http://radioaficion.com/cms/ft-410-yaesu/

160-10, 100W, no USB (it's 2015 FFS), fugly and no DSP.  Not worth much more than an equivalent Alinco IMO.

Looks like a competitor to the IC-718, but uglier.  Better be < $500, $399 would be better.

It's not that old, since it has mini DIN ports.  But, yea, seems very basic.  Considering I got an FT-897 with the AT-897 tuner for $500, that thing better be pretty cheap.

says right in the emission mods that it has USB.

Probably referring to Universal Serial Bus (USB) connectivity, or the lack thereof ...  Looks like a 9 pin RS-232 for CAT.

Nick

 
But plugging a cable into that Upper Side Band might prove... challenging.


 

On one side, I like that it appears to be a 718 competitor, and another offering in the low $$ entry to HF realm.


On the other side, unless they've achieved some really low receive current draw, I'm not really interested.

At 3.5A on receive according to the manual, this is solely a base station radio.  Also why I bought an FT-857D - lowest current draw on receive of any 100W radio.

And I dun goofed - it does have some kind of DSP filtering.  Might be somewhat redeeming in that sense if around the $500 mark.

Yep, it does have DSP.
Seems that it may be targeted to the HF mobile market.
From page 18 of the manual at the FCC site:
"The FT-410 includes an effective Noise Blanker, which can significantly reduce noise caused by automotive ignition systems."
I'm bummed about the lack of USB, but seeing the FAIL in the TenTec Eagle & Yaesu FT-991 for USB interfaces ...

The picture of the IC-7200 is staying on my wall for now.  And until then, I keep using the FT-747.
Though the Anan 10E/Flex 1500 may be displacing the Eagle for 2nd place.

Would have to be <$500 for me to care.

Heck I got a used 857D for $500.

It's already been shit canned.

I think a lot of newer hams shy away from HF due to the cost of equipment. I think it would be awesome if someone produced a no-frills 160-10m 100w radio for <$300 to let people get their feet wet. I realize there's a lot of used equipment in that price range, and maybe even a couple cheapo china radios, but I imagine more people would rather buy a new radio than a 15yr old rig in unknown condition. While the FT-410 has no appeal for most of us who have messed around with HF for awhile, I know a lot of newer guys that would be more than happy with a radio like that.

This is the situation I am in. I really look forward to working HF, but the cost of getting set up isn't cheap.



I simply do not believe that the industry is not capable of it. They choose not to make such a product. I know many people who stay away from HF just because of the cost. Sure, over a lifetime of use a radio isn't that much money per QSO, but people don't shop that way. I suspect if such a product was made, new hams would gobble it up and established hams would buy it as a cheap back up to leave somewhere they visit often.



 

Yaesu's FT-8x7 DSP could be duplicated with a dish rag over the speaker grille.

Worthless.

Another shiny new turd that doesn't do anything new. The only possible saving grace would be if it's dirt cheap, but I doubt it.

I would skip on the FT410. They are very few of them on the market. It will be hard to find someone to repair it. Take a look at a FT-450D. FT450d is a great radio for the money. It has a roofing filter, IF DSP, excellent ergonomics, large and informative display and tons of very useful features. Many people use them on DX Peditions because of portability and good receiver performance. New ones sell for $690 but you may be able to find a used one for about $500. You won't find anything better in under $1,000 new price range.
Your FT-857 is a very good radio and it can be used as a base radio as well. It would not compete with $2000+ rigs but it's well worth the money. IMHO, it's the most versatile radio on the market. Yes. it does not have a fancy IF DSP but it does a good job at reducing white noise in the background without affecting audio quality too much. Obviously, none of the DSP systems will be effective at reducing S9 noise, no matter what you do. Besides, about 1/3 of the stations on the air sound like they are transmitting from 6ft below ground. Many people don't bother spending time to set up TX audio properly to make their signal intelligible.

Not a bad looking basic rig. I wonder how long before it gets released and what price point it will be initially offered at? Makes me wonder if they are doing away with the FT-450D.

In this price range, the 450D is a no-brainer in comparison unless they do something radical like charge $400 for the 410.  I highly doubt that'll happen, especially given the debacle of the 991.  



With the optional 300Hz or 500Hz filters, the 857D more than holds its own against more expensive rigs even if it's not quite as good.  Sherwood has himself said that almost any modern rig is sensitive enough on receive for the vast majority of users.  The 857D also consumes 250mA on receive with the display backlight off and using headphones, bested only by receive-only radios and QRP rigs like the KX-3.  For emcomm or SHTF situations I can't imagine taking any other setup on the road when I consider weight, versatility and power consumption.

Looks like a maritime rig from 20 years ago if it was white.

What's with Yaesu and the key jack on the front?  That's the one big thing I don't like about the 450 and they do it here too.  Why would I want an extra cord sticking out of the front of my radio?  Rant off.  

 
Debacle?


Can I ask for details? I'm not familiar with this fail.

I just realized it's a new model once I saw the picture. For some reason I thought OP was talking about an older, discontinued model. No wonder I have never seen one before.
I don't know if they will discontinue FT-450 line of radios. They still advertise then as new though.
I like the way FT-410 looks. It's simple and functional. It sure looks better than an IC-718 and much better than Elecraft K line of radios (IMHO,the ugliest radios on the market). Having a larger LCD display makes this radio more attractive. I like the black front panel. I would refrain from buying one until they sell a few thousand radios and work out all the small issues that all new model radios are known for. Usually it's safe to buy a new model once it's been on the market for a year or so.

