Posted: 12/19/2014 9:05:36 AM EDT
|
Anyone think we may see an updated FT-817 with C4FM abilities and if I had it my way, pushing up to like 10 watts. Word to Big Bird?
Don't worry about the batteries Yaesu; We will bring our own!! |
|
I have asked that question over the years and I concluded that they are still selling lots of the current 817s, so why would they ?
FWIW: I don't think that upping the power to 10 watts would provide any noticiable difference in your signal. That would be equal to one half an S-Unit on a properly calibrated meter. |
|
I don't see it. Japanese manufacturers really don't make anything US hams would rather have. If that was the case then why was the FT991 made to be less portable than it's predecessor. The IC7200 less portable than a IC703? Why hasn't one of them made a ruggerized commercial quality dual band HT or mobile with a front speaker? US, Canadian and Australian hams are more prepper orientated and Japanese hams are more...?? Well we all know how goofy Japanese are. I'm sure one day one of them will wake up and make an awesome portable that doesn't cost $5000. I'd love to get a 10 to 20 watt battery powered portable just as many would. If you want that your options is get a used 703, which ask for a premium, a KX3, which ask more than they are worth, a too low powered 817 with poop batteries or spend the big bucks for a Codan or a Micom back pack radio. |
|
Quoted:
I don't see it. Japanese manufacturers really don't make anything US hams would rather have. If that was the case then why was the FT991 made to be less portable than it's predecessor. The IC7200 less portable than a IC703? Why hasn't one of them made a ruggerized commercial quality dual band HT or mobile with a front speaker? US, Canadian and Australian hams are more prepper orientated and Japanese hams are more...?? Well we all know how goofy Japanese are. I'm sure one day one of them will wake up and make an awesome portable that doesn't cost $5000. I'd love to get a 10 to 20 watt battery powered portable just as many would. If you want that your options is get a used 703, which ask for a premium, a KX3, which ask more than they are worth, a too low powered 817 with poop batteries or spend the big bucks for a Codan or a Micom back pack radio. The KX3 has one of the best receivers ever made in a ham radio regardless of cost. I own an 817 (for over 10 years) as well as a KX3. I have never turned the 817 on again once I got the KX3. |
|
Increasing power from 5 watts to 10 watts, a doubling of power, is only 3 db, which is half an S-unit. A rather
meaningless increase. To be noticeable power would have to increase at least 10 times. I have a good friend that has a Yaesu FT-817 for which I'm building his Hardrock-50 amplifier kit. This amp puts out 50 watts with 5 watts in. That is a 10 db increase. Also building the Automatic Antenna Tuner made for this amp, which is installed inside the amp. These kits arrived at my door just yesterday afternoon. I'm taking photos as I go, and when done will do a show and tell thread on this. 50 watts is half of the output of a regular 100 w rig, just -3 db, or 1/2 S-unit below 100 w, and should be as effective as a 100 w rig. But a boost from 5 to 10 watts is a waste of time. I have seen a few places where someone bragged that he tweaked his IC-718 from 100 w to 120 or 130 watts. So what? Now his radio is much more likely to suffer finals damage for absolutely no noticeable difference. All this goes right along with my audio experience, that unless you are increasing power 10x (which is 10 db), don't bother. |
|
This is something that lot of hams don't get.
Research how RF power works and you will see that these small increases in power don't make any difference on the other end. And the more power you are running, the less increasing it will do: in other words going from 100 watts to 150 watts won't make any difference on the receiving end. This is one reason why 600 watt amplifiers are so popular. They are much cheaper, you can run them off of 115V, and there isn't much difference between that and legal limit power. You can do a simple test yourself: the next time you are in a QSO, on every transmission decrease your power WITHOUT telling the other guy you are doing it. Odds are that if you both are hearing each other well, you will go down from 100 watts (or whatever) to maybe 5 watts and providing you don't say anything about doing it, the other guy will never mention it. I have a sked every afternoon at 4:00 on 75m SSB. Just for the heck of it, I play around with this, even though it has been proven to me time and time again. I will get on sometimes running my KX3 at 5 watts. The next time I might start out at 100 watts and without saying anything turn on an amplifier and run 400 watts. The difference is slight enough that any change in my signal is just written off as band conditions. We all got a big kick out of it one day when a guy who was in a QSO 2 khz down from us came up on our freq and said I was interfering with them. He specifically said it was me. I was running my KX3 at 5 watts. Everybody else said they felt slighted because they were all running at least 100 watts or more and I was singled out as interfering with the other QSO. Another time I got on 75 meters SSB in the morning and joined a round table of guys I didn't know. I was running an 817 and with every transmission I made, I decreased my power. When I decided to get off and go make breakfast, on my final transmission I said: hey for what it's worth I have been running 500 mw. I left the radio on while I was making breakfast and they told one guy: he was running 500 mw and he sounds better than you do 
By the same token, the opposite is true: you can try this out for yourself also: running 5 watts, get into a QSO with someone. Go back and forth a few times in conversation. AFTER maybe three go-rounds, tell the guy that you are running 5 watts and I bet you a dollar that he suddenly says he is having trouble copying you. It was fine UNTIL he heard 5 watts then your signal gets bad. 
