - I own one, and used to own a Elecraft K2 - I know which I wish I had now.

Take a look at the K2, it is a modular kit, so you can just buy the bits you need, and build it up from there.

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

I agree with Sean. A secondhand FT857 or similar will do what you want now and also what you might want to do in the future, e.g. higher power and VHF.

Don't forget to budget for a power supply an an AMU although you can make one for a lot less than you can buy one.

Gordon
G7KNS

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

I looked at the K2 but it was out of budget to start with. Need something simple and with moderate performance. I don’t necessarily want easy.

I’ve built a 40m DC receiver and antenna already. Want something stable and always there basically while I develop a transmitter later on.

817 was because I’m planning on doing a lot of portable operation. While not particularly convenient for base use it seems to fit the bill as a good alround portable.

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

Thanks. Will look at that too. Thanks for the suggestion.

Got a good enough power supply already (TTi PL154). I’ve got enough bits lying around to knock up a variety of AMU configurations that’ll be good up to 10W or so. Would buy one for higher power.

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

Perhaps also look at things like the Yaesu FT450, or perhaps the Icom 718.

The 817 is a clever little thing, but personally I think I would go for a K2, even for portable operation, fully understand the cost situation though - think mine came in at about £800 when I built it, i've no doubt it is going to cost me a lot more to build another one now.

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

Cost is not a problem in the long term, however it is in the short term so something like a K2 is likely to happen in the next couple of years once I’ve sorted the new house out. I did somewhat drool over their marketing literature for a few minutes the other day.

But really I need a cheap crate to get some contacts in. A first car so to speak, be it a banger, as long as it gets from A-B. If the doors fall off, so be it.

I have had a look at some second hand kit from the 70s-80s now and it’s quite remarkable how expensive it is. £250 for an FT-7 for example. Ouch. And add another £100 and you’ve got something much better.

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

I use the Alinco DX70TH in the shack, 100W but the low power setting is 10W, there is an internal switch which changes it to 5/50W. Dual VFO, all mode, HF + 6m. Simple to operate as well, not too many bells and whistles but what it has (IF offset etc) are useful.

These can be had for a good price

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

What about an ex-military radio, a PRC320 (with it's ATU built in) or VRC321 perhaps, modified for LSB? They won't break the bank and apart from issues with 'tuning around' they do seem to work well and appear to keep their resale value too...

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

Hmmm, I also have a PRC-320 which I use for events and some SOTA (im that stubborn!)

I really wouldnt advise that route for a first rig. The tuning around issue mainly - it very soon becomes depressing! Its ok if you can stick to set frequencies, which I can for SOTA, but in general its a lot of hassle.

But also, the lack of any ability to work split means you will miss out on a lot of the DX stations!

You'll find as well that they are rarely as cost effective these days as you'd think. And the internal ATU is really only intended for electrically short end fed wires or the whip. And by the time youve sourced the audio ancilliaries, battery, charger etc, youve easily spent what a 2nd hand 100W HF rig would have cost.

Im looking for a replacement for my DX-70TH for the shack - something HF+6m, 100W, dual VFO but also CAT, so I can release the Alinco for SOTA use! (a heck of a lot lighter than the 3201)

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

Keep looking, they turn up much cheaper than that (I got one for nothing as it needed minor repairs).

The FT7 is a good rig and fits your spec exactly, plus is easily repairable.

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

Yes the FT7 is the sort of template radio I’d really like. It crosses over slightly with the homebrew and analogue side of things.

Thanks all for comments so far. Much appreciated.

SOTA is one interest. My eldest did DofE last year and enjoyed it and I spent a lot of my teenage and early 20s up mountains so we’ve decided to attack some ourselves. Might as well do something at the top.

Not sure I could stomach PRC kit. I was in army cadets for a bit and had to argue with I think it was some half dead PRC-349’s. I wasn’t much a fan of the physical training side of things. Slowly ascending a mountain yes. Climbing up things like ropes and having to wear uniform, nope.

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

How about the Icom IC-703? HF to 6m, maximum 10W output in a mobile (but usable as portable) outline.

http://www.icomuk.co.uk/categoryRend...ID=720&tID=938

The manual is also available on that page.

They were aimed specifically at foundation licence holders, most of whom invested in radios like the IC706 and (hopefully) kept them throttled back until they progressed further up the licence chain.

I really wish I had bought one of these when they were available. Icom didn't make enough of them, and so they are likely to be very overpriced even if you can find one for sale.

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

General observations are all very well, but it all comes down to what turns up when you're looking. Sometimes you can come across one of the very good ones for low prices. Not often, but you wouldn't want to miss the opportunity if it arose.

FT107 is a transistor amateur bands only job that works well. 10W and 100W versions were imported.

FT1000D was a monster, worked well, but is now seen as a bit of a boat anchor. The complexity scares people off. Actually they're quite repairable but look scary.

IC765 is a superb performer with a known weakpoint. The trimmers in the synthesiser VCOs rot as the foam gloop attacks them. You sometimes find these sets sold faulty for low prices. Mine's got a dead CMOS 4011 IC I need to replace. Again, the bark is far worse than the bite. Fixable and worth fixing!

Then there's the Ten Tec Corsair II. Very very fixable. No synth. superb performance. The screw drive for the permeability tuned VFO can wear. Amateur band only. If bought with matching PSU, I STRONGLY advise you re-wire the mains... running mains live from one box to the other and back as part of a multiway single-insulated ribbon cable is dodgy. A lot of US mains wiring looks like doll's house stuff.

Adverts in the amateur radio magazines tend to have crazily optimistic pricing. On-line auction sites find whoever in the world will pay most, so you look for radios in other places if you want a bargain.

David

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

Throwing in a suggestion for traditional analogue set missing from above.

Trio/Kenwood TS130V but that would not have topband.

RX not the best on 30m - suffers mixing from adjacent BC band if condx good.

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

I reckon the FT101ZB takes some beating but as already mentioned they are not cheap.

Peter

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

What about an Atlas 210/215?

http://atlas.wireless.org.uk/

They did have a reputation for blowing PA transistors but that was largely because people over-drove them into inappropriate antennas when operating mobile.

Keep the RF drive down to 60 or 70 Watts PEP output and they're OK. The modular construction means it's rather easier to repair/maintain than some of the "Everything on one PCB" construction-style preferred by the Japanese.

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

Those Atlas transceivers are rather nicely engineered. If you want a radio to actually understand they look spot on.

I get the feeling this is going to result in a few things being purchased :)

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

If you go for an older rig watch out for which bands it covers. I know it doesn't meet your specification but a lot of rigs earlier than the FT101ZD Mk3 did not cover what are known as the WARC bands which is a limitation nowadays.

Gordon

Re: What’s a relatively decent (old) transceiver for my needs?
 

The Kenwood TS440 seems to tick a lot of Bungle's boxes. A "Rainbow" of features! Revolutionary in 1986 as it was solid state, much modifiable for improvement development, still well thought of, described as an ideal "starter" on some threads. I only know all this because I read it up yesterday out of interest:shrug: One of these sets came into my possession almost inadvertently [it was in] the boot of my computer guy's car so I bought it
They seem to have a well known standard fault [spots on the dial]. Some people claim they are difficult to repair, others that they are ideal as the boards fold out conveniently [typical internet assessment-try looking for the "best" lawnmower sometime] 8-\I did the exam but have never gone air so the TX side is not a big interest. I had a TS430 previously [also well thought of] but sold it to a friend for that reason. What's the knowledgeable opinion here?

Dave W