For once, I agree with Sherwood although he confused a lot of people with his "performance tests".
You are right about FT857d CW performance with a 300Hz mechanical filter. I did a side by side testing of my ft-857d with my Elecraft KX-3 and my FTDX-3000d. It beats the KX-3 hands down and almost beats the FT3000 (CW mode only). Not bad for a portable multi-band radio.

This way you won't plug it into a wrong hole. (what she said ).  Most radios have CW key jacks on the back as well. It's no big deal. Actually, I programmed my front key jack for a right handed operator and the back jack for leftie. It helps when I bring my radio to a friend's house for contesting.
What bothers me is the microphone jack. I always wondered why most radios have microphone jacks on the front only. I have no problem with that on small, portable or semi-portable radios like FT-450. Why not move mic. jack to the back panel on larger, base radios? I hate having the microphone cable sticking out in front of the radio. It would look much cleaner if the jack was on the back panel. How often do you need to plug and unplug a microphone cable on a base rig?

** I re-read my post after I wrote it and realized I went off the original topic by a country mile, so feel free to ignore me. But I typed it so I want to post it **


When I bought my Flex-3000 I did some A/B testing against my only other HF rig, the FT-897 which is pretty much the same as the 857. Stations that were easy armchair copy on the 3000 were barely audible on the 897. Yes, the Flex was a much better radio in an entirely different class than the 897 at the time, and most responses to my comments echoed that. However now the 3000 is a sub-$900 radio which makes the 897 look even worse, considering how it has held its value, something I don't quite understand. The only blemishes on the 3k is that it uses Firewire (which is no longer terribly common, however PCI, PCI-X, and Cardbus adapters for it are cheap and won't disappear any time soon) and the newer generation of Flex radios make it look terrible by comparison. But to my reading that only makes the standalone radios look even worse by comparison. Yes, Flexes need a computer to operate.

So?

The major arguments against it typically fall into two categories: (1) I got into ham radio for the end of the world, so I need a simple system or (2) It's reliant on a technology that will get out of date.

To break it down:

(1) Elephant in the room - that use case is probably never going to happen. As much as I enjoyed Lights Out, chances are none of us are ever going to be putting a station on the air from the smoldering remains of society. And even if that did happen, there are plenty of laptops with low power requirements that can drive the rig to the point that the performance of the rig would outweigh any potential power cost. If you're preparing for a situation where a computer won't survive, neither will any modern radio, so your SHTF plan had better include nothing but tubes and dynamotors.

(2) This has always been a hard pill to swallow since you can still run Windows 3.1 apps (and even older if you want to. Heck, not relevant to this discussion, but I can emulate a PDP-8 on my laptop). Virtual machines and hardware emulation ensure that we're unlikely to run into a situation where you can't operate a piece of hardware because the control software can't run on modern computers. I anticipate the argument of programming older Motorola equipment requiring old hardware, but this was due to Motorola writing their software such that it directly bit banged hardware interfaces and used CPU loops for timing. Flex never did either of those and so long as you can emulate an environment from XP through at least 7 (which I've done; I know they'll continue to support MS operating systems wells into the future) that point is moot.

Bringing it back around to the topic at hand, if this new radio has comparable performance to the FT-8x7 radios then I don't understand why they built it. Much like the big 3's HT offerings as of late, they're essentially giving us the same performance and usability of every other radio that's existed for the last 30 years. There's nothing new here, nothing to make a splash let alone an upset in the consumer HF market. I feel insulted by the low end rigs that have come out from the big 3 in the last decade or so. Yes, radios like the IC-7800, TS-990 and FT DX 9000 look fantastic, but I haven't seen any features from the high end rigs trickling down to the mid or low end models. It's one of the reasons I really like Elecraft - for an upper mid price level, they provide a radio that competes with the highest end rigs of the other manufactures. The technology of the K3 has been applied to the KX3.

I use the back mic jack on my Flex 5000 and it's great!  The Yaesu 450 and it seems the 410 too after looking at the manual, have a CW key jack on the front only.  No back jack possibility at all.  I know, not a big deal to most, but to me it's that one thing that makes me want to look elsewhere.  

It's not getting released.  Yaesu has decide to scrap it.

It will not be for sale.

I am friends with someone who does a lot of published reviews and has several industry contacts.   He heard directly Yaesu has decided to move in a different direction.

The 991, in addition to having no I/Q out nor being a direct conversion receiver for a 2015 radio (all IMHO but not even the big deal breakers), and lack of user macros for those (in)famous Yaesu menus, had a few issues early on, including:

• CAT control codes were not published on release (but they are now), making programming and controlling the radio a bit of an exercise and somewhat defeating the purpose of USB input


• Slow ATU with limited range


• Some radios having a bug causing permanent low VHF power output for various reasons


• Losing audio switching back and forth between VFO and memory mode


• Crappy AM transmit, for those who really care about AM

All these issues caused a lot of initial returns and headaches.  Yaesu obviously did not do enough quality assurance prior to release and were rushing to get it out the door.  For all the money that rig costs, and given the alternatives, I don't think it's acceptable.  At least they've resolved most of these issues, to their credit.

Reminds me of my first 100watt HF rig.

....sniff

Wasn't that also sold as a heathkit?