|
|
Quoted: The KX3 has one of the best receivers ever made in a ham radio regardless of cost. I own an 817 (for over 10 years) as well as a KX3. I have never turned the 817 on again once I got the KX3. Quoted: Quoted: I don't see it. Japanese manufacturers really don't make anything US hams would rather have. If that was the case then why was the FT991 made to be less portable than it's predecessor. The IC7200 less portable than a IC703? Why hasn't one of them made a ruggerized commercial quality dual band HT or mobile with a front speaker? US, Canadian and Australian hams are more prepper orientated and Japanese hams are more...?? Well we all know how goofy Japanese are. I'm sure one day one of them will wake up and make an awesome portable that doesn't cost $5000. I'd love to get a 10 to 20 watt battery powered portable just as many would. If you want that your options is get a used 703, which ask for a premium, a KX3, which ask more than they are worth, a too low powered 817 with poop batteries or spend the big bucks for a Codan or a Micom back pack radio. The KX3 has one of the best receivers ever made in a ham radio regardless of cost. I own an 817 (for over 10 years) as well as a KX3. I have never turned the 817 on again once I got the KX3. How hard would it be to just package the radio similar to that of a 817? Really? Something designed and orientated to be backpack portable with VHF/UHF. the 817 was/is so popular because it meets that requirement but falls a tad short on batt power and power. In other words just modernize the FT817 without losing an attribute already. Bump up the power to no less than 10 watts, put a nifty tiny antenna tuner in it. Make it able to slide into a pack. It's great that the KX3 has an awesome receiver, but how does that help me if I humped it up a mountain break it out of the pack, of shit, it's now raining, let's cover it with a bag. Damn, I squished the VFO knob and now it's turning crooked. Look I scratched that huge plastic LCD cover and it's cracked on one corner. We want a 2015 version of a PRC77 with a 2015 capability, size and weight. Whats so hard about that? Just one, one manufacturer all they have to do is take the guts out of a comparable and capable radio, tweak it a bit, and package it as such and they'll knock it out of the ball park for those of us who like to get our radio on somewhere other than sitting in front of a desk or driver's seat. That's it. |
| I know im a little batty but I had my FT-400 open a few weeks ago updating the firmware and could see no huge reason why I couldn't get more than 5 watts on a portable like an 817. people argue about power in watts all the time but I still think that there is a reason why 5 and under is a respected QRP tradition and has an awards phase. When I think about back packing with a group of hams or other formed party's I just cann't think of why there isn't more field ready radios. it makes me think most hams are old and just want to sit at home behind a desk. |
|
So the QRP scenario...I have some questions. the 5W limit is at the radio, or at the antenna? i.e. if you are QRP on the mountaintop then obviously you are getting all your power to the antenna. What if you have 100ft of cable at your house and are getting say 2W of loss in the coax, can you increase to 7W on the radio to compensate? And obviously the antenna is a factor, right? So running 5W into a 9dB yagi is really netting you 40W in your beam. So is it 5W ERP? I doubt it as most hams couldn't even figure out their ERP. Just curious. QRP is not interesting to me, at least not yet. |
| I have been tooling with an antenna analyzer. So Return Loss (RL, 0-30dB). this is a rating of a tool to establish a capability. People talk limits (1500W) and then push an agenda to say that my 5 watts more is some how toxic or not worth anything? I laugh at you for seeing flashing lights and nothing worthwhile. |
|
Quoted:
I have been tooling with an antenna analyzer. So Return Loss (RL, 0-30dB). this is a rating of a tool to establish a capability. People talk limits (1500W) and then push an agenda to say that my 5 watts more is some how toxic or not worth anything? I laugh at you for seeing flashing lights and nothing worthwhile. I o not understand this post. |
|
Quoted:
I have been tooling with an antenna analyzer. So Return Loss (RL, 0-30dB). this is a rating of a tool to establish a capability. People talk limits (1500W) and then push an agenda to say that my 5 watts more is some how toxic or not worth anything? I laugh at you for seeing flashing lights and nothing worthwhile. what is the meaning of all that typing above? ar-jedi |
|
Quoted:
what is the meaning of all that typing above? ar-jedi Quoted:
Quoted:
I have been tooling with an antenna analyzer. So Return Loss (RL, 0-30dB). this is a rating of a tool to establish a capability. People talk limits (1500W) and then push an agenda to say that my 5 watts more is some how toxic or not worth anything? I laugh at you for seeing flashing lights and nothing worthwhile. what is the meaning of all that typing above? ar-jedi I'm not sure but I wonder if he is suited for this forum... Quoted:
I don't either asshole 
|
|
Quoted:
