Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site kitty.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester!rocksanne!sunybcs!kitty!larry From: larry@kitty.UUCP (Larry Lippman) Newsgroups: net.ham-radio Subject: Re: Re: Quality of ICOM radios Message-ID: <532@kitty.UUCP> Date: Sat, 26-Oct-85 09:47:27 EST Article-I.D.: kitty.532 Posted: Sat Oct 26 09:47:27 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 31-Oct-85 22:23:03 EST References: <2089@brl-tgr.ARPA> Organization: Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, NY Lines: 28 > ... > Apparently the problem was built-in... foil lifting from the PWBA! The > repair was called a "jumper-job"... It cost me $65 plus time and > postage. I feel an honest company would have stood behind the product > and repaired the problem without cost. > > Much like the issue with the Kenwood VHF Power Modules... If the arrl > really had it's stuff together, they would have brought a class action > against Kenwood on behalf of all American Radio Operators... A > strong message to all ham radio manufactures that we are fed up with > poor design/engineering and won't take it any more! Aw, come on... Didn't anyone ever wonder why ham-quality gear cost an order of magnitude less than commercial-quality gear? And TWO orders of magnitude less than military-quality? You get what you pay for. Period. I have looked at so-called commercial versions of hand-held radios made by ICOM, Wilson, etc., and that stuff is real trash compared to GE, Motorola, Repco, etc. - of course, it costs a lot less, too. === Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York === === UUCP {decvax,dual,rocksanne,rocksvax,watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry === === VOICE 716/741-9185 {rice,shell}!baylor!/ === === FAX 716/741-9635 {AT&T 3510D} syr!buf!/ === === TELEX 69-71461 ansbak: ELGECOMCLR {via WUI} ihnp4!/ === === === === "Have you hugged your cat today?" ===