So the QRP scenario...I have some questions. the 5W limit is at the radio, or at the antenna? i.e. if you are QRP on the mountaintop then obviously you are getting all your power to the antenna. What if you have 100ft of cable at your house and are getting say 2W of loss in the coax, can you increase to 7W on the radio to compensate? And obviously the antenna is a factor, right? So running 5W into a 9dB yagi is really netting you 40W in your beam. So is it 5W ERP? I doubt it as most hams couldn't even figure out their ERP. Just curious. QRP is not interesting to me, at least not yet. Ham radio, for the most part, at least award hunting isn't about trying to impress other people Other people don't really care. If you tell someone you have DXCC for example; what does that really mean to them ? Probably very little. Achieving these goals in ham radio is about personal satisfaction. It is about personal integrity. It's like that saying: Integrity is what you do when no one else is looking. The only person that will ever know what you did is you. And you are the only person you have to satisfy. So with QRP, you do whatever you think is right. There is nobody that is going to come and run tests on your station to see if you meet some kind of requirement. If you make it your goal to challenge yourself to get DXCC running five watts, only you really know if you were actually running five watts. You could run 1500 watts if you wanted to and odds are that only you would ever know. For me personally, I consider QRP to be five watts when my radio says I am running five watts. You can get into all kinds of technical arguments like: what if the radio is not calibrated correctly ? So you should measure the five watts using an external wattmeter. Ok, how do we know the external wattmeter is correctly calibrated ? What if the load on the wattmeter isn't exactly 52 ohms or whatever making the measurement calculation inaccurate ? What degree of accuracy in the reading are we going to consider acceptable ?........................................... So in the end, there is no one to satisfy but yourself. You decide where the five watts is measured and you live with the choice you made. Most people consider you putting five watts into the feedline as QRP. If you have losses in the feedline, so be it. If you are running a gain antenna, then good for you. If you are at a great location, again, good for you. Your transmitter was still putting out five watts. All that being said, I have played around quite a bit running milliwatt level power just to see what I could do. I have also participated in NAQCC sprints running milliwatt level power. When I do that, I have an inline attenuator with an external wattmeter to semi-accurately determine my power. But once again, if you wanted to you could argue the accuracy of the meter calibration and all that. But at some point you just have to say, it is what it is. FWIW: I have worked DX and even ragchewed with DX stations running less than half a watt. My antenna is a wire strung between two trees at the height of about 35' in the center (the ends are higher and it sags in the middle). |
|
Quoted:
That's not the way we operate here. I don't think simpsonjcat meant any offense by his post. Quoted:
Originally Posted By ResidentOrange:
I don't either ******* That's not the way we operate here. I don't think simpsonjcat meant any offense by his post. such a promising username, yet such poor social behavior. ar-jedi |
|
The OP's question about his 5 w radio, no, it isn't a limitation by regulations, or by anything other
that that is what the radio is designed to produce. It happens to coincide with how QRP operation is defined, that is, 5 w or less. The limitation of 5 watts may be because of voltage available to the finals, current rating of the finals, or other factors. But tweaking the radio trying to get 7 or 10 watts out of it is not a simple matter of turning an adjustment inside. It goes to the design of the rig. And even if you could get a few more watts, it would not be audible. I explained previously what would be necessary to have an audible increase in your signal. Understand there are other factors, such as increased current draw at higher power levels. That means, that for the purpose for which this radio was designed, you have to carry bigger batteries, lugging them up the trail to that mountain peak, or whatever. If you were operating as a base station this would not be a problem, but then, if you were operating as a base, you'd just buy a bigger radio and power supply. So, not making fun of "just 5 watts", just explaining what will have to be done. |
| it seems like when I step in this place I get comments like im a dummy, but when you look deep its just these other people acting like they know everything.. live it up assholes.. I will to. Ps the idea of the thread is about Anyone think we may see an updated FT-817 with C4FM abilities? ... if I had it my way, it would be my way ass. |
|
Quoted:
it seems like when I step in this place I get comments like im a dummy, but when you look deep its just these other people acting like they know everything.. live it up assholes.. I will to. Ps the idea of the thread is about Anyone think we may see an updated FT-817 with C4FM abilities? ... if I had it my way, it would be my way ass. Welcome to the "Lid List" |
|
Quoted:
Welcome to the "Lid List" Quoted:
Quoted:
it seems like when I step in this place I get comments like im a dummy, but when you look deep its just these other people acting like they know everything.. live it up assholes.. I will to. Ps the idea of the thread is about Anyone think we may see an updated FT-817 with C4FM abilities? ... if I had it my way, it would be my way ass. Welcome to the "Lid List" Thank you |
|
Quoted:
I have been tooling with an antenna analyzer. So Return Loss (RL, 0-30dB). this is a rating of a tool to establish a capability. People talk limits (1500W) and then push an agenda to say that my 5 watts more is some how toxic or not worth anything? I laugh at you for seeing flashing lights and nothing worthwhile. I don't think anyone was saying that 10 w would be toxic or not worth anything (awards, qualify as QRP, etc). More that you would not see much of a difference from the extra 5w. And I don't think any one was trying to offend you, but the post that is quoted above is kinda hard to understand. It took a couple of reads for me to believe I know what you were saying. |